Dear Editor,
The impression has been given that the People's National Party (PNP) has benefitted from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) doing things to ensure they continue in power. But nothing could be further from the truth.
The Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) must be fully aware that there were certain critical and painful steps which were to be taken under its watch and it failed to do so because of the inherent consequence of the moves, which are inescapable.
It is somewhat trite at this critical juncture of our history for us to be going to and fro, simply to determine whose fault it was for us to get to where we are today. The approach certainly is for us to step back into history.
We are fully aware of the setting up of the two very important financial institutions which were created for the world to emerge from the debacle of the Second World War: the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, commonly known as the Bretton Wood Institutions. The effort was for financial assistance to be given to countries which had found themselves in deep crisis. They were to be facilitated to get back on track. But they were to be also helped in building new infrastructural measures which would make their environment more accommodating and people more comfortable in the new dispensation of a development model of the poor South.
We are fully aware of the setting up of the two very important financial institutions which were created for the world to emerge from the debacle of the Second World War: the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, commonly known as the Bretton Wood Institutions. The effort was for financial assistance to be given to countries which had found themselves in deep crisis. They were to be facilitated to get back on track. But they were to be also helped in building new infrastructural measures which would make their environment more accommodating and people more comfortable in the new dispensation of a development model of the poor South.
The IMF was never created as an institution to give away to poor countries. That others took the view that the IMF was the sounding board of the free market of the West is not sufficient for us to engage in a critical discussion as to why the IMF is necessary. If countries are unable to satisfy their basic socio-economic needs to participate in the free market of the world, money lenders or even those who would approve grants will decline from accommodating them. Those who are prepared to engage in investments, do so on the basis of the reports they receive from institutions such as the IMF.
The IMF is interested in how disciplined and serious countries are in seeking to be part of a financial arena in which investors can lend and get value on their dollar. If it is found that Jamaica has borrowed a vast stash of funds and very little effort is exerted to repay, the world money lenders will be forced to step back. It is therefore the task of borrowers to put their houses in order. Public spending must be reduced to the extent where only those projects which are highly important to generate investment and growth will be considered. Yet, it must be accepted that failure of countries to take on their own goals for financial development will also allow them to falter and be flashed out in the dump heap of history.
Thus, the Opposition must be very careful about what interpretation or description they are giving to the IMF, because their negative analysis of the Government's links with the institution will come back to haunt them. It behoves us, the citizens, to step away from following the negative slaps which are being given by the Opposition about our country's association and deals with the IMF.
Tony Smith
Smithbklyn@yahoo.com
The Opposition's IMF talk may come to haunt them
-->
The impression has been given that the People's National Party (PNP) has benefitted from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) doing things to ensure they continue in power. But nothing could be further from the truth.
The Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) must be fully aware that there were certain critical and painful steps which were to be taken under its watch and it failed to do so because of the inherent consequence of the moves, which are inescapable.
It is somewhat trite at this critical juncture of our history for us to be going to and fro, simply to determine whose fault it was for us to get to where we are today. The approach certainly is for us to step back into history.
We are fully aware of the setting up of the two very important financial institutions which were created for the world to emerge from the debacle of the Second World War: the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, commonly known as the Bretton Wood Institutions. The effort was for financial assistance to be given to countries which had found themselves in deep crisis. They were to be facilitated to get back on track. But they were to be also helped in building new infrastructural measures which would make their environment more accommodating and people more comfortable in the new dispensation of a development model of the poor South.
We are fully aware of the setting up of the two very important financial institutions which were created for the world to emerge from the debacle of the Second World War: the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, commonly known as the Bretton Wood Institutions. The effort was for financial assistance to be given to countries which had found themselves in deep crisis. They were to be facilitated to get back on track. But they were to be also helped in building new infrastructural measures which would make their environment more accommodating and people more comfortable in the new dispensation of a development model of the poor South.
The IMF was never created as an institution to give away to poor countries. That others took the view that the IMF was the sounding board of the free market of the West is not sufficient for us to engage in a critical discussion as to why the IMF is necessary. If countries are unable to satisfy their basic socio-economic needs to participate in the free market of the world, money lenders or even those who would approve grants will decline from accommodating them. Those who are prepared to engage in investments, do so on the basis of the reports they receive from institutions such as the IMF.
The IMF is interested in how disciplined and serious countries are in seeking to be part of a financial arena in which investors can lend and get value on their dollar. If it is found that Jamaica has borrowed a vast stash of funds and very little effort is exerted to repay, the world money lenders will be forced to step back. It is therefore the task of borrowers to put their houses in order. Public spending must be reduced to the extent where only those projects which are highly important to generate investment and growth will be considered. Yet, it must be accepted that failure of countries to take on their own goals for financial development will also allow them to falter and be flashed out in the dump heap of history.
Thus, the Opposition must be very careful about what interpretation or description they are giving to the IMF, because their negative analysis of the Government's links with the institution will come back to haunt them. It behoves us, the citizens, to step away from following the negative slaps which are being given by the Opposition about our country's association and deals with the IMF.
Tony Smith
Smithbklyn@yahoo.com
The Opposition's IMF talk may come to haunt them
-->