|
Khan’s Chronicles
Free up the Rasta!
By Sharief Khan
LISTEN up, people! I and I not feeling so righteous and I want to chant my feelings with you today.
I man feeling a bit down and when I man feeling down my vibrations affect other people, including those close to me and I don’t like those kinds of feelings.
I don’t like affecting people man, not me. I man on the straight and narrow and I don’t like being on any stupidness. That not for this dread.
So I chanting with you and looking to the Most High to lead us out of this latest patch of trouble.
I remember the late great Brother Bob Marley raising some mighty chants down in a government yard in Trench Town, Jamaica, and pouring forth with that sweet, mighty and moving voice of his.
That brother had some real powerful messages and he helped raise the consciousness of brethren and sistren spread all over the world so that today I and I and you are able to see things in the proper perspective.
Praise Jah, the Most High.
I can’t raise as mighty, nor even a sweet a chant as Brother Bob, but I want to chant down some things that not making me so irie today.
I remember Brother Bob and Georgie making the fire light in that government yard in Trench Town as if it was love burning through the night; and then they would cook some meal porridge of which they would share with others.
And I man see some people in this country moving along on some pretty strange stupidity and I man want to chant them down. I want to raise some fires on them and ask them to stop the foolishness.
Remember how Brother Bob appealed to us to emancipate ourselves from mental slavery? Well brethren and sistren, a lot of us still tie up tight, tight, tight with some mental slavery chains and we got to shake them off.
We got to shake off the nonsense.
As you know, I man am a scribe I write for a living.
My job is journalism and the greater part of it is for righteousness for all and to help lead us all into the Promised Land where we can find a better life. That’s putting it in a coconut shell and I spend a lot of time chewing on stuff like what being a scribe means when I sit down with my calabash of ital from time to time.
Ital is good meditation food but the other night I saw a dread looking longingly at two sweet-looking women and I reminded him that meat is forbidden to Rastas.
He looked at me, then even more longingly at the two good-looking women, smiled, winked and said, “That’s good halaal meat and that’s not forbidden to Rasta!”
Right on, Rasta! Praise to the Most High who works His wonders in so many wonderful ways for us to behold.
But back to where I was chewing on my ital and meditating.
I remember when I was at the Stabroek News (the other newspaper I helped to bring to birth and watch grow into a sturdy tree), the late President Desmond Hoyte didn’t really like us talking to his key government officials.
He probably was afraid of information leaking out to nosy brethren like me who would not waste time spreading the news and so he put a clamp on them.
As I recall it, some kind of law or edict was passed banning government officials from giving out information without the express permission of the top guys. In other words, it was now up to those who felt they were the `Most High’ to decide what the rest of us should or should not know.
So, in a flash, those who were affected were told in no uncertain terms that if they spoke to others about matters they were not supposed to talk about without permission from the `Most High’, they faced a fine of $10,000 and a jail term.
Needless to say that put the fear of death in a lot of people who no longer felt safe talking to reporters from the Stabroek News. Many were scared but a few held their ground, including Dr. Barton Scotland, Mr. Winston King, Dr. Cecil Rajana and the late Dr. Cedric Grant, who never failed to see or speak to me in the course of my job. This Rasta says `Hail up, brothers! Glory to the true Most High!’
Those brothers have moved on and so have I and I had thought that with the dawn of a new day, that that kind of fear wrought by the stupidity of a time bygone had drifted into the dank corners where evil dwells.
But I have found that the fear is alive and well and this Rasta wants to break those chains, man.
Listen to this reasoning and tell me what you think. One of our reporters last week was doing a story on how good the new-look Cheddi Jagan International Airport looking. Nothing controversial -- nice, simple story; but when she checked with a senior man at the airport, the reporter was told that he could not speak to her without permission from his Permanent Secretary!
We dug further and it became apparent to us that a lot of officials around the place are under the distinct impression that they can give out information only through a certain government agency, which shall not be named for the time being.
I couldn’t believe the stupidity we were picking up and it seemed like even more foolishness when another reporter approached a Government Minister on a story and she suggested to him that she would talk to someone at the unnamed government agency who would eventually put out the information. Thankfully, that minister pulled back from going that route and gave our reporter her telephone number to pursue the matter with her.
See the dothishness, people? We are not after the crown jewels here just simple information so that we can keep the public better informed and on the straight and righteous. But some people seem to want to keep us in the land of darkness until they decide how much light we can see.
Now, I man am not on that kind of foolishness and I chanting it down. I don’t yet know how far the rot has spread but this Rasta fighting it down.
This Rasta raising a chant against this backwardness and I hope all the righteous brethren and sistren join me to bring fires on those who want to keep us in mental bondage.
Hear me the days for that done and fires pon anyone who want to take us there!
Free the Rasta! Hail up, people. Praises to the Most High.
I and I gone to find a good calabash bowl of ital to meditate on the two good-looking sistren that other halaal meat-loving Rasta was feasting his eyes on the other night.
In the more time, people.
RICKEY Singh column
GLIMPSE OF TEXAN TYCOON BANKROLLING OUR CRICKET
Big money for 2006 tournament, but is there more in the mortar than the pestle?
THERE'S a lot of shouting for joy as well as sharp criticisms over the proposed US$28 million `20/20 cricket tournament’ in 2006 announced at a lavish media launch on October 3 by Texan billionaire Allen Stanford at his Pavilion Restaurant in Antigua.
If celebrated West Indies cricket legends earmarked to share in the Stanford cricket payout are exuberant, that is understandable. To rationalise, as Clive Lloyd, one of the legends behind the `20/20 initiative’, noted at the launching ceremony, our cricketers have too long been "grossly underpaid".
But is this American tycoon, whose dominant investments and influence in Antigua remain a source of controversy in that CARICOM state, really out to "revolutionise" West Indies cricket, or is he on a new market blitz, on behalf of the "Stanford empire", reputedly worth some US$21 billion with multiple business interests in approximately 79 countries?
In contrast to the exuberance of icons like Garfield Sobers, Wes Hall and Clive Lloyd for the Stanford-sponsored tournament, there are questions, from various quarters, pertaining to the rationale, organisation and management at this time of the 2006 tournament with the West Indies Cricket Board (WICB) still seemingly left in the dark.
Granted that the Board lacks the confidence it needs from players and public, it still stands as the principal mechanism for organising cricket tournaments with its territorial affiliates. Yet, according to, for example, Ellis Lewis, President of the Trinidad and Tobago Cricket Board, also a WICB director, he knows of NO consultation for the Stanford originated 20/20 tournament.
On the other hand, as he said to me last week, Vincentian Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves, has different concerns that would not have him "jumping for joy over Stanford...I am not having any historical amnesia about Stanford who is keen on taking LIAT out of operations with his 'Caribbean Star' and 'Caribbean Sun'.."
Others in governments, including Antigua, Stanford's primary operational base in this region, are also rhetorically asking what has become of the Texan entrepreneur's much publicised originally proposed "Stanford Caribbean Investment Fund"?
That Investment Fund
Announced with much media fanfare over two years ago, Stanford had pledged to pump some US$2 billion in economic development projects through that Fund.
An estimated US$900 million had been identified to come from foreign investors; another US$700 million borrowed on the basis of conventional financing and approximately US$300 million to be raised through non-cash concessions from Caribbean governments.
Immensely successful an entrepreneur Stanford certainly is. But the 55-year-old American entrepreneur and bossman of the Stanford Group of Companies, known to have had his share of clashes with governments, including some within CARICOM, is certainly no philanthropist.
He makes no secret that he is in business to make money, and is on record as boasting of being in the habit of getting what he wants.
Well, his range of investments and level of influence in Antigua over a relatively short period - check his investments profile spread across sixty acres at VC Bird International Airport -point to his success in achieving what he wanted to have located in that CARICOM state, once jeeringly deemed "the Birds estate".
Those jeers, in reference to the political grip and enormous influence of the family of the late VC Bird, including sons Vere Jnr and Lester, were to give way to current jokes about "Stanfordville" as a new name for Antigua.
Stanford had no real problems in quickly securing the support he needed from Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer's United Progressive Party administration, following the defeat, finally, of the Birds' Antigua Labour Party at the March 2004 general election, after a long spell in government.
The UPP was vehemently opposed to the investment tentacles of the Stanford Group reaching into an off-shore Guiana islands project for an estimated US$1 billion luxury tourism resort.
Prime Minister Spencer, who had recruited as his experienced and well-paid public relations handler the Trinidadian national, Roy Boyke, and now has him attending cabinet meetings to the discomfort of some of his political colleagues, was to make a rapid transformation.
Spencer's Transformation
One from being a robust, hostile opponent of Stanford to a relationship friendly enough to publicly greet him by first name, "Allen" - just as he did at the billionaire's lavish launching party for the 20/20 cricket tournament.
Stanford originally became involved in financial investment in Antigua through acquisition of a then financially threatened Bank of Antigua.
Following a fierce exchange with the government of the British dependent territory of Montserrat in the 1990s, resulting from a decision to revoke licences granted him for what was then his `Guardian International Bank’ (GIB) in Plymouth, Stanford was to considerably raise his profile in Antigua.
Before his move to Antigua, with the surrendering of his licences to preempt revocation as ordered for May 31, 1991, Sandford's GIB off-shore banking operations had grown enormously in just two years from a deposit base of US$2 billion at the end of 1987 to US$55. 5 million by the end of 1989, reaching some US$100 million by November 1990 - according to Federal Bureau of Investigation monitors in Texas and records of the Montserrat and British governments.
Once the Bank of Antigua was under his control for domestic commercial operations, the Texan tycoon did not lose time in securing from the then Bird administration a licence for off-shore operations by his Stanford International Bank, the largest such banking business in that Leeward Island state, with an expanding South American clientele.
Today, he is quite proud and comfortable in Antigua and Barbuda - or is it "Stanfordville"- wielding the critical influence that goes with his investments as part of the "Stanford empire".
From Digicel to Stanford
Earlier, as is well known to both past and present ruling parties in St. John's, he had threatened to shift significant business operations away from Antigua to St. Kitts unless his demands were met for ownership acquisition of 60 acres of land he currently occupies at VC Bird International Airport.
There are located the offices of the Texan tycoon's banking, construction, airline and media businesses, the Stanford cricket ground and stadium, 'Sticky Wicket' restaurant, a private members-only spa and an Olympic-size swimming pool.
Stanford has repeatedly dismissed as false and politically inspired allegations against him involving inquiries from US Treasury and other agencies relating to off-shore banking operations and influence-peddling, and remains confident about the legitimacy of his business dealings. He certainly has influential backers.
But is there more than just a claimed "love" for West Indies cricket that has this Texan billionaire in shining armour investing US$28 million for a 20/20 cricket tournament and a star-studded team?
I guess whether or not the financially-strapped, confidence-afflicted WICB endorses Stanford's `20/20 tournament’, the show will begin.
So, from Ireland's Digicel, as sponsor of the West Indies cricket team, we have now moved to a Texan tycoon's sponsorship, with very big money, for the proposed 20/20 tournament in 2006. Is there more in the mortar than the pestle? Time will tell.
GUYANA’S DEMOCRACY QUESTIONS (II)
Weekly viewpoint by Robert Persaud
(The following is part two of excerpts of a presentation made to a `Democracy Symposium’ held at the University of Guyana Tain Campus, Berbice)
I intend this brief presentation by answering four basic questions that are relevant to the theme and purpose of this public symposium: 1. What is democracy? 2. What has been the impact of our brief experience with democracy? 3. Is our democracy threatened? 4. Why is democracy critical for our prosperity and stability?
Is our democracy threatened?
Given the nature of this form of Government, there will be perpetual threats. Threats even exist in the world’s largest democracy - India - and also in one of the most dynamic democracies - the USA. Guyana is no different. Today, the more prominent threats to our democracy are: crime, poverty, corruption and political instability.
The singular or combined manifestations of these can undermine our democratic gains. For example, we all know the feeling that is created when there is rampant criminal activities and even criminal terror such as the disappearance of the sugar workers on the East Coast of Demerara. Crime can cause all sorts of reactions by the public that can harm our democracy. Also, it can lead to governments rolling back some of the democratic features as a society more focused on security is forced to sacrifice some of its freedoms. The criminals also limit the ability of the population to fully tap all the gains of democracy. The criminals who pillage, commit murders and terrorise are hitting directly at the backbone of democracy.
The second threat is poverty. This has been cut in half since the return of democracy. But the presence of poverty means the presence of a dangerous threat. People instinctively give bread and butter issues priority. Democracy for them is meaningless if it cannot answer their daily needs and fulfil their dreams. Poverty serves to inhibit people’s faith and belief in democracy. A view strongly held by the late President Cheddi Jagan when he observed (August 6, 1996): "Democracy can only prosper in an environment of economic, social and ecological development…If left unattended the expansion of poverty with hunger and the hopelessness it engenders will undermine the fabric of our civilisation and the security of the democratic state….”
The third is corruption. This is like a cancer that can eat away at the fabric of any democracy. The on-going battle by the Government to confront corruption can be seen as an effort to forestall this dangerous threat to our democracy. The tentacles of corruption can undermine our democracy and even have a demoralising effect on our citizenry to build their country and earn an honest living. There are instances where democractic governments have fallen under the millstone of rampant corruption, a fact of which the PPP/C is fully aware. In Guyana, people had to engage in corrupt activities just to get food. The culture of smuggling flour, potatoes, spilt peas, cooking oil and sardines, which were once banned, added to rigged elections led to the genesis of monstrous corruption in our society. This monster must be eliminated to preserve our democracy.
Sadly, in this day and age, there are those who still do not believe in the power of our people to choose their leaders. We see the fourth threat - political instability - and violence manifested in after elections results, and even in court rulings. Those who promote political instability now have the audacity to seek foreign support for a non-elected government instead of a government that is freely and fairly-elected by all the people. Political instability is the Achilles heel of any democratic State.
Having identified these threats, there must be firm and decisive action by the Government and all stakeholders, Opposition political parties included, which is consistent with the principles of democracy to crush the various threats to democracy.
Is democracy critical for our prosperity and stability?
The survival of this nation hinges on a lasting democratic environment. We do not have the luxury to experiment with any non-democratic arrangement to find out the consequences. The experiences of the 1964-1992 period tell the sordid story of destruction, deprivation and economic spoliation resulting from the absence of democracy.
This point was made by President Bharrat Jagdeo in his last Independence address to the nation: “In many respects, Guyana lost decades in terms of development. October, 1992 marked another important milestone in our country’s history. With the rebirth of democracy and the return to office of a freely elected government, a new phase in our national journey began. As in any journey with a destination in mind, we must know where we are heading if we are not to become lost en route, or to become diverted from our goals.”
It would also be useful for us to examine the indicators of progress since 1992 which will answer the question about the essentiality of democracy for our individual and collective survival. These evidence of progress are redounding to the prosperity and stability of this country.
While we reflect on the struggles to win democracy and celebrate the gains, we must not lose perspective of its critical importance locally and internationally as an agent of world peace. We must not take our democracy for granted as the enemies of freedom and democracy are lurking outside our doors. At times, commentators observe that we are too liberal with our democracy. But this is a price we must pay. We must prepare to fight to defend this democracy as our ancestors and freedom fighters did when they stood for what was good for them and the generations to come. Also, let us count ourselves fortunate as there are still many millions struggling to attain a basic democratic State.
And now I end on a provocative note: any democracy runs the risk of perishing by the abuse of democracy.
The Greater Caribbean This Week
MEASURING TOURISM SUSTAINABILITY
Jasmin Garraway
THE development of standards and indicators as a means of measuring tourism sustainability is one of the primary recommendations of Agenda 21.
Standards and indicators are a process, which is based on the premise that by following a certain set of procedures and principles, acceptable outcomes will result.
Tourism practitioners agree that indicators are a practical instrument that measures progress of sustainable tourism development. They act somewhat as a compass to present a picture of the direction in which a destination is travelling as it journeys on the path to sustainable tourism.
They also convey information about the progress that a destination is making in achieving targets that are desired or that have been set. On the other hand, indicators give warning signals about a situation that is emerging, or an area of concern in a destination. In this way, preventative or corrective action can be taken, before the situation deteriorates to a level where it cannot be easily remedied.
These tools are used not only to conceive developments, but are also a practical way to actually achieve improvements in the tourism industry.
Agenda 21 identified 12 priority areas in which sustainability can be measured for the tourism industry. These include design for sustainability, partnerships for sustainable tourism, waste minimisation, reuse and recycle, management of fresh water resources, as well as staff, customers and community involvement in environmental issues.
The Association of Caribbean States' Convention establishing the Sustainable Tourism Zone of the Greater Caribbean and its protocol also outlines areas for measuring sustainability in tourism.
These include security, as measured by the number of crimes committed against tourists in a destination per year, child prostitution as measured by the number of cases detected involving tourists, and employment which can be measured by the number of persons employed in the tourism industry.
Other priority areas for measurement are quality of water, energy and water consumption, tourist satisfaction, and environmental management. In fulfilling its mandate to establish the zone, the ACS embarked on the process of developing indicators of tourism sustainability. The process started with the pilot study of a tourist destination in Guadeloupe, followed by the development of a manual for trainers on sustainable indicators development.
The ACS' theoretical approach to indicator development was coupled with the practical methodology designed by the World Tourism Organisation.
A field test of the combined methodologies resulted in several lessons learnt, including the importance of information gathering as the basis for indicators use, and the need for cooperation amongst all stakeholders in the process.
The latter is particularly important in multi-use destinations where the resources are used by several users and stakeholders. The development and use of indicators require a high level of commitment by the community.
This can present a major challenge especially as it relates to getting consensus or agreement on the units of measurements, or the actual benchmarks for each of the priority areas identified.
Another constraint is that existing tools are often inadequate in light of the diverse nature of the tourism product, and the broad range of issues and activities, which the industry embraces. It is often easier to find tools for measuring physical and environmental impacts rather than those for measuring social and cultural impacts, as these are more challenging.
In beginning the process, the tourism sector can seek guidance by examining standards both voluntary and mandatory, which have been set. Mandatory standards encompass physical and national policies, development plans and tourism master plans amongst others while voluntary standards include codes of ethics, industry guidelines for compliance, and best practices that have been identified.
Ms. Jasmin Garraway is the Sustainable Tourism Director of the Association of Caribbean States. The opinions expressed are not necessarily the official views of the ACS. Comments and reactions can be sent to mail@acs-aec.org
Preventing Pandemics
By Gwynne Dyer
IT WOULD be funny if it were not so serious.
As migratory birds carry the avian influenza virus west across Europe, Britain is following in the footsteps of Russia, Ukraine, Romania and Turkey and asking hunters to shoot down as many incoming ducks and geese as possible. They have been issued with bird-flu testing kits to see if their victims are carrying the dreaded virus, but they really have little to worry about: all the cases of direct bird-to-human infection, now over a hundred in total, have occurred on family farms in South-East Asia.
The panic over bird flu is not wholly misplaced. If the H5N1 strain that is currently ravaging wild bird flocks learns to pass between human beings easily while retaining even a tenth of its current lethality -- the death-rate among people who catch it directly from birds has been as high as 50 percent -- the world would face an influenza pandemic as grave as the one in 1918-19. That one, known as the "Spanish influenza", killed between fifty and a hundred million people at a time when the world's population was only a third of what it is now.
Recent research has shown that the 1918 virus was also a purely avian strain that jumped to human beings, but then changed enough to become highly infectious between people. Its peculiar pattern of mortality, with a much higher death rate than usual among healthy young adults (half the victims of the Spanish flu pandemic were between 18 and 40 years old), is reappearing in the cases of direct bird-to-human transmission of the past two years. If the current avian virus also develops the ability to move easily between people, the world is in trouble.
IN THE WILD
Only in the past couple of decades has it been widely understood that almost all the quick-killer infectious diseases that have emerged to ravage human populations since the rise of civilisation come from our own domestic animals.
Human beings in the wild, like other predators that live in small, isolated groups of a few dozen individuals or less, would rarely have fallen victim to the quick-killer viruses and bacteria whose natural habitat is animals that live in large herds.
Even if such a disease did jump from some prey animal to the hunters who killed it, and even if it then adapted enough to infect the other members of the hunter-gatherer band, the new, human-infectious form would usually die out when it had run through those few dozen people.
Only when civilisation brought people together in large groups, and those people began living in constant close contact with domesticated versions of herd-dwelling animals, did the quick-killer diseases that often devastate those species begin to adapt permanently to the human species.
Over the past three or four thousand years this process has given us a whole range of highly infectious new human diseases, including quite lethal ones like smallpox, cholera, typhoid, and the Black Plague.
Influenza, which colonised civilised human beings via their flocks of domesticated birds, is usually a relatively mild member of this family of diseases, but the flu virus mutates with great ease, and occasionally it assumes a highly lethal form.
As our population has grown into the billions and the volume and speed of travel have soared, we have become more vulnerable to these "emergent" diseases, but they are unlikely to emerge on a British or even a Russian farm. Eighty years ago the "Spanish influenza" virus probably made its way from wild ducks into chickens and thence into human beings on a Kansas farm, but modern commercial farming does not involve people and their animals sharing the same living spaces. Moreover, if some disease does cross the species barrier anyway, its human victims are far more likely to get early treatment (and, if necessary, quarantine).
The places where the style of farming and the density of human and animal populations still favour the easy movement of diseases from animals into people are mostly in Asia, particularly in South-East Asia. That is where all the new flu viruses have emerged in the past half-century, where the SARS virus came from two years ago, and where other emergent diseases are most likely to appear. As a first step, it would make sense to create a network of trained observers who would report on any unusual disease patterns among the local farm families or their animals.
This is being done in Thailand, and much poorer Vietnam is making a start, but Indonesia has done little, the Chinese refuse to say what they are doing, and some of the smaller countries have done nothing. The developed countries would be wise to support these reporting networks, since they offer the best chance of stopping a new disease before it reaches the rest of the world.
In the longer run, farmers throughout the region must be encouraged to change their long-established ways of raising poultry, pigs and other animals. That is a tall order, but similar shifts in farming practice have already happened elsewhere, and at least the region's economy is developing fast enough that it can provide markets for a more commercial style of farming and non-farm jobs for those no longer needed on the land.
The countryside wouldn't be nearly so picturesque at the end of the process, but the world wouldn't be facing so many new diseases, either.
** (Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.)
Turning Caribbean migration to advantage
By Sir Ronald Sanders
(The writer is a former Caribbean diplomat, now business executive, who publishes widely on Small States in the global community)
IN A report that should deeply trouble the Caribbean, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) reveals that a majority of Caribbean countries have lost more than 50 per cent of its people who have been educated beyond secondary school.
They have migrated to the countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the world’s richest nations.
The report says, for example, that the tertiary educated labour force (people with more than 12 years of schooling) has been reduced by 89 percent in Jamaica and 82 per cent in Guyana.
Almost all the Caribbean countries are among the top 20 nations in the world with the highest tertiary-education migration rates,
It is significant that even oil-rich Trinidad and Tobago has a high number of tertiary-educated people who migrate. Indeed, Trinidad and Tobago ranks fifth in the region behind Haiti, Suriname, Jamaica and Guyana.
This is a truly troubling situation for the Caribbean. For not only does it mean that the region is losing a very large number of its most educated people, it also shows that the richest nations are the beneficiaries of the scarce financial resources that Caribbean countries, particularly Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, and Jamaica, spend on the education of their brightest people.
This is yet another form of resource transfers from developing countries to developed countries that are not taken into account in the uneven relationship between rich and poor countries.
And, the problem is about to get worse.
Two of the three major immigrant-receiving countries are Australia, Canada and the United States. Of those three, Caribbean people emigrate to Canada and the US.
In mid-October, the Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister, Pierre Pettigrew, declared that Canada’s population of 32 million must reach 40 million within “the next few years” if Canada is “to maintain its quality of life”.
Mr Pettigrew was reflecting the concern that Canada’s population is ageing with more demands on the social welfare system. There is, therefore, an urgent need for a younger and bigger work force to contribute financially to the system.
But, since the Canadian population grew by only 1 percent between 1994 and 2004, it would not reach 40 million until 2026 if it relied on natural growth.
Canada, therefore, will encourage migration to its shores, and given the proximity of the Caribbean and the traditional links between the two areas, it is obvious that the Caribbean will be one region to which Canada will look for fresh immigrants. And, those immigrants will be the best qualified.
To add to the problem, over the last few years, the United States and the United Kingdom have been actively recruiting skills that are required in a number of fields including teaching, health care and computer technology. Both Guyana and Jamaica have already lost a large number of nurses and teachers to the US and Britain.
While, now and in the future, the largest number of such skills will come from Asian countries, the largest number as a percentage of the population will come from the Caribbean. In other words, the Caribbean will continue to be the region that will lose the largest number of its qualified people.
There should be no doubt about it: it is not the poor, the wretched and the unskilled that will be accepted as migrants into the OECD countries. The drive is for qualified and skilled people who can fill a void in the work force, contribute to the creation of new jobs and new businesses, buy property, spend in the economy and pay into the social security scheme.
The loss of a significant number of its ablest and brightest people clearly has a negative impact on the social and economic development of the Caribbean.
When this loss of talent is combined with the erosion of preferential markets for the area’s traditional exports, the decline in official development assistance, and the slow down in the growth rates of national economies, it is very likely that both poverty and unemployment will increase.
There are, of course, two factors contributing to the migration of skills from the region.
First is the “pull’ factor, among them better salaries and wider opportunities to work in a chosen field.
Second is the “push” factor which includes political discrimination and victimisation, lower s |