Wondering…

 

…about Burnham’s “buy local”

well meaning regular letter writer reacted to a reference about the closure of a raft of manufacturing businesses initiated by the Burnham regime in the 1970’s to make Guyana “self sufficient”. He wondered why the succeeding governments didn’t continue with the drive after Burnham died in 1985.

The question’s very pertinent today since the present government just reminded us they’ll be guided by the “ideology” of Burnham in general and import substitution – “local” products like plantain chips and tamarind balls were mentioned – in particular. So in the interest of heading off “history repeating itself as farce”, your Eyewitness will try to answer the question.

In the 1970’s it wasn’t that Burnham was particularly “brilliant” or “innovative”. The dominant developmental model for poorer countries then was “import substitution industrialisation” (ISI). It was even endorsed by the World Bank since at least it wasn’t the socialist model of the USSR or even the “Dependency Model” of radicals like our own Clive ‘SARA’ Thomas, who insisted that all linkages with the West must be cut! Inserted into office by the US, Burnham wasn’t going to go out too far on the economic limb.

so we had our “bicycle factory”, “refrigerator factory”, “tapir factory”, etc. But if the truth be told, they weren’t really “factories” that manufactured the products, were they? They were all actually entities assembling parts imported from outside. Our input was the labour. How much was our labour going to save on the end product? And with our small market, these were never going to be profitable over time.

Then we had the “milk factory”, “canned juice factory”, “carambola factory”, etc. which all used local products and added value to them. These were actually factories and could’ve gone on to long term successes… but with our markets being so small, it had to have at least been capable of penetrating the Caricom market, which had succeeded CARIFTA. And this was the constraint on all the other “factories”, such as the “match factory” or any other factory we’ll launch in the present: how are we going to get big export markets?

The Far Eastern Countries that succeeded in escaping the poverty trap took a completely different route other than “import substitution”. They looked to the developed countries and made strategic decisions on what they could export to them cheaper than they were producing the items at. That is they identified markets and then created products. And that’s how we have Toyota -a sewing machine manufacturer- becoming the largest automobile company in the world. And Samsung coming from nowhere and dominating in all sorts of electronics.

So what exactly can we export today?

…about cheques and balances

There’s been a great deal of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth by some die-hard supporters of the government who worked their butts off to put the incumbents into office but are now dumbstruck at the venality displayed in just one year. “Where oh where, have we gone wrong after all the criticisms we made of the previous PPP government?”; is their lamentation.

Well the short answer is that they were naive at best, or foolish at worse, to have believed that the AFC and APNU were motivated by anything other than pure self-interest. The bottom line to deliver good governance is to have checks and balances in the structure of government. Give even an angel unlimited powers and no checks and you get a Lucifer -who became the Devil!

In all their actions while in the opposition, did the principles of APNU or AFC EVER display they were interested in checks and balances?

Cheques and balances were more like it! Fedders-Lloyd anyone?

…about the new untouchables

In India the “untouchables” are the lowest of the low. In Guyana it’s the exact opposite. Like the “Gang of Four” at City Hall who can do no wrong.

Even when they break the law AND flout a High Court order!