Having won the general elections of 2008, called eight months ahead of time by the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) then led by Owen Arthur, the Democratic Labour Party (DLP), led then by David Thompson (now deceased) and subsequently, by Prime Minister Freundel Stuart, managed to obtain a mere 16 seats to the BLP’s 14 in the subsequent elections of 2013. And now, the government must clearly be seeking to create better electoral prospects for itself, in the face of a persistent financial crisis during its present term, that has necessitated continued recourse to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Indeed as the country recently celebrated fifty years of independence, the IMF’s description of the state of the economy has been that of its experiencing “protracted stagnation”, with annual growth persistently below 1%, in a context of doubts about its ability to deal with a major problem of “debt sustainability” and budget deficits remaining persistently high.
Tourism, a long-time major propeller of the country’s economy has, between 2011 and 2015, experienced growth of a mere 0.5%, despite, as the IMF has emphasized, “an impressive increase in total visitor arrivals of nearly 15%”, a predicament also being experienced by other countries in the Region. And in that regard, the institution has stated, the country’s budget deficits have remained high, while they have had to be persistently met by the Central Bank and the National Insurance Scheme, a situation, in the case of the latter, normally frowned on by the international institution.
This has been the situation as the leadership of the government and the DLP must certainly have begun to ponder on its prospects as the period for holding the next general elections comes nearer, and in the face of an opposition BLP which, under the leadership of Mia Mottley (following Owen Arthur’s departure) must see continued prospects for, at least, improvement in its own electoral situation.
It is open to question, of course, whether the two main parties are as yet on par in terms of the electorate’s perception of both their leaderships’ abilities and political competences. For there appears to remain some doubt in certain quarters, as to the ability of their leaders to carry the next electoral battle. Some perspectives on the DLP query whether Freundel Stuart has displayed the dynamism to carry the battle against a BLP led by Mia Mottley who has focused on revival of her party’s image and sense of sustainability.
Clearly, Stuart took full advantage of the recent celebration of fifty years of independence to try to emphasise that a situation which he inherited has positively turned the corner. This follows his insistence that the country take the full dose of the IMF’s advice, the institution being the substantial source of the country’s needed support, in a situation in which the international environment is not particularly favourable.
On the other hand, Mia Mottley seems to have fought with persistence not only to stamp her influence on her party, but also to persuade the electorate that she is demonstrating a capacity to persuade the country as a whole, not simply of her own competence (which seems hardly in doubt), but of her ability to win the confidence of the electorate as demonstrating sustained, and substantially supported leadership of her own party.
Ms Mottley’s situation as party leader succeeding Owen Arthur, has, naturally, not been easy to consolidate in a context in which her predecessor, obviously in the full flush of physical and intellectual strength, has continued to make his own assessments of what is advisable for the country’s recuperation, and indeed, the region’s economic and political consolidation, in the present international environment.
Prime Minister Stuart, in seeking to come to terms with the country’s present economic predicament, has insisted that the present policies, mandated by the IMF, are the only available ones appropriate to remedying the economy’s situation. From his perspective, no other recommendations from the prevailing opposition have been brought forward that could be substantially different from those of the IMF. And in that context, he has demonstrated that he has the intellectual support, in domestic terms, of the technocrats, and in particular of the leadership of the Central Bank of Barbados, led by Dr DeLisle Worrell, who appears to have taken the brunt of the criticism of those not supportive of the economic medicines presently being administered.
The last general elections, contrary to the substantial victory of the DLP (with 20 parliamentary seats to the BLP’s 10 in 2008), seemed to reflect the electorate’s conclusion that there was no demonstration by the BLP of an alternative medicine for the country’s economic ills, even though the BLP increased its number to 14, giving the government a relatively narrow majority. Yet the BLP can now assert that the electorate has had more time now to assess the leadership of Mia Mottley, which the party believes to have been positive.
The fact of the matter would appear to be, however, that the electorate has probably come to the conclusion that there is hardly likely to be a difference between the two parties, in terms of possible presentations of economic policies in particular, given the subordination of the country to the IMF. And current commentaries do not seem to suggest that the two party leaders present, as of now, substantial advantages of mass persuasion, one against the other, even though personalities may differ.
The DLP government can, as of now, hope that there will be little contestation in terms of the economic remedy applied to the country’s ills of the last decade, or that programmes presented as the next election campaign dawns can differ substantially. And some commentary also suggests that, although the personalities of the two party leaders are indeed quite dissimilar, what many may by now have considered to be as the inevitable economic medicine, will not much differ between the two parties.
