See this report by WAPA TV, where Governor-elect Luis Fortuño presents his advisory board on the Puerto Rican Government's fiscal situation. Notice how most of the members are from the banking and private sector (large enterprises, mostly) and none - according to the report - from medium and small enterprise, cooperative, and union sectors.
Two Comments:
I am no friend of the New Progressive Party (NPP). I remember too well what has been done in the past politically and economically and how damaging it has been for the island and its people. Having said that, I think what the governor is doing is quite commendable. Therefore whatever the findings of this board he needs to understand that the present situation, apart from the obvious global circumstances, is the doing of reckless spending and political patronage from the Popular Democratic Party (PDP) as well as the NPP. If he assumes this line of thought, he will have taken a step in the right direction. After all, the road to economic recovery will be a hard one and he will need help from all; for that he will need to reach out to political opposition as well as social sectors and individuals who did not vote for him.
Second, the fact that he has excluded other sectors, such as small and medium enterprises and cooperatives, gives me reason for concern. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't they as much a stake on the economy as large businesses or banking? Why aren't they on the advisory board? Fortuño gives us an answer on this last question:
If this is the new administration's practice of governing, excluding crucial parts of society from the dialogue it has initiated, I can anticipate problems, and it won't change a thing from the past. If the new NPP government would like to initiate a social pact, then they should include other groups in this initiative. Taking into consideration the antagonistic relations between unions and government, and the mutual suspicion between unions and private enterprise one might argue that the inclusion of diverse sectors in a social dialogue could be productive. Reaching out especially to potential political adversaries and enemies signals a new attitude and ways of doing things. The governor might just be that conciliatory figure that helps the different socio-economic sectors to talk to and listen to each other. I will remain skeptical, until I see otherwise.
This model of social dialogue has worked before. In Germany the country's social partners (that is, government, enterprise, and unions) are engaged in constant dialogue, which, in the end translates into mutually beneficial policy. See this report by the International Labour Organization. The governor can also look in this report from the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions so he can see some examples of productive collaboration.
Two Comments:
I am no friend of the New Progressive Party (NPP). I remember too well what has been done in the past politically and economically and how damaging it has been for the island and its people. Having said that, I think what the governor is doing is quite commendable. Therefore whatever the findings of this board he needs to understand that the present situation, apart from the obvious global circumstances, is the doing of reckless spending and political patronage from the Popular Democratic Party (PDP) as well as the NPP. If he assumes this line of thought, he will have taken a step in the right direction. After all, the road to economic recovery will be a hard one and he will need help from all; for that he will need to reach out to political opposition as well as social sectors and individuals who did not vote for him.
Second, the fact that he has excluded other sectors, such as small and medium enterprises and cooperatives, gives me reason for concern. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't they as much a stake on the economy as large businesses or banking? Why aren't they on the advisory board? Fortuño gives us an answer on this last question:
"We aren't looking to offer incentives here for this or that group (I guess he means small and medium businesses and cooperatives, as well as unions) it isn't the [advisory board's] reason for being; let us be clear on that, [the purpose of the board] is the straightening-out of the states finances and [procuring] tools to fix them. Once we have them, then can we talk about cinematography (what!?), tourism, small businesses..."So, if I understand this correctly, we will give this group the power to advise the new government and, based on this group's opinion, the government will make a decision, which will then hand out to other social and economic sectors. All part of his social pact.
If this is the new administration's practice of governing, excluding crucial parts of society from the dialogue it has initiated, I can anticipate problems, and it won't change a thing from the past. If the new NPP government would like to initiate a social pact, then they should include other groups in this initiative. Taking into consideration the antagonistic relations between unions and government, and the mutual suspicion between unions and private enterprise one might argue that the inclusion of diverse sectors in a social dialogue could be productive. Reaching out especially to potential political adversaries and enemies signals a new attitude and ways of doing things. The governor might just be that conciliatory figure that helps the different socio-economic sectors to talk to and listen to each other. I will remain skeptical, until I see otherwise.
This model of social dialogue has worked before. In Germany the country's social partners (that is, government, enterprise, and unions) are engaged in constant dialogue, which, in the end translates into mutually beneficial policy. See this report by the International Labour Organization. The governor can also look in this report from the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions so he can see some examples of productive collaboration.
Comments