I have not lost my mind quite yet, but I have a suggestion for Christopher Zacca, president of the Private Sector Organisation of (PSOJ) — one that is far more innovative than his recent recommendations to Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller to shuffle the Cabinet. It will give him immediate traction among sensible people in Government, civil society, the authentic clergy, and Jamaicans generally. I dare say, it will secure his place in history.

I take Mr Zacca at face value: His recent suggestion that a Cabinet reshuffle was needed came from a desire to see improvement in governance and for stabilisation to move to faster growth that, hopefully, will redound to the benefit of all. However, the recommendation carries some built-in assumptions that must be questioned. Foremost, that, for example, shuffling the Cabinet will achieve any such thing.

Further, he named five Cabinet members whom he said were performing well. I will take the liberty of adding a sixth — Education Minister Ronald Thwaites — to advance a theoretical argument.

If the prime minister were to shuffle the Cabinet, should she retain these “high” performers in their current positions? I would say yes, to allow them to consolidate positive gains in their areas of responsibility. If she moves them, just when they are starting to make a real difference, what would that accomplish? What if she replaces one of these ministers with one of the non-performers? What if she shuffles the non-performers among themselves? Yes, she can promote from the pool of junior ministers, or from the backbench, but is that pool wide enough to make a difference?

Frankly, the Cabinet does not need to be (re)shuffled as much as it needs to be rationalised and organised around a set of portfolios that will more effectively address the needs of the country with competent leaders in place. Sister P may get around to it after she wins the next election.

Zacca’s argument seemingly assumes, too, that Jamaica’s underdevelopment lies in the failure of Government alone. I have never believed this to be true, because evidence says we also have a private sector with considerable weaknesses.

I believe the ghost of Michael Manley agrees strongly with Karl Samuda’s recent charges that the private sector lacks courage, is myopic, and uncooperative, and with businessman J J Geewax’s observation a few months ago, about the immaturity of our business class.

One critical factor that is seriously impeding economic growth is the concentration of capital in the hands of too few people, and the corresponding inability of those with innovative ideas to access the help they need. This is supposed to be taboo, except that it is no longer, because even the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is concerned, in a general sense, and we are in their crosshairs. We owe them a lot of money, we have one of the highest income/wealth gaps in the world, and they are aware that many of those at the top are beneficiaries of corruption and illegalities.

I will gamble on the fact that the IMF is working on a fix. My suggestion to President Zacca, then, is that he gets ahead of the IMF and convene a PSOJ commission to devise urgent strategies to reduce income inequality. Indeed, ‘The Zacca/PSOJ Commission for the Reduction of Income Inequality’ has such a wonderfully distinguished ring to it, it would be a shame to miss an opportunity to lead from the front and make a real difference, instead of merely voicing what the trolls say day in and day out.

Diaspora matters

Any individual pretending to understand globalisation should also understand migration, because the two are inextricably linked. Socio-cultural anthropologist Dr Arjun Appadurai labelled five critical dimensions of globalisation as ‘scapes’ — a term meant to convey constant motion and change.

It is no accident that the first one is ethnoscape — the movement of people across cultures and borders or “globalised spatial diffusion of ethnic communities”. The others are technoscape (technology), financescape (money), mediascapes (images), and ideoscapes (ideas). Changes spurred by information technology and improved air travel galvanised people, and now the world is on the move. This is the defining ethos of the 21st century so far.

Jamaicans have always been migratory, due largely to the limited opportunities available after Emancipation. For most, the likeliest option was going back to work for the very planters that had enslaved them; most wanted no part of it. They tried to find their way, and when the opportunities came, they went to Panama in the 1850s to work on the railroad, and later the Canal, and later to Cuba to work in agriculture. A few went back to Africa through Marcus Garvey’s Liberia Programme, and later the great migration to Britain and North America began. Most worked in menial jobs that, over time, allowed them to improve the quality of life, if not for themselves, for the next generation.

Many Jamaicans who migrated in the 50s, 60s or 70s eventually sent for their children. And, while they were settling in Bristol or Brooklyn, most continued to send home small amounts of money to take care of parents and siblings left behind and to improve the family dwelling — an effort that speaks to the hope in their hearts to one day return home to enjoy “a likkle life” before the final journey. The effects of these efforts are incalculable. Imagine how much worse social conditions would have been without those remittances? How much worse off schools and hospitals would be without the contributions of alumni and friends in the Diaspora? How much worse off would Government be without this source of foreign exchange?

The point is, if we understand our reality, past and present, we should cut the sophomoric drivel about Jamaicans having no right to participate in national discourse because they migrated. Furthermore, Jamaicans with cross-cultural experiences are well-placed to make meaningful contribution to national development. We merely have to put each situation in context and approach the process with intelligence, common sense and mutual respect.

Grace Virtue, PhD, is a social justice advocate.