It was Barbados’ Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley who famously remarked that to talk of Economy and Society in binary terms would be to establish what she termed ‘a false dichotomy.’ She was perfectly correct. The two domains, Economy and Society are intricately related. It must be extremely difficult to construct a viable economy in a context where society is falling into a state of disrepair. An economy may be relatively viable in terms of the metrics, GDP growth, moderate inflation rates and relatively modest unemployment. However, if that economic growth is unevenly distributed to the extent that a significant number of the population cannot participate in that growth, the result could be social decay and disorder as sections of the populace feel excluded and alienated. It is therefore incumbent on any polity that calls itself ‘liberal democratic’ to strive for greater socio-economic inclusivity.
The term inclusivity can mean different things to different people. What it does not imply is some notion of social egalitarianism where presumably we will all be ‘equal.’ As I have said before, all polities based on the capitalist mode of production produces and reproduces some degree of social stratification.
In 1983 Tom Adams was asked what kind of Barbadian society he would wish to see. He stated that he would want to see a society in which even the poorest Barbadian would have access to the basic amenities of life, good food, safe dwelling and adequate clothing. Note that as a pragmatic centrist, Adams did not expound on some vague academic notion of an all-inclusive egalitarianism.
Since 1951 both BLP and DLP governments have legitimately sought to establish a measure of social justice and socio-economic equity. This has resulted in a welfare provisioning that would be the envy of many more developed polities. Much has been expended on education and health, welfare and other aspects of social security. In that regard we have done rather well. Although the partisans and political careerists like to claim, ‘my party did this and my party did that,’ the truth is that the progress has been incremental with each government invariably building on the foundations constructed by and on the other.
Every year much is expected from the government’s Financial Statement and Budgetary Proposals and invariably some individuals and constituencies feel disappointed. Budgets are attempts to balance spending and revenue and hopefully project policies that will enhance economic growth and social stability. Sometimes they achieve a bit of both, but if the fundamentals are essentially weak or modest they, more often than not, fail to accomplish the extravagant visions conceived. An editorial in another section of the Press stated: ‘The history of governance in Barbados has examples of good-sounding budgetary measures, that in some cases were never implemented.’ This is on both sides of the great partisan political divide.
Too often the reality is that over the years the fundamentals of the economic system, the so-called engines of economic growth are not firing on all cylinders. Once again the present government has been indicted for failure to diversify an economy that has become admittedly over reliant on tourism. But how many decades has there been chatter concerning the need to effect meaningful economic ‘diversification.’ In a polity so subject to external shocks, the on-going global uncertainties do not incline one to think too optimistically of any great expansive future. What is becoming equally noticeable is that apart from the Economy, the fundamentals of Society, Barbados’ once esteemed ‘social capital’ are becoming demonstrably degraded and this in spite of much articulated measures at ‘Transformation.’ The ‘transformation’ of Barbados, assuming that the term has any real currency, will require much more than budgetary tinkering.
A number of commentators have suggested that the 2025 Budget was more ‘people focused.’ There were no onerous tax increases and in fact there was some effort made to distribute or redistribute what some see as ‘a bounty.’ In the present context, the term ‘bounty’ seems awfully misplaced. The citizenry in Barbados as elsewhere want lower tax imposts. The irony is that the same citizens also want increased government expenditures on health, education, social welfare and other entitlements. Given existing levels of inflation the call, more often than not, is for higher wages and lower prices both of which pose difficulties for any government. Increased wages without a corresponding rise in productivity, can have an inflationary effect. The lowering of prices given the fact that much of our inflation is imported is not within the capacity of the Barbados government to substantively modify.
The price of goods is related to duties on imports but the government needs the import duties to pay for the advanced welfare provisions to which Barbadians have become accustomed and which the various governments have promised they can and will supply once elected. The people never seem to realise that they are the ones paying for the entitlements.
Be that as it may, the Budget provided some measures of relief.
There is the $300 one-off Solidarity Allowance for all Barbadians over 18 years and those with legal status contributing to the National Insurance Scheme.
There is the two per cent automatic annual increase in the National Minimum wage as of January 1. 2026.
There is the payment of $32 monthly per affected households in St Lucy and St Peter because of persisting discoloured water problems.
An increase in the remuneration given to foster parents from $110 weekly to $200 weekly as of April 1. Maternity grants will convert to a child grant with effect from June 1, 2025.
Maternity leave to be increased from 12 weeks to 14 weeks and to 17 weeks in the case of multiple births. Maternity grants will convert to a child grant with effect from June 1. 2025.
In this regard there is the introduction of statutory paternity leave of three weeks.
The proposed paternity leave legislation has received almost universal approval, but it is this writer’s considered opinion that such leave should only be given in cases where it can be proven that the father is making a substantive commitment to his child/ children where he lives with, and is committed to the household i.e. he assists in the changing of baby nappies, the making of baby formula and holding crying baby at night. I know a kind of Bajan fella who would be on paternity leave twice a year. He lives with his mother in Britton’s Hill and is on paternity in March for a baby son in Foul Bay, St. Philip and in October for baby daughter in River Bay, St. Lucy. No polity should appear to be encouraging male irresponsibility.
These collective measures should provide some degree of relief to an already over-burdened citizenry but one doubts the extent to which they can in themselves significantly change a Barbados where there are many societal challenges and where the economy remains rather anaemic. If these conditions persist, the repeated transformation messaging may well prove hollow.
There has been much talk of price gouging by both wholesale and retailer outlets. In our efforts to survive it seems that everyone is resorting to some form of gouging and scamming. Some have called for price controls, but price control mechanisms have no great record of lowering inflation across the board. When the DLP administration attempted such controls during the oil crisis of the early 1970’s they did not prove very effective. In Canada during the same period, price controls proved even less viable.
The framers of Budgets should avoid over-promising, proposing legislation on which they cannot deliver. The British Chancellor of the Exchequer in the present Labour government, Ms. Rachel Reeves has had to impose taxes months after that government won the July 2024 election on the promise to provide relief for the middle class and the poor. Running a country in today’s world is not easy. The struggle continues.
The post The Budget – The Social Component. appeared first on Barbados Today.
