PNM MP Dr Amery Browne told us re­cent­ly that the PNM regime is the on­ly one that has de­vel­oped a vi­sion for this coun­try, Vi­sion 2020, which en­vi­sioned mak­ing T&T in­to a de­vel­oped na­tion by 2020. The PNM gov­ern­ment formed the mul­ti-sec­toral group (the Vi­sion 2020 Plan­ning Com­mit­tee) which was charged in 2002 with the de­vel­op­ment of a na­tion­al strate­gic plan for so do­ing. The plan, ac­cept­ed by Par­lia­ment in 2006, de­fined a five-part mod­el that high­light­ed in­no­va­tion and en­abling com­pet­i­tive busi­ness. The Min­istry of Plan­ning pre­pared a vi­sion 2020 op­er­a­tional plan for 2007-2010, which was a far cry from be­ing a strate­gic man­age­ment sys­tem, and called on the min­istries to de­vel­op strate­gies to, for ex­am­ple, cre­ate a cul­ture of in­no­va­tion and pro­mote busi­ness in­no­va­tion, both re­quir­ing the need for the im­ple­men­ta­tion of a (still non-ex­ist­ing) na­tion­al in­no­va­tion sys­tem.

The Min­istry of Plan­ning by is­su­ing in­struc­tions to the var­i­ous min­istries to align their plans with the rel­e­vant out­comes of the op­er­a­tional plan, ex­pect­ed the de­vel­op­ment of ob­jec­tives and their im­ple­men­ta­tion. Very lit­tle hap­pened that refers to the di­ver­si­fi­ca­tion of the econ­o­my. Though one may agree with Browne that the PNM had a vi­sion for the de­vel­op­ment of the coun­try, this was with­out the nec­es­sary gov­ern­men­tal in­sti­tu­tions, or­gan­i­sa­tions and in­ter­con­nec­tions that could imbed this vi­sion in a strate­gic man­age­ment sys­tem that could bring the vi­sion to fruition. The PP Gov­ern­ment came to pow-er with its cer­tain ob­jec­tives and talked about the sev­en pil­lars up­on which it would re­struc­ture the econ­o­my in­clud­ing ar­eas that par­al­lelled those of the PNM: ship build­ing and re­pair, ICT, print­ing and pack­ag­ing, tourism etc.

Though cer­tain in­cen­tives have been now tak­en, eg the an­nounce­ment of a fund to sup­port in­no­va­tion, an ap­par­ent fo­cus on SMEs by the Min­istry of Labour, and the wish list ar­tic­u­lat­ed by the PM, very lit­tle has hap­pened. I do not think that this Gov­ern­ment as a col­lec­tion of in­di­vid­u­als is bank­rupt of ideas. The prob­lem is that as a body charged with the cre­ation and im­ple­men­ta­tion of a stra-te­gic man­age­ment sys­tem for the re­struc­tur­ing of our econ­o­my, noth­ing can take place giv­en our cur­rent gov­er­nance sys­tem. Min­istries are in gen­er­al charged with cer­tain tasks and the tra­di­tion is that there is no in­ter­fer­ence by one min­istry in the af­fairs of an­oth­er. Fur­ther, the Cab­i­net is sup­posed to co-or­di­nate the ac­tiv­i­ties of all min­istries but here­in again a min­is­ter has lit­tle to say about the af­fairs of an­oth­er min­istry ex­cept to de­fend turf, typ­i­fied by the cur­rent Vol­ney-Chance-Ra­madars­ingh im­broglio. The PM, with very lit­tle pro­fes­sion­al help, has the fi­nal say and her of­fice is struc­tural­ly in­ca­pable of this stra-te­gic cross man­age­ment process.

Re­struc­tur­ing of the econ­o­my spans all of the min­istries-even state en­ter­pris­es-and the strate­gic man­age­ment sys­tem for eco­nom­ic de­vel­op­ment needs a man­age­ment and op­er­a­tional struc­ture that tight­ly in­ter­con­nects the ob­jec­tives and strate­gies of min­istries, pro­pri­eties, su­per­vis­es, con­trols and adapts the strate­gies of the in­di­vid­ual min­istries with­in an over­all plan that in­te­grates their ac­tiv­i­ties. The present gov­er­nance struc­ture works against this man­age­ment par-adigm. An at­tempt was made by the PNM regime, now fol­lowed by the PP, to man­date the Min­istry of Plan­ning to co-or­di­nate the task across the min­istries via a sys­tem called re­sults based bud­get­ing-a sys­tem that was not sup­port­ed by the oth­er man­age­ment el­e­ments that could make it ef­fec­tive.

The cur­rent Cab­i­net made an at­tempt to man­age the eco­nom­ic re­struc­tur­ing across min­istries by the cre­ation of a Coun­cil of Min­is­ters which nev­er got off the ground, since the in­di­vid­ual min­istries by con­ven­tion did not see the whole pic­ture and fo­cused on their in­di­vid­ual bud­get­ed re­spon­si­bil­i­ties: fix­ing and build­ing roads, build­ing drains, pro­vid­ing ed­u­ca­tion, hand­ing out ham­pers, al­le­vi­at­ing pover­ty, al­lo­cat­ing low-cost hous­es, in­creas­ing for­eign in­vest­ment, with no over­ar­ch­ing co-or­di­na­tion that meets a supra set of ob­jec­tives. We are open for busi­ness but our mar­ket­place is still awry.

Mary K King

Via e-mail