Last Thursday saw the staging of the second in the series of debates between representatives in the country’s two major political parties, hosted by the Jamaica Debates Commission.

Below, sector interests comment on the performances of Finance Minister Audley Shaw and Opposition spokesman on finance Dr Peter Phillips.

Joseph Matalon, Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica (PSOJ)

“Everybody seems to believe that it was a sort of even performance between the two gentlemen. I think that they covered most of the issues that we would have wanted to hear in relation to the economy and the budget, and I think that between the two, there isn’t a significant degree in terms of their policy directions. It just seems that one might have a different direction than the other.”

The settlement of issues around the IMF agreement; either a re-negotiation and extension of the existing one, or the implementation of a new stand-by arrangement (are of critical importance). And in order to get that done we are going to have to show clear commitment on a number of items in the pension reform, tax reform, public sector restructuring and reform programmes. That’s the first issue and that really deals with the macro-economic environment,” he said.

The policies that we would like to see otherwise from the point of view of the private sector, are those that are likely to create a more enabling business environment for entrepreneurs generally and, in particular, small and medium-sized businesses which we firmly believe are the most important engine of growth within the economy if we really want to achieve high sustained rates of growth. This is about the regulatory framework and the extent of the cost and the time within which it takes to conduct business, and the access to credit to small and medium sized businesses.

Kavan Gayle, president Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU)

“Both parties are speaking along the same ideology. The JLP had indicated from the start that there are certain things that would be required to restore the economy; reducing interest rates, reducing inflation, creating a type of infrastructure that would create investment. That is what they would have done before you start creating the growth, and that would have been the positive coming out of their debate. Apart from the fact of talking about tax reform and pension reform, which are crucial, what I have seen from the PNP is that they are speaking along the same lines as the JLP. What they (PNP) are seeking to do is to rebirth the plans of the JLP. The only shortcoming is that neither party was able to present the direction they will be going in the future. And that, based on my opinion, came across based on the questions that were asked. Most of the questions were directed to what has happened in the pass and not questions to determine what can take place in the future to allow the debaters to present that type of an argument,”

Howard Duncan, Vice president National Workers’ Union (NWU)

“I believe, honestly, that both debaters failed to address some topical issues as it relates to how we are going to take this country out of the dilemma that we are now in. I don’t want to say who won, but I want to say that based on what I was expecting I was a bit disappointed with both sides because it is the same thing that they keep repeating over and over; I blame you, you blame me.

More political issues are coming out more than how we are going to be coming out of the issues that we are now in. What new things are you talking about?

Both of them were equal but they failed to address a vision plan to address what they will be doing over the next 20 years. As it relates to the workers, I am not hearing anything coming forward. Both of them mentioned things about the IMF implications but my position and the NWU’s position is that when the IMF agreement was being negotiated and enforced the workers were not a part of that. I think the Union should be a part of those discussions.

Paul Adams, president Jamaica Teachers’ Association (JTA)

“Education is underfunded and it is so because government has failed to properly allocate the resources. That is why I said that any continuation or renegotiation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) agreement must take into consideration special considerations for education. The amount of money given to run schools cannot run schools. All it does is run down schools. Primary schools are grossly underfunded to the point of it being cruel. So one of the things that I would like the next government to do is to take into consideration the real value of putting in the resources to properly educate people’s children and incrementally move the budget to the point of having the funds allocated. And, for the high schools, they (government) need to look especially in the area of technical education because a large number of schools with equipment and machines, those machines are either run down or out of order. If government intends to build a functional economy it must first allocate proper resources to education. And on the output of education our economy will be build.”

Oneil Grant, president Jamaica Civil Servants Association (JCSA)

“There were a lot of ideas and we heard a shift in position (by the Government) that will make it better for public sector workers. A shift in that the current administration is saying that they are now looking at growing the economy rather than looking at cutting the public sector. Already some things have started to happen where that is concerned. [But] we are still unsure at this time what the People’s National Party is going to be doing as a solution to the cost of the public sector (on the public purse). They said they are going to reduce the cost of the public sector, but they have not brought any ideas that I could really point to in the debate this evening as to what that is going to be.

“Come January, whoever forms the government that administration is going to have a mandate but I am fearful that all the work that we have done over the last two years, especially, is going to be brought to nought because people are now going to want to move with mandates that were not there before. So right now it is a state of uncertainty as to what is going to happen in January.

“I wasn’t looking for strength of argument, I was looking for analysis behind the argument and I didn’t get that tonight based on the arguments put forward. What I got for the most part from both gentlemen was some rhetoric having to do with what they think is good and what they think is not good about what each other, as an administration, would be doing for the public service. I have not heard anything earth-shattering as far as I am concerned.

Milton Samuda, Jamaica Chamber of Commerce (JCC)

“I can’t comment first hand on it but I will tell you that I came away with. There was this sense of quarelling and tit-for-tat and perhaps we could have benefitted more from a concentration on what we are going to do and on how we are going to do it.

“The government (which will be formed) have very little leeway in terms of policy determination and it is really more a question on emphasis on priorities.

Because whichever government comes in, it is going to have to tackle the debt problem; our debt has increased. There has been some shift recently, but on the whole our debt has increased.

Poverty has been increasing, corruption, at least the perception of corruption, has been increasing; ease of doing business, we have fallen on that international indicator.

So regardless of who forms the government there are some things that have to be tackled in order to create the climate in which people feel that they can go into business, feel that they can generate and grow profit, feel that they can contribute to economic growth and the growth of employment, and are willing to invest in their own country, as well as feeling confident to invite others from overseas, including the diaspora, to invest here.