What a riot!

Amid all of the reaction — or rather overreaction — to the minister’s zero per cent wage negotiation remark, the truly offensive sound bite has slipped.

“They haven’t rioted yet,” the minister quipped, as he mused another 15 percent fuel hike.

For sure, the Finance Minister chose the wrong forum to discuss the Government’s negotiating position in relation to public sector wage increases. If it is standard practice in industrial relations to come to the table with an offer of zero percent, it is certainly not standard practice to let the cat out of the bag.

Doing so at an IMF meeting at the swanky four-star Hyatt Regency hotel sent the wrong signal, making the Government, which is simply guarding taxpayers’ money, appear cavalier.

The minister’s jaunty quip about rioting, however, was the real offence.

While this increase was already signalled in the Budget, the joke trivialised what is for ordinary consumers no laughing matter.

The entire nation was, only a few days ago, faced with the possibility of no longer being able to pay for gas at the pumps with electronic cards.

That possibility came about due to complaints about slender revenue margins. Luckily it was averted. But for how long? At the same time, frenzy and spin over the zero percent starting point is something we highly caution against. It is clear that the economy has faced challenges, but negotiation positions should not substitute economic indicators as barometers of economic health.

Sadly, this is the age of social media and it is easy to take things out of context. Imbert was forced to call a press conference — at taxpayers’ expense — to allay panic.

In fairness to the minister, he also said the bargaining could see higher settlements with the cautionary note that they would be less than 14 per cent. Also, he disclosed an estimated $500 million TTEC settlement with the OWTU, a truly positive development on the industrial relations climate.

But the panic expressed online does signal the unease the public feels about the economy, about job security and a climate where there has already been substantial job loss. All the more reason for stakeholders, media included, to be careful in how we report and react to accounts of government statements.

We are not saying don’t comment but we must be sure of the facts and the context.

Imbert probably did not help the misunderstanding by making the remarks at an IMF forum where questions for clarification may not have been immediately possible.

The IMF itself has a stigma of foreboding. A press conference or the Parliament should be the places were any key policy is conveyed.

What was that long Budget debate for? The reaction from Opposition parties, including Watson Duke who has pretty much made the PSA an extension of his political party, also did not help matters.

Jumping on inaccurate economic reporting for the purpose of the local government election campaign sets a negative tone similar to the general election, which the country is hardly in any mood for.

The UNC also pounced on the issue, not surprisingly sticking on the zero per cent position. The PP administration got licks for its five per cent wage cap, and it should be remembered it started at zero, zero, one for the years 2008, 2009 and 2010 under Winston Dookeran.

The very PSA accepted five per cent and when the other trade unions negotiated for more, Duke began demanding more. So this again is playing politics.

The irony is both the UNC/PP and PNM began their terms having to settle long overdue industrial agreements. And in the end, these negotiations will take a long time, and even when settlement is arrived at, it may not be immediately implemented.

The real joke is our archaic wage system will still see public servants get zero for a long time to come.