|
Momodou
Denmark
11634 Posts |
 Posted - 28 Dec 2007 : 22:21:24
|
Interview with Halifa Sallah
Part 16
What would labour relation be like?
We will restore the joint industrial council where representatives of employers and Trade Unions shall meet to establish wages for all categories of workers on the basis of the quantity and quality of work done and the duration.. These minimum wages will be statutorily established and shall take the cost of living
into consideration.
Could a small economy like that of the Gambia be self-reliant?
Nkrumah had indicated that a self-reliant economy must have three components.
First and foremost it must be able to produce it raw material requirements.
Secondly, it must be able to process the raw materials to produce value added manufactured goods. Thirdly, it must be able to produce the machines required for the production of manufactured goods.
Gambia can meet the first requirement. It can establish many cottage industries to go a long way in producing value added processed goods to meet domestic consumption and reduce our food import bill. However it will still need to import a substantial part of its needs for manufactured goods. Thirdly, even though it will be able to build some light machines it will still be unable to establish machine building industries on its own. This is precisely the reason why we stand for continental integration so that African countries can pool up resources to meet the secondary and tertiary phases of self reliant economies.
This is what Europe did after the devastation of their economies during the Second World War. I have made this very clear in my book: ''Treatise on founding a Federation of African Republics''
Some people have been arguing what your positions on religion and communism are. Can you shed more light on these issues?
Halifa: I have been intimated with the content of the debates on Capitalism, Socialism, Communism and Religion. It is amazing how people confuse ideology with policies and programmes of political parties. Does a country
like the Gambia become a developed capitalist country because of the commitment of its leaders to the system? In the same vein, does it become a socialist, communist, Christian or Muslim society because of the commitment of the leaders to any of the concepts? The answer to this question is obviously in the negative.
Capitalism can only exist where there are many capitalist investors who own means of production in the forms of land, industries and other companies in sufficient numbers to generate employment for the vast majority of inhabitants.
They should be able to generate enough income and corporate tax as revenue for the state to provide public services.
In fact, during the depression of 1929 economists like Keynes argued vehemently that when demand for goods and services fall economic down turn or crisis must become the consequences. Hence he recommended government policy interventions to stimulate demand for goods and services. This confirms that even in the most advanced capitalist countries the state is an economic actor. One has to study Roosevelt's New Deal which was designed to lift The United States from depression to understand how state interventions had given rise to the public
economy and the welfare state which has created the political boundaries between democratic/social democratic, socialist parties in Europe or the US and their Republican / Conservative / Christian democratic counterparts or opponents with the liberals standing in the middle and the Communist at the left of the first group.
Governments in the most advanced capitalist countries are in control of monetary and fiscal policies which are utilised to control money supply, determine exchange rates, set interest rates to stimulate demand and even determine prices through the introduction of subsidies in agriculture.
Governments maintain welfare and pension schemes, run transport, public works and services to expand public sector employment. Suffice it to say, any body who follows the evolution of the International financial system would realise that the primary aim of establishing the IMF is to provide liquidity to countries which cannot pay for imports as loans, through the collective contribution of states, to enable them to pay for imports and thus sustain international demand for goods and services.
In the second book of the analysis of the National and International Economy quotations shall be culled from ex President Reagan's speeches which he made in 1965 to distinguish the policies of his former party , The Democratic Party and the new party he chose to join, the Republican Party. This will show the degree of state intervention in the US economy and the level of the state debt and deficits which were partly designed to maintain it's military might and partly motivated by the Keynesian policy of state intervention in stimulating demand and thus maintain production and employment. This will confirm that both the public and private sectors are economic actors in developed capitalist countries and the difference between the conservative Republicans and the Liberal Democrats/ Social democrats /Socialists lay in the degree of space occupied by the state as an economic and social actor in contrast to the private sector.
The important point to note however is that where capitalism has been consolidated the vast majority are employed because of the industries which rely on the economics of scale to sustain production. They maintain national and international markets to sell their goods and services. Credit cards become rampant and consumerism is stimulated to sustain demand and encourage production. In such countries income and corporate taxes are levied to provide social security services to those without work while local councils and building societies provide housing and other social amenities. Many people from developing countries who benefit form these schemes fail to appreciate that they are benefiting from the type of policies which have been engendered by years of struggle by trade unions and movements for social justice to pressurise governments to adopt people centred programmes which PDOIS is advocating for.
Hence if Gambians see any party which can bring about agricultural and industrial development to the point of ensuring the employment of the vast majority of people through capitalist investments and rely on income and corporate tax to provide social security, infrastructural development and general welfare we will be glad to step aside and leave them to move the country forward. The reality is that the Gambia is not heading towards Capitalist development. It is sinking into the abyss of underdevelopment. It currently belongs to the least developed countries of the world. It does not have an industrial base to process it raw materials into manufactured goods. It does not even have the marketing potential for its cash crop. 70 per cent of the people in the rural area are living in abject poverty It has a narrow tax base and cannot provide welfare service. This is why we call for the intervention of the public, the cooperative and the private sectors to play their part in promoting people centred and sustainable development.
Foroyaa: Can you explain the other two concepts, namely, socialism and communism?
Halifa: The concepts: Socialism and Communism arose from the expectation that Capitalism without any state intervention to regulate its excesses would lead to development of advance technology which will require lesser number of people to engage in production. It is expected that if such a development takes place, the more advance the technology the more people are thrown out of work because of automation. In this way there will be immense profit generated by the capitalists and few wage workers to pay .This is expected to yield immense
wealth on one side and immense poverty on the other. Those who analyse such a state of things concluded that the way to prevent this is for the state to intervene and take control of the means of production and allow every one to work according to ability and receive according to the quality and the quantity of work done. According to them technology would no longer lead to the alienation of workers and their retrenchment but would lead to growth in income and reduction of working hours because of the rise in the value of labour and its productivity. According to them the more technology advances the greater the likeliness for labour to yield more than the person needs for consumption.
When that point is reached it is hypothesised that people will be able to produce according to their ability and will consume according need. This is what Marx called communism. According to him, there will be no classes or inequality in such a society.
What then are the points of the critics? The Gambia is a poor agrarian country without industries and advanced technology. Is it useful for us to debate whether we can build a society where so much abundance is created that the slogan ' could be put into practice.
In my view, we should concentrate on translating Ideologies into practical and relevant policies, programmes and projects in order to save our people from poverty and tyranny.
To be continued
Source: Foroyaa Newspaper Burning Issue
Issue No. 149/2007, 19-23 December, 2007
|
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
|
Topic Locked
