IN the past week I have learned that the next potent letter in our alphabet is the 12th, certainly as it pertains to lawyers, liars, liability and litigation. This writer outlined the methodology of the David Smith/Olint saga, after it was brought to light by the FSC that this entity was unregistered as a financial institution. However, many Jamaicans and other nationalities allowed greed to prevail over their better judgment.

The vaunted lawyers of both political parties are being very clever in their use of words, as perhaps they have been advised by other lawyers. The PNP, under the chairmanship of a lawyer, says it has no record of that and in a statement “dismissed claims that the party received US$1.3 million in 2007”. That is not what was said in a television interview in 2007.

That is a great argument for all the persons who may owe GCT: they can now claim not to have any records, and I would recommend it as a precedent for Digicel following the rough treatment meted out to them in their offices. Perhaps armed police could enter the party headquarters and seize some records and financial statements (but do they have to keep records?). This treatment seems worse than the alleged money find on the plane from Cuba (of which I have heard no further information).

The non-lawyer chairman of the JLP said that was before his time in office (despite being a long-serving executive member), so I guess that changing a CEO or chairman could be a solid defence against past liabilities, legal and illegal. The former JLP treasurer (a lawyer) said “we got some money from Olint but it was nothing near US$5 million”, but offered no alternate figure (so much for accurate accounting procedures).

To their credit, Daryl Vaz and Sally Porteous have admitted to receiving campaign money for election budget expenditures, the former for the party, the latter for her Manchester campaign against Peter Bunting. Former Prime Minister Patterson categorically denied allegations that he had received any gift from Smith, and signed no cheques or undertook any transactions that required his sanction.

But he does admit referring Smith to the late Donald Buchanan, who was then campaign director and who regrettably cannot answer any questions. Peter Bunting must be smiling as he was the subject of discussion as it was feared by Smith that he would have done the right thing if appointed finance minister.

What would be great to know is how many of these persons and others not yet named went to the TCI and got their payout prior to the collapse of the fraudulent scheme (or is that hoping for too much?). As another noted lawyer has stated, he would advise his clients not to refund any monies donated to them by David Smith.

The moral law may also not be a shackle. In fact, I would recommend that those implicated sue David Smith for libel. So much for the letter that is our 12th.

The statement that no contact had been made with the named persons prior to this current episode is a sharp contradiction of the statements being made from the TCI, and if either side is correct there must be liars in the mix. David Smith is in jail already, so he could not be implicated in the matter between the named parties and the TCI authorities, therefore he cannot be the liar in this section of the impasse.

If the parties and the candidates did receive tainted money and are liable for its return, then this could implicate the supporters who consumed the curry goat and white rum and received money in exchange for their votes. What a bam-bam!

Don’t worry, this will make the talk shows for a week and will fade from our memories even as another scam company is alleged to have fleeced J$4 billion from more investors (and yet we say we are broke). Don’t you just love the morals of a country that boasts more churches per square mile? Nobody feels ashamed or betrayed anymore in this country.

The separation of economics from history and theory from common sense may seem to be logical, but when applied to imperfect markets and human behaviour may tend to be misleading. The current world financial crisis has seen a conflict between politics and economic recovery. This is evidenced by the loss of political control in Europe over the past two years by newer and less known players that have largely been characterised by an opposition to austerity measures and which favours stimulus as a way out of this massive world depression.

This does not mean that the will of the people is the best possible economic indicator, but we must concede that elections genuinely reflect the will of the people. There have been major changes of governments in Europe and these challenge the unity of the EU and have fomented the resultant speculations about the future of the Euro as a world currency.

The important characteristic is that people across the world seem to wish to resist any reduction in jobs or other cutbacks as a way out of recession. As we used to say in Jamaica, further belttightening will only cause a blockage of our bowels, and you know what we will be filled up with as a result.

The Great Depression was generally attributed to the events on the United States Stock Exchange crash, but perhaps there were pre-existing conditions in Europe that facilitated the widening of the devastation. Some problems were the conditions in Europe following the First World War and the resulting deterioration in the volume of production and competitive costing.

There was an imbalance in the European nations compared to the USA that may have exacerbated the inequity under a rigid Gold Standard system that relied on real production, not the printing of money and credit.

As the giants crumbled under pressure, there was political upheaval that fostered conditions which enabled the growth of fascism, and in particular the rise of Hitler and Mussolini. That allowed for a division into the Axis powers, the Allied Forces, and the nonaligned nations.

This was enough to lead to the outbreak of the Second World War, the descent into further destruction of people and productive resources, indebtedness of nations, postwar reparations, and the demise of the Gold Standard.

These conditions are again manifesting themselves in nearly every way except for the lack of an announced war. Economic tremors in Greece, France, and some others in that region seem to be giving a rebirth to some anti-German feelings, as if to say that Germany is responsible for the welfare of the rest. Therefore, much ado is being made about the EU and the Euro as a monetary instrument, with little thought to the consequences of separation.

Needless to say, Greece and Italy would have to revert to suitcases of money for a trip to the supermarket, as credit cards do not register in the tens of millions.

Have we learned anything at all? There will be no war that mobilises excess productive capacity, and therefore stimulus will require labour intensive infrastructure expenditures that will carry forward benefits for decades to come. In every case, the employment multiplier needs to be evaluated and maximised.

Industrialised countries will have to utilise existing skilled labour and machinery in order to benefit from employment of available resources. In the case of Jamaica we need to get out of the jeep and start some opportunities for manual labour, as we do not have the luxury of time to train persons for the next 20 years before acting. This is the reality that faces us, and it is a blunt call to action before we suffer further deterioration.