Caribbean Investment IQ December 2013 | Page 55

was used to finance an expansion of the state’s role in the energy sector. The establishment of an ‘export-oriented industrial park and commercial port’ in Point Lisas (the Point Lisas Industrial Port Developmental Company) was one achievement; the formation of the National Gas Company of Trinidad and Tobago was another development in furtherance of the Government’s strategy. In 1970, the government purchased 51% of Caroni Ltd and acquired the remaining 49% in 1978; Forres Park was then acquired in full by the government and placed under the care of Caroni 1975 Ltd. The state then had a monopoly in the sugar industry. The standard of living of the population improved as a result of the increased government expenditure but little attention was paid to the fact that the higher expenditure was being financed by an exogenous increase in oil prices and which was therefore unpredictable and not sustainable. Turning attention back to Trinidad and Tobago, the period 1983 to 1994 the country experienced an economic bust resulting in a decline in output of 4.84% per annum. Between 1990 and 1991 there was some recovery with the growth rate averaging 2.08% per annum. However, the economy went through another slump with output falling to 1.56% in both 1992 and 1993. The Government of Trinidad and Tobago had implemented sectoral plans focused on the energy sector (as opposed to an overall development plan) in the preceding period. Consequently, there was no plan to address what should be done in the face of negative growth. Some of the macroeconomic characteristics of the economy during the period were high unemployment, high inflation, and severe economic contraction, devaluation of the exchange rate, low crude petroleum prices and currency account deficit on the rise from 2% of GDP in 1985 to 14% in 1986. By contrast, that same period in Jamaica, one decade after independence, saw a Government trying to meet election promises and provide social services to the poor and other The Government of the day embarked on a Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) to, inter alia, reduce the external current account deficit, reduce the public sector deficit and In the end, the Government decided to borrow from the Bank of Jamaica and from abroad, to finance the growing fiscal deficit and not surprisingly, a balance of payments crisis resulted. weak sections of the population – all of which exerted pressure on the import bill. The rise in food and oil prices in the early 1970s (the latter led to a windfall in Trinidad) led to a major foreign exchange crisis in Jamaica as the windfall receipts from sugar exports and bauxite were wiped out. The Government of Jamaica responded by imposing a new levy on bauxite companies and channeled this revenue to a large capital development program aimed primarily at unemployment reduction. The bauxite companies responded to this perceived “attack” and reduced bauxite production as bauxite prices headed south. The conundrum facing the Jamaican government was then a large cut in revenue, a high oil-import bill and a politically charged unemployment relief program (with an election around the corner). The government of the day imposed restrictions on imports of luxuries and other “non-basic” goods by way of prohibitive tariffs, quotas, import licensing, and foreign exchange licensing and other controls. In the end, the Government decided to borrow from the Bank of Jamaica and from abroad, to finance the growing fiscal deficit and not surprisingly, a balance of payments crisis resulted. to improve the incentives for both domestic and foreign investment in the tradable goods sector. Some of the policy measures adopted by the government to achieve the aforementioned aims of the program included the suspension of cost of living allowances for public sector employees, reduction of transfers to the state enterprise sector and liberalization and rationalization of the trade system. The unintended consequence of these actions were however, cuts in wages and salaries, which led to the exodus of many experienced workers in the public sector such as teachers and nurses and reduction in the expenditure on capital projects, this led to the deterioration in roads and public buildings. The most significant social impact of the Government facilitated SAP was the sharp increase in the rate of poverty. The 1992 Survey of Living Conditions noted that the poverty rate increased from 18.5% in 1988 to 35% in 1992 including in the “working poor” – those workers who fell below the poverty line as their real incomes fell brought about by a fall in nominal incomes and significant increases in the price level. 55