 Project Independence – After 56 Years:
Windfall and Wastage – Saga of Unsustainable Economy When the NJAC leaders were rounded up in the early hours of April 21, 1970 as another State of Emergency (SoE) was declared and the army mutiny that morning was diffused, the Government thought that the conflagration was doused. However, into 1973-74, the embers of disaffection continued to smolder. The strikes and labour unrest persisted and armed fighters persevered despite police crackdown. In 1971, strikes at FedChem and Dunlop supported by close to 4000 oil workers raged. Strikes at Texaco, Badger and Wimpey involved more than 1000 workers. All these led by the OWTU. Workers on the port, at TelCO and WASA wanted to join the OWTU and abandon the ‘responsible’ unions (which supported the ISA) in preference for the ‘radical’ ‘Butlerite’ unions. Government’s response – Declaration of another State of Emergency in October 1971, banning public meetings, detention of 10 leaders and replacement of the ISA by the Industrial Relations Act (IRA) introduced in Parliament almost simultaneously with the SOE. The price control provision in the ISA (never implemented) was repealed and to stop the spread of ‘radical’ unions a prohibition of representation of more than one “essential industry” by a single union was added. This prompted another split in the trade union movement into the Labour Congress and Council of Progressive Trade Unions (CPTU). Unrest persisted into 1973 and PM Williams threatened to resign encouraging the refrain of ‘Don’t go, Doctor. Don’t go.’. Oil Boom 1973-74 Dramatically, a development completely outside of this country’s control occurred. There was a sharp increase in world oil prices, triggered by the Arab oil embargo, triggering yet another boom for this oil-exporting country. In both World Wars, because of the needs of the British military, TT oil experienced booms. In the late 50’s, driven by the demands of the US market, the extension of marine drilling and refinery expansion out of Texaco acquisition of TLL, saw another boom to production of 70,000 bpd of oil and refinery throughput of 345,000 bpd by 1965. The oil windfall of 1974-78 was the first based solely on increased oil prices. Oil prices were declining between 1960-70, multiplied by 7 between 1972-78. Government’s revenue rose from $591M TT in 1973 to TT1,398M in 1974 to $3,226M in 1978. Oil revenues increased 48 times by 1980 compared to 1972. The balance of trade moved from -$360M TT in 1972 to +$340M in 1974 and +$1B in 1977. On Independence Day 1974, Williams declared: “In our case oil means (a) a large number of permanent jobs through downstream petroleum operations or new industries based on petroleum, (b) greater national ownership of our national resources….and local utilization and diversification of products which we formerly exported, (c) larger allocations for our domestic services, (d) more rapid progress….to supplement our own domestic efforts at greater self-sufficiency.” (emphasis mine) TT was floating on oil dollars. YEAR GDP ($M) 1951 308.3 1960 865.9 1970 1630.9 1972 2039.4 1973 2554.7 1974 4101.5 1977 8552.2 1980 14081.9 Government employment increased by hiring 100,000 people – 80,000 in the public service and 20,000 in partly government-owned commercial and industrial enterprises. Oil windfall dollars were spent on increases in subsidies in food, welfare, utilities and petroleum, cuts in income and other taxes, employment creation, expanding state ownership in Texaco and Tate & Lyle and new joint ventures. This was the explosion in the state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector. Despite the oil money, poverty and poor income distribution persisted. Dissatisfaction Continues In 1974-75, industrial unrest flared up again. By March 1975, 17,000 sugar workers were on strike, cane farmers launched ‘don’t cut’ campaigns, mass meetings in oil and protests at Neal & Massy and in other industries were escalating. A rally and march were planned for March 18. More than 15,000 workers were on the move. The police refused permission for the march and brutally attacked in San Fernando, arresting 32 leaders of the ULF (a grouping of 4 unions). Police blocked the roads and overturned huge pots of food prepared for the marchers in Marabella and Saith Park, Chaguanas. That day became known as ‘Bloody Tuesday’. Within 6 days, the ULF converted into a political party dubbed a working-class party. The ULF had support from workers mostly in the ‘radical’ unions and organised among the university lecturers and students. It contested the 1976 General Elections in September of that year. The outcome of the election was: PNM won 24 seats, ULF – 10 and the DAC (led by Robinson who left the PNM in 1971) – 2 Tobago seats. Despite the large protests and strikes, the ULF failed to gain the majority of working class support. By September 1977, it had split into 2 factions, one led by Basdeo Panday, who enjoyed the support of the workers and people in the sugar belt. The demands for unity of 1970 appeared to be silenced and the old pre-Independence pattern of politics based on appeals to race and division among the people seemed to be back. Because of an elections boycott, the PNM formed a minority (33%) government in 1971. Largely because of the lavish spending of the oil windfall dollars, it was able to regain support by 1976. But, by the early years of the next decade, windfall turned into downturn very much as the situation was at the approach to Independence in 1962 and again at the start of the ‘70’s. The economy was like a roller coaster ride and the boom and bust pattern closely followed the pattern of prices for the main commodity on which the country relied – oil. Source: T&T: Economic Growth in a Dual Economy, IDB, 2007 Into Recession Again - 1982 While oil prices ‘bumped up’ in 73-74 and again in 79-80, by 1985-86 they were halved. By 1980, oil business amounted to 42% of GDP, provided 65% of government revenues and accounted for 94% of export earnings. Dependence on oil was a benefit and a threat. Partly because of falling US demand for imported oil as refineries there stepped up production in response to the 1973 ‘oil crisis’, both oil production and refinery throughput were on the decline in TT from around 1978. The oil windfall, while it created the opportunity for government and the private sector to diversify, did not result in moving toward a less oil-dependent sustainable economy. Government concentrated on very expensive economic projects with less-than-expected returns like ISCOTT, the private sector preferred the comfort of retail operations and ‘screwdriver’ industries with high import content like the multiple car agencies and assembly plants and corruption assumed massive proportions. The bus station racket and Caura Dam scandal of Gene Miles’ days paled in comparison to the new wave of feeding off the state trough. Between 1982 and 1989, there were 7 years of negative growth in GDP (more than enough to satisfy any definition of recession). GDP was $6229M US in 1984 and dropped to $5610M US in 1987. The burden of debt reached $1.41B US in 1987 and external debt servicing/GDP escalated from 2% in 1982 to 24.3% in 1987. The1981 Chambers government devalued the currency by 50% in 1985 and added a 10% tax on some consumer goods. The 1986 NAR government rode in on a wave of ‘one love’ and a massive 33-3 majority and continued Chambers’ “adjustment” measures:
Unemployment, poverty, vagrancy and vending spread all over the country. The Kirpalani conglomerate collapsed in 1986 and bankruptcies dealt with many other private companies. The savagery of the attack on the workers and poor to ensure the ‘inescapable obligation’ of debt payments drove the divided trade union movement to act together against the state and private sector assault. Neal & Massy froze wages, cut work time and contracted out work. That conglomerate locked out workers at its subsidiaries – Polymer Caribbean, Edgar Borde, Electrical Industries, Automotive Components and N&M Motors. Unions rallied with TIWU which bore the brunt of these attacks. March 6, 1989 was declared a Day of Resistance – a massive one-day national strike, led by the Joint Trade Union Movement (JTUM). It was followed by strikes in oil, PTSC and WASA, among others. The 1990 Budget and 15% VAT drove the unions to expand the coalition of resistance in a single labour day march that year and the creation of the Summit of People’s Organisations (SOPO). Eventually, a new single trade union federation, NATUC, was created when the PSA Rooftop Accord was signed in 1991. The NAR disintegrated in 1988 when Panday and some Ministers supporting him were fired by Robinson. They formed Club 88 and founded the UNC in April 1989. By 1990, the NAR which began with ‘One Love’ was facing unceasing social unrest and eventually on July 27, the Jamaat al Muslimeen attempted to overthrow it in an unsuccessful coup. The oil windfalls passed through the society ‘like a dose of salts’ and TT marched into the ‘valley of debt’. Heading Where? The economic strategy adopted before, continued at Independence, persisted in through 2 major windfalls in the 70’s and 80’s left Project Independence floundering and the nation-building project in tatters. The shift in dependency from liquid to gaseous hydrocarbons did nothing to free the economy and the country from the single-commodity ‘plantation’ economic construct inherited from colonial times. The structure of the economy never changed, and the diversification promised by Williams on Independence 1974 and other PMs since boom has never materialized. Agriculture has been annihilated and the mounting food import bill stands testimony to a persistent subsistence sector despite the various Oil and Food Conferences and plans touted over the years. The tourism sector has never contributed as much as 10% of GDP and the economy rises and falls as global hydrocarbon prices fluctuate. The dependence on foreign capital and the US gas market after its oil market collapsed left project Independence without the economic base for success and recurring crises of boom and bust up to the 2014-18 recession accompanied by huge deficit-financing and mounting public debt and debt payment issues. The governance remains the maximum leader PM and Cabinet dictatorship patterned on the Colonial Governor-ship as the demand for ‘Power to the People’ raised in the call for Home Rule in the 30’s and 40’s and rekindled in 1970 remains a hope and prospect yet to be realized. The SOE’s in the economy and SoE’s in suppressive rule every time the people demand a new way continue to suffocate the advance of the nation-building project and Project Independence. In part 5, we look at the state of things at the jubilee celebration of the 50th anniversary in 2012. Clyde A Weatherhead A Citizen Fighting for Democratic Renewal of Our Society 24 August 2018  Project Independence – After 56 Years:
8 Years Later – Disappointment to Action The mood of expectancy and hope that existed among the population when the Union Jack was lowered and the red, white and black hoisted outside the Red House at a minute past midnight on August 31, 1962 was pervasive. With all the symbols of a newly-independent country – national flag, coat of arms and anthem, the streets of Port of Spain adorned with decorations and bunting and the singing of ‘nation-building’ songs, ‘our nation was born’. Beneath all the pomp and ceremony, however, certain realities persisted. Those realities would undermine the Independence euphoria as the population almost immediately began to face the realities of the new emerging nation state. The choices made in moving to Independence, particularly, the choices of economic strategy, political culture and governance architecture began to impact the lives and livelihood of the expectant population, not in ways they were led to anticipate. The euphoria of Independence was more a sigh of relief given the tensions generated in the political sphere between 1958 and Marlborough Conference in May 1962. The Atmosphere of Division The genesis of threatening tensions was to be found in the consolidation of party politics and the 2-party system with the following developments:
Winner Take All Governance Approach The already edgy atmosphere worsened when the PNM took a unilateralist, non-bipartisan approach on major decisions on the country’s future. First, rather than seeking national consensus, the party convention was used as the forum for a final decision on the issue of federation. Second, the PNM Government decided to unilaterally draft the proposed independence Constitution with no consultation with the Opposition only adding fuel to the atmosphere of division and tension. At the Independence Conference at Marlborough House, only at the last minute, in the atmosphere of racial and political polarisation back home, did the PNM accept several constitutional positions advocated by the DLP including limiting the powers of the Executive, requirement for special majorities to amend entrenched provisions, an independent EBC and Service Commissions. The PNM’s preference for ‘responsible’ trade unionists also led to mounting tensions between it and Butlerite union leaderships which were gaining strength in and around 1962:
These factors all contributed to the undercurrent of tension in the atmosphere of high expectations on August 31, 1962 The Experience of Independence The fall in world oil prices in 1961-62 triggered a downturn in the economic fortunes of the country at the dawn of Independence. Government’s fiscal deficit reached $56.4M in 1961. This was one consequence of the economic strategy adopted by the Government even before Independence. In the early independence years, several weaknesses of the economic choices became apparent:
All the major commercial banks were foreign owned. So, was half of the land and 80% of manufacturing investment was by foreign capital. Most foreign investment was in oil. There was a shift of the population from the rural to the urban parts of the country and out of agriculture. Proportion of Population 1946 1960 1970 Living in rural areas 36.4% 23.3% Living in urban areas 40% 53% Involved in agriculture and related activities 27.5% 21.1% Involved in mining and manufacturing 22.3% 22.5% 21% The rates of unemployment and underemployment were increasing. Underemployment rose from 14.5% in 1960 to 20% in 1970. Income distribution was a constant and worsening problem. In the early 1960’s the top 10% of income earners shared 33% of the national income. The wages for women were about 50% of their male counterparts. A study in 1971 revealed that unequal income distribution was closely linked with racial factors. Acton Camejo showed that among executive and managerial staff in larger firms 53% were white, 15% were mixed, 9% Chinese, Indians 9% and Africans 4%. The median monthly incomes, according to the 1960 census, for males was $500 for whites, $104 for Africans and $77 for Indians. This pattern closely resembled the situation in the colonial era which was supposed to be the past. Industrial development was not delivering full or close to full employment and unequal distribution of income persisted. By 1963, the unionised workers were on the move again. Strikes were being called by almost all the major unions in 1962 and 63. In February 1963, BP workers went on strike over the planned retrenchment of 200 workers. In October 1964, the unions boycotted Tripartite Committee talks. In February 1965 sugar workers went on strike against a wage freeze imposed by the company. The strike was supported by the OWTU. At the same time, there were strikes at Lock Joint, Federation Chemicals and even the CSA was threatening a go-slow over wage demands. A State of Emergency, under the 1947 Emergency Powers Ordinance, banned public meetings in the sugar belt to keep oil and sugar workers apart. On March 18, 1965, Government released the report of the Mbanefo Commission which was set up in 1963 to investigate what government and some ‘conservative’ trade unionists called subversive political activity in the trade union movement. In just 2 days, 18-20 March 1965, the Industrial Stabilisation Act was passed in Parliament and assented to by the Governor General. This law was principally aimed at restricting the workers right to strike. It banned strikes in ‘essential services’ – electricity, fire, health, water and sanitation. It introduced compulsory arbitration in the Ministry of Labour and the Industrial Court. Williams himself later declared that the ISA was aimed against “the subversive elements in the society.” and that the “background was an open attempt to link the trade unions in oil and sugar” (Eric Williams, Inward Hunger, p 311) Williams blamed the unions for the low levels of capital investment and uncompetitive exports to justify this draconian law. The fact was that the difficulties in the economy were a result of the development strategy of the Government itself as discussed above. The passage of the ISA also achieved the further division of the trade union movement and split the Trade Union Congress, weakening the workers’ fight for rights and interests, for jobs and incomes and for national control of the major economic enterprises. All the declarations of ‘Massa Day Done’ and the euphoria of Independence was turning into disappointment at the failure of the promise of Independence. The disappointment was acutely felt among the urban youth who, despite expanded educational opportunities, were unemployed and without employment prospects in increasing numbers. 1970 – The Revo – Disappointment to Action By the end of the 60’s the attempts by Pegasus to create a people’s programme for nation-building were frustrated and usurped by the Government. Granger went on to the UWI campus and into the communities to begin a new phase of his struggle for development. The workers and their unions were fighting battles to save jobs as employment in oil fell by 3% between 1965 and 1969. Automation in sugar led to retrenchment and in other sectors job cuts were the order of the day. In June 1968, 10,000 workers joined in a March of Resistance, TIWU led the challenge against the ISA with strikes at Sissons Paints in 1967 and in public transport in June 1968 and May 1969. The disaffected among the unemployed and the intelligentsia at UWI were also in action. Some lecturers were challenging the thinking and policies of the Government. The university students engaged in protests on 26 February 1969 in support of 11 Trinidadian students arrested at Sir George Williams University in Canada. The students also linked with the youth in the communities. All these currents fed into what erupted on 26 February as the 1970 Revolution led by NJAC which was formed that night by students, workers and their unions. In 1970, mainly young persons, disillusioned with the persistence of the colonial construct, sought to address social inequality, foreign domination of the economy, racial inequality and poor political representation. The shouts of ‘Power to the People’ and sound of marching feet filled the air. The clarion call “Indians and Africans, Unite!” urging unity was inscribed on the banner. The youth re-examined history seeking a better understanding and appreciation of the society and its people and to define project independence anew. The response of the ‘independence’ state was a mixture of ignoring ideas for a new development approach, offering a minimum of concessions, State of Emergency, imprisonment of leaders and brutal repression including the attempted dreaded Public Order Bill. Like the colonial authorities’ response to the Butler Riots, the approach to the 1970 Revo was ‘Smiles and Blood’ – token concessions and severe repression. Against those who dared resort to arms, the answer was blood and steel. Against the adherence of the youth to revolutionary ideas of change, a new element was introduced to the society - the mass culture of illicit drugs. Understanding why, in less than a decade, the euphoria of Independence gave way to mass disillusionment, was not important. Protecting the new order of power was. But, the idea of the new Trinbago remained alive among the workers and youth who dared to take action in 1970. In the next part, we examine the pattern of boom and bust in an unsustainable economic construct. Clyde A Weatherhead A Citizen Fighting for Democratic Renewal of Our Society 22 August 2018  An Apology That is Not so Unreserved
Last night, the Leader of the PNM issued an ‘unreserved apology’ to the Hindu community for the ‘hurt’ caused by the ‘sari skit’ at his party’s sport and family day last Sunday. In making this apology, Dr. Rowley, claimed that he did not understand the implications of the skit because he did not know about the Mahabharata and beliefs of the Hindu religion. He went on to suggest that his ‘ignorance’ of such matters was because in his growing up in Tobago, there were only a handful of Hindus or Muslims, and he, as a Christian, simply did not have much interaction with people of those religions. But, as the author of ‘Mason Hall to Whitehall’ – his autobiography, Dr. Rowley has traced his growing up which also took place in Trinidad for significant periods of his life, apart from the fact that he is resident in Trinidad. He also reminds in the same speech that the PNM has been in existence since 1955 and in power for many of those years as well as ‘represents every square centimeter of this country’. However, as a national political figure for many years and leading member of this party which claims it represents everyone in this country, he expects us to believe that in all of these years and with a party that boasts of its organisation, the PNM has not educated him (and its candidates and members) about the cultures of the various groups of people who make up this ‘diverse population’. Instead, he blamed the failure to promote such sensitivity and information on the education system. Incidentally, the same education which the PNM boasts they have created. So, his explanation of his ‘ignorance’ is dubious particularly when he spoke, last night, about being involved in a meeting with the leader of the SDMS some years ago ‘about the need to know more about each other’. This speaks volumes of the prejudices of the PNM which presents leaders to this country without them appreciating the culture and thinking of the various ethnic groups in the society. While espousing the virtues of the PNM’s concern for women, the PNM Leader after relating the story of the Mahabharata, proceeded to deny that one of the implications of the ‘sari skit’ was that it was also insensitive to women. So, his apology was limited only to Hindus, but not also to women. While the PNM Leader must be congratulated for making an apology, even if after some time since the incident and with excuses for not understanding the significance of the the implications of the skit, we must note that it was equivocated by the ‘explanations’ offered. More, the rest of the speech, last night was spent berating the Opposition for using the incident to ‘promote divisiveness’ and ‘saboteurs’ looking to create discord and destruction in the society’. This speech, therefore, was crafted to extol the virtues of the PNM as ‘a force for unity’ and the UNC as a force for ‘division’. Almost the entire Cabinet was present for this laying of the foundation of the next phase of PNM propaganda. This was entirely self-serving to advance the interests of the PNM and its Leader in its strategy to hold on to power be ensuring that the opposition is defeated in its image and in elections in 2019 and 2020. If we forget the history of the PNM and the boasts of its founding Leader that its “achievements” in the 1960’s with the passage of the ISA and in 1970 with the State of Emergency was to ‘keep the workers in sugar and oil’ and later the ‘Indians and Africans’ apart. If we forget that in attempting to expand its support and influence in the 1958 Federal Election and the 1961 Elections, the PNM viciously attacked the then PDP on the basis of race and religion. See some of the history here: http://clydeweatherheadsite.net/discussion/project-independence-after-56-years-part-1. If we forget that the racist divisive activity of the PNM in the 1961 Elections had to be stopped by the declaration of a State of Emergency. If we forget all of this history which we have lived then we will be closing our eyes to the PNM’s legacy of ‘looking to create discord and destruction in the society’ which its present Leader accused the UNC of last night. The thinking people of this country must be conscious of the danger of divisiveness of the politics of both of the so-called major parties. The people must defend and safeguard their unity against the promotion of divisiveness from any source. Great attention must be paid to what the PNM Leader said last night and what he will say in Tunapuna next Saturday. Safeguard the Unity of the People and reject the self-serving propaganda of the political parties!! Clyde A Weatherhead A Citizen Fighting for Democratic Renewal of Our Society 19 August 2018 |
AuthorI am a appalled at the loss of the simple skills of discussing ideas and sharing Opinions to DEEPEN ANALYSIS and UNDERSTAND DEVELOPMENTS to ARRIVE AT SOLUTIONS. Archives
April 2024
Categories |
RSS Feed
