The Economic Development Task Force - a statement of opinion

Part 2

In my last column I posed to you the opinion that the Task Force is a brilliant plan masterminded by the Demo Executive to do two things – beat the CIP to offering the nation what the nation obviously needed economically and, more importantly from the political angle, create an all consuming distraction from the extremely poor performance of the Demo government. Their lacklustre performance, the lack of positive leadership and the division within their camp constitute the real problem.
It is a pity an insufficient number of people acknowledges this fact. The Demo Executive does. That is why the “distraction” has been created. The problem is not the science of politics in this country. The problem is not the number of politicians in this country. The problem is neither the method of representation nor the first past the post election. The problem is the Government. By removing this problem we are already on the path to recovery.
I do not know how you feel, but I personally support the establishment of an Economic Development Task Force. This should have been done long ago for as far back as 2004 the Coalition Government of which the CIP was a part advocated the convening of an economic summit. The fragility of our economy was evident even then. The world economy was reeling from unprecedented oil prices, followed by equally unprecedented commodities prices, large borrowings and high risk financial transactions. We all now know what all this led to – a widespread financial collapse.
The Coalition Government decided to organise an Economic Summit for the early part of 2005 with the intention of growing and strengthening the economy through the implementation of economic policies obtained from dialoguing with the banking, investment, trading and tourism sectors. It was also the intention to consult with the “consumer market” to develop “cushions” against recessionary impacts. However, during that time five hurricanes of great intensity threatened the well being of the nation and attention naturally was diverted.
Budget preparation then overtook all other concerns. As that was reaching conclusion the annual Constitution Celebrations were upon us and shortly after that the Demos regrouped and the CIP was dismissed from the Coalition and any notion of an economic summit went out with us. The idea, therefore, to do an economic stock take now and develop a positive, forward looking economic pathway is well overdue but even if late, it is better late than never.
Our economy is suffering from a serious contraction in the domestic labour market as well as the consumer market to the extent that national purchasing power has been declining resulting in many businesses winding up. We are losing Cook Islanders at an average rate of approximately 800 a year to better jobs, better pay and better social services overseas. The situation on our Sister Islands is absolutely desperate where there are no new business investments, very few sustainable job opportunities with the declining population almost totally reliant on welfare benefits and where each remaining person is daily punished by poor shipping services, inadequate infrastructure and horrendous prices for goods and services.
During their presentation to the Opposition the Task Force emphasised 8 objectives. Five have been resuscitated from faded and dust strewn papers, although some of the approaches being advocated are quite innovative. Three are brand new – “harmonise social services with New Zealand”, “harmonise regulatory environment with New Zealand” and “working with China”.
These three objectives, in my view, represents “outside of the box thinking” that is not only innovative but quite persuasive. Those of you who read my column will recall that I have written on and about “outside of the box thinking” on several occasions. I noted with interest that the Task Force reiterated what I said about harbour development and renewable energy. I also noted that the Task Force was strangely silent on the question of developing our prolific and rich manganese nodule field.
As far as I am aware the first time the idea of harmonising social services with New Zealand was first articulated in a statement by John Hayes MP to the NZ Institute of International Affairs. John Hayes suggested that this was an important step that should be undertaken. I agreed with him but not to be left to New Zealand alone. We should be there at the forefront of the dialogue developing ways by which this can be achieved. But then we need a good government for this, don’t we?
Harmonising our “regulatory environment” with NZ is also a good new and challenging idea. It has nothing to do with surrendering sovereignty because we have already done it before and are still doing it. We are now discharging our foreign affairs in full today. We did not before. We are still reliant on New Zealand for defence. Our international airport is regularly inspected and rated by the Civil Aviation authority of NZ. Why not extend this to other activities – infrastructure, buildings, fisheries control, pollution and toxic materials etc. But then we need a good government for this, don’t we?
“Working with China”, now that is truly a bold and challenging proposition!! I might add that it is a challenge that we should accept and convert into an opportunity. As a matter of side interest the cynics and the Sino fear-mongerers are noticeably silent. Do you remember the controversy that arose around the “multi sports complex” of just 2 to 3 months ago and how we will lose our soul and nation to the Chinese? That fundamentally was because government botched up the dialogue with the Chinese. Any discussion with our Chinese friends must be handled with great care, diplomacy, skill and deftness. But then we need a good government for that, don’t we?

Herald Issue 463 10 June
- World famous activist assisting residents
- Budget will decide if residents prosecute Government over landfill
- Forestry project sucking Mangaia dry
- Budget 2010 – fiasco or disaster?