Rescue Me!

Two of Barbados' well known economists unwittingly, but wittily, faced off in this morning's Nation: they each had articles about the quality of economic analysis, which were set on adjacent pages. Clyde Mascoll, whom I would describe as an economist-turned politician-turning economist again (see Standards for all) attacks the public for their preference for style over substance in economic discussions. In his 'take no prisoners' style, he opens with 'I certainly have offended my share of media practitioners over the years in one way or the other. I am therefore fully aware that I am not popular among certain personalities in the media,' and keeps beating. I'm with him on what I see as an appalling lack on the printed media's part to help the economic debate along, and have said so enough times.

Meanwhile, trained agricultural economist-turned man-of-letters and humorist, Richard ('Lowdown') Hoad, takes economists to task for not saying much that is easily understood and not understanding what can easily be seen, agreeing along the way with similar comments by Central Bank Governor Worrell (see Unstable condits). He opens with 'IT HAS been said that we would be no worse off, and would be equally well informed, if we let the weathermen predict the economy and let the economists predict the weather.' His stance seems to be that if all the economists were put into a dung heap it would certainly smell no better than it did before, and their contributions as mould may be more than their contributions with models.

You have to take each point of view where you wish.

Over a lovely breakfast this morning with another of Barbados' well-known economists (he ate the 'Bajan', I ate the 'English'), I likened the discussion over the state of the economy to that over a piece of broken china. So much of the discussion is about who to blame for the breakage, and too little discussion about how to fix it (if possible), or replace it (if needed). It can even get heated about descriptions of the number of broken pieces and their shape. Meanwhile, the broken pieces are being gazed at or stepped over, and some would even try to deny that there has been any breakage. All very surreal.

One collective voice that I have not heard in the recent discussions is that of the National Council of Economic Advisors. If you read one commentary from over a year ago (see Advocate report), when Minister Estwick 'outlined an extensive action plan which puts Government at the helm of steering Barbados out of troubled waters and called on the public to position themselves as part of the response plan' and a 'set of operational responses were indicated, driven by the Prime Minister and comprising a Cabinet Economic Committee, which Estwick chairs; and a Council of Economic Advisors made up of eminent professionals in the area of economics' you may be tempted to ask at least one question. Have I been deaf or blind in that I had not heard more than a peep from the Council?

When I talk about 'implementation paralysis' it includes not acting in a way that can be seen or heard or understood, after promising that each and all would occur. One of my constant themes has been about transparency, governance and accountability and how each seems to be much talked about but not that much seen.