Agriculture was the mainstay of life for most of the history of mankind because communities had to feed themselves. Trade led to diversification of foods consumed because communities could exchange some of the food they produced for products they did not.

International trade therefore meant that countries did not have to produce all the food they needed. Today, agriculture is no longer the dominant economic activity. In fact, its share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has declined in all countries, especially the developed countries.    

However, agriculture is still vitally important to the Jamaican economy because it provides some of the food we consume, it is a major source of employment, it earns foreign exchange, it provides supplies for the manufacturing sector and it contributes to tax revenues.  

Currently, the agriculture sector is one of the few growth areas of our economy. But despite this, it is not realising the true potential which it is capable of in a country where it is the backbone of rural life. The sector has declined in fulfilling all of its traditional functions.

There are many reasons for this relative decline of agriculture, including praedial larceny, natural disasters, disease, drought and inadequate attention from successive governments. Some of these we have no control over but we must do better on the factors we can do something about, such as government policy towards agriculture.

Agriculture must become a priority because it can drive the process of economic growth with minimal investment based on the amount of unused land, unemployed labour and unfulfilled local demand for food.

The first and most important step is to appoint the best possible person to succeed the late Roger Clarke, who had the advantage of being a successful farmer to be minister of agriculture.

Since Independence we have not always selected the “brightest and the best” as minister of agriculture. As a result, the sector has been deprived of adequate public sector investment, imaginative policy and a ministry with the requisite technical skills.

In the past, the post of minister of agriculture was never one of the most sought-after. Most ministers of agriculture were gentleman farmers such as Messrs Keeble Munn and John Gyles. In many instances, the minister had never farmed but was a not-too-bright backbencher from a rural constituency or was born in “deep rural”. Agriculture is not seen as politically glamorous. A politician in short-sleeved shirt, khaki pants and boots does not compare with one clad in a three-piece suit at a meeting in Rome, Washington, DC or Brussels. Addressing farmers in the ‘sun hot’ does not excite public admiration like a meeting with other ministers in the plush conference halls of London.

The next minister of agriculture must be the best person the Government can find, because talent, energy and experience can make a difference in any situation in any sector. He or she does not have to be a farmer; for example, Dr Christopher Tufton, but ideally should believe in rural development, know about agriculture and be able to communicate with all persons in the agriculture sector, á la Roger Clarke.