Caroni land deal can work
The Government appears to have exercised considerable care in its allocation procedure for Caroni lands, which is to commence this Friday. This was absolutely necessary, since the Opposition United National Congress and other provocateurs have been using the issue as an ethnic political football since Caroni (1975) Ltd was closed, putting almost 9,000 employees out of work. UNC spokesmen have demonised John Rahael, who oversaw the dismantling of Caroni (1975) Ltd as then-Agriculture Minister, and they have displayed their sexist crudeness by continually using a derogatory Hindu word to describe Junior Finance Minister Christine Sahadeo, who has been overseeing the allocation process. In addition to this, all the expected accusations have been bruited — that Caroni lands will be given to the PNM’s friends and family; that the closure was aimed at destroying "Indian" people in general, and the UNC political base in particular; and that the Government had no plan in place to take care of the displaced Caroni workers. The first allegation may or may not be true — thus far, no hard evidence has been uncovered. The second allegation is purely political and cannot be proven one way or the other (although it should be noted that the UNC when in office also had plans to close and diversify Caroni (1975) Ltd, but shelved them amidst accusations of a less-than-transparent process). It is only the third allegation which had some merit. The PNM administration has taken an unconscionably long time to reach this stage, whereas proper planning would have ensured that the distribution of lands could have started mere months after the company’s closure in 2003. Be that as it may, it seems that the authorities have now made every effort to prevent these allegations from gaining ground as the allocation process gets underway. In a 16-page supplement published in yesterday’s Newsday, the government listed the names of the 7,247 ex-Caroni workers who have applied for agricultural land. The services of auditing firm Ernst & Young have been engaged to ensure accountability and transparency. And documentation is to be provided on the spot once the applicant has drawn his or her plot of land. In terms of policy, the Government also appears to have taken a right step in mapping out the land according to the crop preferences indicated by the applicant. Presumably, this means that the State will not be interfering too much in the activities of the new farmers. The individual cultivators know best what the market wants, and must be left free to choose their products accordingly. This fundamental economic truth should be reflected in the contract between State and farmer. If the allocation agreement is too restrictive, then the benefits of this allocation programme will be correspondingly reduced. Does the contract allow or forbid transfer of rights to the land? Will the farmers be allowed to combine properties? Will they have the option of eventually owning the land? These questions go to the heart of creating capital. And, if the former sugar workers are given these legal tools, then the Caroni lands are likely to become far more profitable than they ever were under State control.
Comments
"Caroni land deal can work"