What is going on? Mi notice none of

[Lazie]

the Defenders round here nuh have a word bout the fact that the Popular One gave a budget presentation that contradicts that of the Finance Minister. When she was asked how her ideas are going to be financed she said Omar would address it when he is closing the budget. Should I take it that Omar is still closing the budget? All now mi nuh hear how it is going to be financed.

Yet as the Opposition talk, everybody have mouth.

[Muadib]

Re: What is going on? Mi notice none of

In response to the Opposition's call for the government to explain how it will finance the announcements, the prime minister said she had no intention of putting programmes on hold because it is an election year.

Sistah 'P' trying out fi di Omar 'Run Wid it Award'... maybe that never come out di way shi mean..

[Karl]

Re: What is going on? Mi notice none of

In response to the Opposition's call for the government to explain how it will finance the announcements, the prime minister said she had no intention of putting programmes on hold because it is an election year.

Sistah 'P' trying out fi di Omar 'Run Wid it Award'... maybe that never come out di way shi mean..

...did Bruce say how he was going to finance all the ills that needs fixing and the new projects he would have coming on stream?

Yup! Sistah P's side must tell us how what is being proposed by the PNP will be financed!

...and yes, I am just curious?

[Lazie]

Re: What is going on? Mi notice none of

Read the presentation by Bruce and ... what Mosiah call the other one .... oh yeah .. Gas Station Attendant.

[Muadib]

Re: What is going on? Mi notice none of

I keep telling yuh.. dem seh yuh cyaan mek di horse drink... mi not gonna try it.

You went to school and can read..see if you can connect the dots...

1. Reduce Crime
2. JOBS, JOBS and more JOBS
3. Leverage CHEAPER money

Those 3 things believe it or not will have an impact on Govt revenue..

So let me help you out, save you some time.. tek di Mosiah approach:

"6% Growth in the medium term is impossible..."

Apply it tuh any of the 3 items I have listed or all 3 then declare on that basis that new projects and financing ills is IMPOSSIBLE.

Stap asking HOW when it deh deh in plain english.

[Karl]

Re: What is going on? Mi notice none of

In response to the Opposition's call for the government to explain how it will finance the announcements, the prime minister said she had no intention of putting programmes on hold because it is an election year.

Sistah 'P' trying out fi di Omar 'Run Wid it Award'... maybe that never come out di way shi mean..

The budget debate wrap-up through various eyes
Geof Brown
Friday, May 04, 2007


The Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller and the Minister of Finance Dr Omar Davis wrapped up the budget debate on Wednesday this week. Their performances have been subject to a wide array of commentary, but moreso as we might expect, that of the prime minister. The Opposition's main speakers in the persons of Opposition Leader Bruce Golding, Finance spokesman Audley Shaw and Energy spokesman Clive Mullings had all given good account of themselves, especially the leader whose oratory has now become a commonly expected feat. The prime minister has emerged, by most accounts, as a far better performer this time around, compared with her fledgling initial presentation when she was only a couple of months old in the new position. Why this is a surprise to some defies common sense.

My own view is that the PM did a very good job and this is shared by a number of less biased commentators. Whereas in a previous column, "Portia one year later: enigma or disappointment?" I saw her as an enigma and speculated about the real Portia coming out, in this debate performance her real shape emerged.

Perhaps it was best described by the hosts of the radio talk show, The Breakfast Club, Tony Abrahams and Trevor Munroe, who saw her as a cross between Michael Manley and PJ Patterson. The delivery in the second part of her presentation was reminiscent of the Michael Manley platform style, though more muted as befits the addressing of Parliament. The politician who puts out programmes designed to win votes at the base of popular support is reminiscent of multi-term clever politician, PJ Patterson.

The latter observation was confirmed by the on-the-street observation of popular fellow-columnist Mark Wignall, an unrelenting critic of the PM. In his article yesterday, "Can Portia's speech win the elections?, Wignall said he went into a JLP enclave to get a sounding of street people's reaction to the PM's presentation. He was apparently taken by surprise to hear the
JLP supporters discussing (favourably?) the relief of hospital fees to benefit some one million children. Wignall, though not wishing the return of the PNP to power, concedes the vote-getting power of politician Portia Simpson Miller in that one strategic measure.

And it cannot be lost on even the casual observer that Opposition Leader Bruce Golding had proposed the abolition of all hospital fees. Portia the politician, by implementing only part of Golding's proposal, is thereby appearing to be more fiscally responsible, in that all cannot be done at once.

Finance Minister Omar Davies gave a convincing response to the well-crafted presentation of Opposition spokesman on finance Audley Shaw. Using the specificic proposals of Mr Shaw as a base, he calculated in hard-to-refute data, exactly how much the Opposition budget proposals would cost. In hard figures, he dismissed Shaw's proposals as "headline news" with no acceptable substance. The bottom line he projected is that the Shaw proposals would increase the debt by $1.4 billion moving from 4.5% to 6.5% of GDP. This is clearly a case for the Opposition to refute.

Therefore the debate, although ended in Parliament, is definitely not ended as far as the Jamaican taxpayer is concerned. For the Opposition will now be forced to destroy the Davies argument or retreat into embarrassing silence. Votes for either side hang on the outcome.

To return to the prime minister's performance. I will come later to those specific programmes, which in my view have developmental significance. How the media dealt with the performance truly vindicates the existence of the various choices in today's media landscape. For we now get to view public matters through various eyes. One could not scan them all, but here are clips from a few. Power 106 with host veteran Ronnie Thwaites called on credible analysts on his morning show to share perceptions with the public. One, Kevin O'Brien Chang, is emerging as a non-partisan political guru. He gave the PM a rating of 7 out of 10. Nationwide with principal host the penetrative Cliff Hughes went, as is his wont, to people on the street and found five in favour, six against the PM's presentation.
RJR's Dionne Jackson Miller, excellent journalist that she is, brought on an expert panel of commentators and then proceeded to skilfully guide their discussion to useful impressions. Veteran political scientist Dickie Crawford gave balance here, but was largely in favour of the PM. RJR's journalist of journalists Barbara Gloudon, was markedly consistent in insisting on balance from callers who tended to be favourable mostly to the PM. Time and again she advised her callers to give credit to the Opposition's views, reminding them that democracy works well only when all views contend. Perkins on Line with popular host Mutty Perkins was unreservedly condemning of the PM's presentation as merely an electioneering gimmick. He eagerly embraced in his usual manner callers subscribing to his position. Yet he did have on his show the respected economic analyst John Jackson who was largely negative about the economic soundness of the PM's budget presentation.

From where I sit, apart from style of delivery, the major social development programme of the present administration is the emphasis on Early Childhood Education. That basic schools will all have a curriculum from the NCTVET national training consulting agency, and that all will have at least one trained teacher, is great news. I know that this is no empty promise, since the Early Childhood Commission is currently training hundreds of senior education personnel who will train teachers on the ground. Taking care of the foundation is our hope for the future. Similarly, more school places address future development. So do greater rural electrification and greater provision of water in rural areas. These and similar developmental programmes in the wide array in the PM's presentation are truly significant, to quote her, in "shaping the future".

browngeof@hotmail.com

Aside: mmmm???
Nuh-nuh Mico man dem tun columnists. Yup - Geof a nedda Mico man.

[Muadib]

Re: What is going on? Mi notice none of

Vampire must have his sychophants to preserve his abominable existence..

All dem ah get bun innah di fiyah tuh !

[Karl]

Scrambling for the goodies

Scrambling for the goodies
Barbara Gloudon
Friday, May 04, 2007


WITHIN hours of Prime Minister Simpson Miller's budget presentation unveiling a range of benefits - housing, health, roads, water, electricity, etc, etc, etc, a new political buzzword hit the street. "basket of goodies".

A week ago, Mr Bruce Golding took his goodies to Parliament, enunciating what he had to offer voters. The wooing of the electorate is underway. Mr Golding offered removal of user fees, across the board, in the public hospitals and clinics. He also sweetened the pot with the promised removal of secondary school fees, an issue which has been long debated.
Then, almost a week later, Portia ups and tries to colt the game, with a bigger-bagga-benefits. What's more, she's even set a date for the implementation of some of the offers. Now the battle is really joined. Whatta preckeh!

Following the prime minister's bid, the cry has begun to reverberate, "Where's the money coming from? How will she pay for it?" While the analysts are making their assessments and the pollsters are polling out in the streets, the people are awaiting their taste of the goodies. Cost is not their concern. Just bring it on.

The PM has put price tags on items on her shopping list. Mr Golding offered neatly rounded-off estimations with the assurance that when the right time comes, his finance minister (Audley) will be able to find the necessary millions.

Mrs Simpson Miller seems to have been planning ahead. The cost of new and improved benefits for would-be home owners, through the National Housing Trust (NHT), has the backing of the NHT, which has affirmed that it has the capacity to pay.

It should be interesting to see how the matter of school fees will be treated. Will it become a bi-partisan matter? Mr Golding was careful to point out that in his proposal, it is not "freeniss" all the way (my word). Other costs (lunch money, transportation, etc) will have to be met by other means.

Mrs Simpson Miller's counter offer for education is to announce an end to the shift system which has been a long-time source of discontent. Reprieve will now be possible due to expansion of school spaces. Some 17 schools, we're told, have been newly built and will be ready for occupation, come the new school year.

As far as voter-appeal goes, the rescinding of secondary school fees across the board could prove to be a bigger drawing card than the shift system, even though the latter has been a burden to the school population in rural areas and in inner-city communities. The system leaves students unprotected and serves to divide the school population like sheep and goats, with little benefit to either.

Despite the hype from either side as to the value of what they're offering, in the present "goodies" handout, none of what is being offered is mutually exclusive. There's nothing wrong with the things which Mr Golding is offering, nor is anything amiss with Mrs Simpson Miller's gift basket. It is the atmosphere of auctioneering which is confusing some people and turning some others off, while there is the larger number who are prepared to give their votes to whomever they think can best fulfil their wish list.

SOME will say placing education and health care side by side makes it difficult to decide which is more important. Most people would rather have both at one and the same time, but if it gets down to the wire, health has the edge. The cost of fending off sickness grows each day, especially since the introduction of new techniques of treatment, involving diagnostic equipment. There is a burgeoning growth industry in that area and someone has to pay for it.

It is of little comfort that the cost of health care currently is on the agenda of concern of almost every nation, developed and developing. This is one area where it can truly be said that there is no free lunch. Even the mighty Yew Ess of A is grappling with the issue like everybody else.

It is unrealistic therefore to expect that "lickle Jamaica" could solve the puzzle with the uncertain resources of the times, but this is election season. It doesn't always come with reason. You can bet that we will be making a proper kas-kass out of it.

Anyway, as consumers, we've come to expect "free giveaways" and "bonus", as a matter of course. It's not unusual to be wooed into buying a $40,000 kitchen appliance with the gift of a hundred-dollar kitchen spoon as a reward. It's not the value of the gift which attracts us so much as the fact that we believe that we're getting something we didn't pay for.

One question now being asked is for the definition of "user fees". Some people want to know if it is the same as "registration fee", which equates to the charge required for a doctor's visit. A source advised me that both terms are in the same jurisdiction. "User fee" could be described as more comprehensive, or "the package" as it is termed in the public health system.

That package would include the visit to the doctor, subsequent recommendations for treatment, for example, X-rays and diagnostic tests, medication, and in the case of hospitalisation, what is referred to as "hotel costs".

When a service which a patient requires is not available within "the package", it would have to be sought elsewhere and the cost (usually much higher), has to be met by the patient. Mr Golding's health proposal calls for diagnostic centres in public hospitals. The Government also has some proposals of its own in this area.

A doctor who has much experience in the administration of public medical services, is less than comfortable with all the promises being thrown around. He doesn't believe, he says, that the state will ever be able to provide a full range of services totally free of cost. Diagnostic centres, for instance, take a lot of money to maintain and require specialist personnel whose services do not come cheap and who are not in abundance either.

Like other colleagues, however, he agrees that there is reason for concern at the difficulties which patients face in paying for treatment and thinks that every avenue should be explored to provide assistance to the needy, in and out of election season. While we're at it, those who can pay should pay, he says. He feels that in our current climate, everybody should take a deep breath, step back and settle down to do what is practical, sensible and long-lasting.

He ended with a cautionary word: "Politics and medicine don't mix. I've seen it before, and every time it is the patients, not the politicians, who suffer."

gloudonb@yahoo.com

[Muadib]

Re: Scrambling for the goodies

All dem will bun inna di FIYAH !

HOTTAH FIYAH FI DEM..

I wondah who gwine watch election count from Farin.. just in case ?