THE PAN-AFRIKAN LIBERATOR

In an article on Colonial Structural Adjustment appearing in the November 1994 edition of The Pan-Afrikan Liberator, Mwongozi Cheddy Browne, commenting on the Montserrat situation, forecast:-

"Organised labour, the only force that could maintain current earning capacity also came under attack.

Leading the way in an attempt to destroy labour unions was Cable & Wireless. A former implementer of british overseas policy, the old boy's club of former british civil servants and their descendants fill the ranks of Cable & Wireless from bottom to top.

Their new policy for dealing with their labour force would pave the way for government's handling of the civil service and private sector handling of other organised labour movements."

The Montserrat Seamen & Waterfront Workers' Union (MSWWU) is the second Union on the list to be destroyed.

The result of this destruction is a further erosion of the money cycle in an already critically sick local economy.

The economic pressure now being brought to bear on the 100 men who were dismissed and their families continues to tear apart our social fabric and makes the exploitation of cheap labour even easier.

Each seemingly unrelated but calculated move that has been made by the colonial masters satisfies a political and economical time-frame that has been planned and executed since the secret meetings between england and China that returns Hong Kong to China in 1997.

The bigger plan of the colonial controllers to tighten their iron grip on Montserrat continues to become more apparent.

Faced with overwhelming problems on an individual and collective basis, the local people react to the immediate, short-term ploys making what should be their priority, seemingly invisible acts.

On Tuesday, January 17th, 1995, the Executive of the Montserrat Seamen & Waterfront Workers' Union was invited to a meeting with the Montserrat Port Authority (MPA) Board of Directors ostensibly to continue ongoing negotiations for a new labour agreement between the MSWWU and the MPA.

The meeting started at approximately 11.10 a.m. with MPA Chairman, Jim Bass, announcing to the Union's delegation that effective mid-day, less than 1 hour later, the Port would no longer require the services of the Union.

At a moment's notice, 100 working men were dismissed from the work-place.

The MPA board members, (Jim Bass, C. T. John, Eric Kelsick, Roosevelt Jemmotte, Bruce Farrara) who initially claimed responsibility for this decision showed absolutely no compassion for their fellow human beings.

Later, according to the MPA Board, they were simply following executive orders.

To most people this would mean that they were following an order agreed upon by all members of executive council comprising the chief minister, the other 3 ministers of government, the governor, the financial secretary and the attorney general.

However, two government ministers stated that they knew absolutely nothing about any executive instructions concerning the MSWWU.

It soon became apparent that the instructions for the action came directly from the chief minister under the guise of executive orders.

What is not clear to the vast majority of the public is the process by which an executive order comes about.

The executive council can only be summoned by the authority of the governor or if the chief minister so requests.

Also, no business can be transacted at a meeting of the Council if there are fewer than three members present who presumably would have had to discuss, vote on and record the decision, with the concurrence of the governor.

If, as it appears, the CM and the governor colluded to issue an order without going through due process, then in effect, only one person (governor) or two persons (chief minister and governor) are needed to issue an executive order.

If this is what happened, then any claim to democracy in Montserrat is a farce.

The governor through his puppet the CM and the chief minister through his three puppets, implement the governor's policies and run the country according to british dictates.

The governor continues to say that so long as he and the CM see eye to eye he needs no further consultation or approval of any action that he desires.

He also states that if he and the chief minister do not see eye to eye he has the authority to do just as he pleases.

No matter what comfortable term one chooses to describe the system that controls our lives, Montserrat is controlled by the dictatorial discretion of its governor.

Three days after the MSWWU was dismissed, the Chief Minister made a public statement.

Given time to put pressure on his puppets and show them the precarious position they occupy, he was able to say that there was full governmental knowledge and support for the decision.

However, the claim that the decision was one taken in executive council was not stated or suggested.

It should thus be clear that the Union was fired by a decision approved by the governor, issued by the chief minister and implemented by the MPA Board.

The MPA board members did not hesitate to use the ready-made excuse that they were following executive orders.

Three days after the act, the other members of government were coerced into agreement by the chief minister's public statement.

No member of government has made an announcement to the contrary.

No executive council order exists.

The disgusting odor surrounding this whole affair can never be removed from the executive council members and the Port Authority board members.

Within hours of receiving the dismissal notice, MSWWU General Secretary, Chedmond Browne began organising the Union to react and deal with the situation.

An emergency general meeting was sche duled for the following day.

The General Secretary then paid a personal visit to the General Secretary of the Montserrat Allied Workers' Union (MAWU), Mrs Vereen Thomas-Woolcock, at Harmony House HQ in Dagenham.

After hearing about the situation, MAWU's General Secretary stated that she was going to sit down and compose a very strong letter of condemnation to the parties involved for the manner in which they handled the affair.

When told by MSWWU's General Secretary that letters could not solve the problem and only a massive demonstration by organised labour could halt and reverse the situation she said that she would have to call a meeting of her Executive.

Mrs Thomas-Woolcock then proceeded to write her letter. (See M/rat News 1/20/95)

After holding press conferences with Radio Antilles and Local Access TV, the MSWWU General Secretary attempted to get some legal advice from the Union's consultant, Mr Kenneth Allen who was unavailable.

Returning to the MSWWU office, the General Secretary began to touch base with affiliated unions in the region notifying them of the situation and seeking their assistance and advice.

About 2:30pm, Mrs Claudia Roach, the Labour Commissioner, called and made an appointment for the General Secretary to meet with the Minister of Labour, Lazelle Howes, at 4:00 o'clock that afternoon.

At that meeting the Labour Minister told the General Secretary that the dismissal of the MSWWU was a complete surprise to her.

She said that she had absolutely no knowledge of the act and called the chief minister to find out about the decision.

The chief minister told her that she could not be found when the decision was being taken, and apologised for failing to notify her.

When the General Secretary told the Labour Minister that the MPA board members claimed that they were carrying out executive orders, she said this could not be true, as there was no mention of the MSWWU in her copy of the Executive Council meeting minutes.

The Minister then stated that she would get to the bottom of the whole affair on the following day as she had scheduled a meeting with the MPA board.

The Minister then stated very strongly,

"There is no way that I the Minister of Labour can just sit here and see 100 men dismissed from their work-place and do nothing about it.

If I cannot reverse this situation tomorrow, there is no way that I will be sitting in this seat on Thursday.

If this does not go back to the negotiating table, the government will have my resignation."

The General Secretary then responded that he truly wanted to believe what she had said, and as a result he would give her the benefit of the doubt and wait until Thursday.

On the evening of the same day, the President of the Teachers Union called to seek information and to offer full backing and support to the MSWWU. Two calls were made by the Seamen's Union General Secretary, to the home of Civil Service Association (CSA) President, Eugene Skerritt, with no result.

Early on Wednesday morning, Mr Skerritt returned the call. He expressed his grave concern for the implications of the MSWWU's dismissal.

However, beyond making some very strong public statements, he said, he could do nothing until he met with his Executive.

Once again the Seamen's Union General Secretary stressed the importance of time and the need for a unified labour reaction to the MSWWU's dismissal.

By mid-morning numerous phone calls had been made, and three labour lawyers in Antigua were contacted.

Upon speaking with Mr Baldwin Spencer of the Antigua Workers Union, one lawyer was identified and arrangements were made for him to begin the preliminary research into the numerous illegalities that had been perpetrated upon the MSWWU.

The General Secretary then spent some time with the Executive of the Teachers Union explaining the Union's position in depth and answering their questions.

At least three times that day, the General Secretary sought to make contact with its local legal consultant without any success.

At 4:00 o'clock, the entire union executive was invited to a meeting with the Minister of Labour and the Labour Commissioner.

Before long, it became apparent that the Minister was not going take the steps necessary to change the situation.

Instead of meeting with the MPA board members, she met only with Jim Bass, the chairman, and Roosevelt Jemmotte, MPA manager.

They were able to evade and mislead her, and it did not appear that she came away with any specifics.

The Minister told the MSWWU Executive that it would be best for them to accept the situation as there was nothing that she could do.

The General Secretary then told her that what she was saying now was a far different tune to the one that she sang about the same time the previous day.

The General Secretary then expressed his disappointment at the Minister's ineffectiveness and told her that he had expected that she would have given him some measure of hope at the governmental level to carry to the members at the general meeting.

At 5:30 that evening the general meeting was held. Only one healthy member did not attend.

Recognising the unwillingness and inability of the other unions to mobilise quickly, the Union Executive put together a series of actions designed to hold the line.

Quickly the union members voted to:--

1. Refuse to accept the payout package being offered by the MPA

2. Withhold Union labour by refusing to fill out any application form or applying for employment at the MPA

3. Organise a public meeting to give the people an understanding of what was taking place. (Monday evening)

4. Organise a mass demonstration in the area of the Port Authority. (Tuesday morning)

5. Organise a mass protest march to the chief ministers office (Wednesday morning)

6. Organise a mass protest march to the governor's office. (Thursday morning)

The Union members voted unanimously for the first two steps. All other action plans were carried by the majority.

It was understood, accepted and agreed by all members, that any Union member who broke the union ranks, and did not remain united on steps 1 and 2 automatically gave up their union membership.

The meeting closed on a high note and a follow up meeting was scheduled for Friday evening.

By Thursday morning, rumors began to surface that some Union members had accepted the MPA payout and reemployment offer.

When the matter was looked into, it turned out that 3 members had already collapsed.

The two main agents for the Port Authority, Roosevelt Jemmotte and C.T. John, knew from the outset that the MPA would rehire only 28 of the Union's workers if they were able to undermine the Union.

They both used this knowledge to their full advantage.

Union members began to report that they were receiving personal visits and phone calls from port manager, Roosevelt Jemmotte, and the financial secretary, C.T. John.

The gist of their conversation went like this. The MPA has your check waiting for you at the office.

If you go for your money now, you can sign up for reemployment with the Port without filling out an application.

However, the Port only needs 28 workers. It would be in your best interest to be one of the first 28, as any who come after will not be hired.

When questioned as to what would happen to the rest of the workers, both replied they will just have to suffer. First come first served.

While Jemmotte and C.T. John were visiting select workers privately, the Port Authority's underlings were calling union members at home, and in the Port's compound, quoting to them the lump sum payout figures that the MPA would pay them.

They were also assuring them that every one who accepted the payout would be re-employed and did not have to fill out an application form.

Double subterfuge was used. Select men in the Union were guaranteed re-employment.

Contingencies were also made for those selected so that they could get their money and their jobs insured without appearing to break Union ranks.

At the same time the entire Union membership was being guaranteed re-employ- ment if they broke ranks and accepted the payout.

Pressure was put upon close relatives and friends of Union members. These people, in turn, focused that pressure on the individual member they could reach.

The shipping community and the merchant community fanned the flames by exerting pressure and spreading confusion among the members in an effort to get them to accept the ports payout package.

Lending institutions also called Union members telling them to accept the package.

Numerous devious ways were suggested to members as to how they could collect their money, accept re- employment and still pretend to support the Union.

Those selected who had already decided to sell out the Union for their own personal interest, did everything in their power to convince others to cross the line while pretending to hold the line.

As the day wore on, relentless pressure from external forces and the continued vision of money dancing before their eyes weakened the resolve of men not used to dealing with pressure.

The pressure continued right into the night with phone calls to wives and mothers and personal visits to houses.

By Friday morning a contingent of Longshore equipment operators led by two of the select, who were also members of the executive, held a meeting with MPA management without consultation, advice or consent from the Union.

That was the signal.

Within a matter of hours, Union members began to cross the line. All who crossed over were led to believe that so long as they were not yet sixty years of age they would be re-employed by the MPA.

The remaining Union executives spent the day attempting to hold off the rush. Once again the General Secretary attempted to get some legal advice from their consultant. Again he was not available.

Friday evening the scheduled meeting was held. When the roll was called 32 members were present.

Those not in attendance, 68%, had either already crossed over, or intended to cross over. Of the number present, 19 were over the age of 60 and were being retired forcibly.

The General Secretary thanked those who showed up for their loyalty and their fortitude under pressure.

He then told them that he did not think that 32 men could sustain the pressure necessary to resolve the situation.

He suggested to the remaining members that if they so desired, they could accept the port's money.

By Monday morning, the collapse of the MSWWU was complete as only its President Mr William (MANNY) West and the General Secretary, Chedmond Browne, still held the line.

That same day, the General Secretary finally had a face to face conversation with the Union's legal consultant.

Mr Allen told the General Secretary as a member of government, he was aware that government was involved in the action against the Union.

Therefore, he could no longer advise or represent the union as it would conflict with his duty to government.

The collapse was quick, but based on public reaction apparently not unexpected.

Within one week of the Union's destruction, the MPA held a private meeting by invitation only, with the 28 men that made the internal collapse of the Union possible.

The Port employed them as permanent staff. The other 40 men who crossed the line under the guarantee of employment were not invited and no explanation was given to them as to why they are not working.

Terms and conditions of work are non-existent. These 28 men sold out their brothers and have willingly entered into a new period of slavery.

Some examination must be given to the events that transpired over those 3 critical days (Wednesday- Friday).

The first 2 steps of the Union's plan were their major weapon.

If all else failed and they held out on those two issues they would have maintained a strong bargaining position.

It never occurred to the general secretary that the union's members would collapse in three days.

The remaining steps in the plan were designed to make the remaining unions in the country wake up and smell the coffee, and to expand the support base of an already sympathetic public.

While waiting for the response from the other unions, the MSWWU allowed its members to sit by idly for 3 critical days while external forces invaded and undermined their resolve.

Organised demonstrations and united gatherings of the members should have started on Wednesday.

The inability of the majority of the members to balance integrity, principle, justice, loyalty to our elders and loyalty to each other against money was the major blow.

How does one refuse a solid physical thing like money which one knows about, for some words and ideas which for the most part have never been a part of our lives?

Not withstanding the fact that the MSWWU collapsed internally, the lack of support from the other union bodies sealed its fate.

Their unwillingness and inability to mobilise for the MSWWU and their own collective survival have also sealed their destiny.

Beyond the verbal concern of individuals, i.e., the Teachers Union Executive, the CSA President and MAWU's General Secretary, there was no action or reaction from the other unions.

Members of the Teachers Union saw no reason for them to be involved.

It took 10 days for the CSA President to convene a meeting of his Executive.

Some members of his executive said that they were never informed about the demise of the MSWWU. They have yet to reach their membership.

MAWU's executive has still not responded to the call from their general secretary.

As a result, they also have not touched base with their members. When they do eventually get together, individually or collectively, the only question they need ponder now, is who is next and when?

The last issue of The Pan- Afrikan Liberator projected the 1996 election year as the year Independence would become the main issue on the platform agenda of any politician wanting to represent the people.

Keeping their record of reacting to The Liberator's projections intact, the british, through their puppet the chief minister, are now jumping on the Independence train.

Even though the chief minister is now speaking of Independence for Montserrat, neither he nor the british want this to become a reality.

They are simply using the media to satisfy certain constraints as they move to tie Montserrat to england forever.

To make their strategy work, they pushed the date back 5 more years.

The british, and the chief minister who is their willing lackey, are following a timetable.

Unfortunately for the majority of the people of Montserrat, that timetable was designed to insure that by the year 2006, a structure would be firmly entrenched, giving the minority expatriate community an economic strangle-hold on Montserrat.

The expat community would by then appear to be allied with and be in partnership with Montserratians who consider themselves to be elite and therefore entitled to suck the blood of their foreparent's offspring.

This economic control system with local lackeys playing secondary roles, will be put in place through the Chamber of Commerce. Presently, the Chamber of Commerce consisting mainly of locals, has neither the financial liquidity, nor the numerical might to be a force.

Therefore, the element of time is an absolute necessity if the british and their lackeys are to incorporate the expats, and put in place the economic control structure that they have designed to run this country no matter who holds the political reins.

By broaching the topic now, the chief minister hopes to stem the flow of ordinary people moving into the Independence NOW camp.

By playing on the topic he anticipates that he will steal the initiative away from those of us who have committed years of our lives to making Independence for Montserrat a reality.

That groundwork is now beginning to bear fruit, and the anti-british sentiments of the populace are becoming more and more vocal.

According to british projections this social attitude should not set in before the year 2006.

The british need 5 more years to make their structure firm.

By attempting to push back the time-table 5 years, the chief minister hopes that he can buy enough time to entrench a structure top heavy with foreigners in economic control of the island.

His reward will be joining their ranks when his one-term government collapses.

If Montserrat is to go into the 21st century with an infrastructure designed to meet the needs of all of its inhabitants then Independence must come with the group of politicians that come to power in the elections of 1996.

Should the Montserrat populace repeat the hapless mistake of putting the NPP government back in power, all they have to look forward to is the continued march backward into the pre-1950's era.

For those who do not know, or choose not to remember, the legislation that made the 1834 "Emancipation Act" a reality for Montserratians, was not written and passed until W.H. Bramble forced it through the council in 1952.

At the end of NPP's disservice to the people, a combination of foreign and local elite minority will be in full control of Montserrat's economic sector.

Less than fifty years after Montserratians became legally free from the system of slavery, an elite minority would have regained total control of the island economically and politically.

This control will, once again, put that minority elite in the position that allows them to suck the blood of the majority.

At that point in time political Independence will be nothing more than words on a piece of paper with a colourless windshredded flag blowing in the wind.

Independence activists beware! Self Determination in the wrong hands will seal the destiny of our children as slaves.

Labour organizations on Montserrat are hurriedly assessing the implications for the future work- place environment in the wake of the unprecedented dismissal of all unionized workers at Port Plymouth on Tuesday, January 17th, 1995.

The situation is especially grave in the light that the Port Authority was in active negotiation with the Montserrat Seamen and Waterfront Workers Union when the draconian order of dismissal was proclaimed by a specially hired "media consul- tant".

According to General Secretary of the MSWWU, Mr Chedmond Browne, "most dif- ferences were settled except for the issue of pensions for workers 60 years and over."

The Union's position was that these men could not be summarily dismissed without some arrangements being made for their livelihood.

Mr Browne further stated that since the payment scheme negotiated with the MSWWU was by the tonnage worked, that the Union had decided to accept this responsibility for the aged workers and suggested that the decision to terminate employment by the age of 60 should be phased in so that workers above the age of 49 could have time to make some provision for their retirement.

While the Montserrat Union of Teachers (MUT) has not heard a clear explanation from the management of the Port on the reasons for their actions, it notes that all stages of the negotiation process had not been explored before this cul-de-sac was chosen.

The enormity of the Port Authority action is even more threatening given that, according to the General Secretary of the MSWWU, this whole process of negotiation resulted from a directive from the Legislative Council that "the Osborne Commission recommenda- tions re Labour at the Port be ignored and that the Port Authority and the Union sit and negotiate."

MUT is especially anxious to hear from the Government of Montserrat on this issue and is even more curious about the process and upon whose recommendation this action was taken.

As teachers, we have a peculiar role in this island to educate not only in the environment of the school but also within the wider community.

We note with further alarm, the stipulation that all workers applying or we suppose, reapplying for employment at the Port should, besides the age requirement, be able to read and write.

Whereas literacy is an ideal striven after in most communities in the world, this remains unfortunately, just that -- an ideal. Montserrat is no different.

Since the late 1980's, teachers at the Church Road Campus have become increasingly alarmed at the phenomena of students, largely male, materializing at 4th Form level lacking literacy skills.

At the same time, the misguided policy of Government to determine the efficient management of a learning facility by dividing the number of students by the number of teachers without particular attention to the needs of both parties has meant effectively that the possibility of addressing those needs fades yearly as, yearly the problems escalate.

Now we must face the reality that another avenue of employment/self- sustenance and contribution to the economy which has traditionally required intelligence and physical strength will be closed to the member of our society, who perhaps through no fault of his own finds himself illiterate after 11 years of Government schooling.

We note that there is no program for the eradication of adult illiteracy in Montserrat. Does this mean that the illiterate adult has no place in our society?

We remind ourselves that those who are educated in this society should recognize the causal relationship between their social mobility and the organisation and mobilization of labour in the not so distant past in Montserrat.

Are we now witnessing the treachery of an educated elite linking itself with old business and new colonial interests as we seek to reorganize or have our society reorganised for us in the closing years of this century.

It has been noted that time and time again that this action is unprecedented in Montserrat.

However, reflection will bring an example to mind. In 1981, President Reagan of the USA used the strike by the Professional Air Controllers' Union as a confrontation with organized labour.

This ended with the wholesale dismissal of all the strikers and the dissolution of their union. The parallels are interesting.

Montserrat is perhaps not as isolated from the world as we may like to believe.

Walden Bello in his examination of Structural Adjustment and Global Poverty draws these conclusions.

One of the key prongs of "Reaganomics", he asserts, "was aimed at breaking the resistance of labor to corporate capital's drive for greater freedom to reduce costs and increase profitability.

In close cooperation with the Administration, the Federal Reserve Board headed by Paul Volcker adopted a tight policy in 1981.

The ostensible objective was to whip inflation, but the strategic objective was to break labor by triggering a deep recession...

The PATCO solution sent a message to both the private and public sectors that it was open season on labor.

Labor-management relations in the next few years were marked by a management offensive consisting of aggressive union-busting, prevention of unionization through right-to-work laws, replacement of full-time with part-time workers, wage and benefit 'give-backs' under threat of plant closure, and increased sub-contracting of work."

It is often heard on the street that one of the characteristics of our people is that "we nuh min" wha happen once me get thru."

Perhaps this attitude has resulted in individual success in the past.

Today, unless this situation is addressed, everyone loses. Even those who watch the ensuing debacle from their towers and offices of privilege can not avoid the fall-out.

Montserrat is a very small place. Perhaps some of us have forgotten the peculiar circumstances of our arrival here. Perhaps some of us have become too "sophisticated" to recall the blood-ties which we all share.

This island is not large enough to contain a dispossessed work-force. We bow to the forces of cynicism at our own risk.

There are very few Montserratians, if any, who have not expressed frustration with the exorbitant prices and low-quality of some of the goods on the shelves of supermarkets and other stores on the island.

This frustration stems from a pervasive view that nothing can be done to improve the situation -- or at least that there is nothing ordinary people can do.

We have been socialised into thinking that if the government does not, or cannot remedy a problem, then as citizens we are powerless.

This concept of the ordinary Montserratian as powerless is especially evident in the area of consumer behaviour.

But contrary to being helpless, the consumer is in fact the most powerful component in any economic system. Without them none of the supermarkets, restaurants, bakeries, pharmacies, etc., can operate.

It is time for meaningful changes to be made to the existing unbalanced relationship between merchants and consumers, so that we could see some solution to the problem of shoppers in Montserrat.

These changes require the operation of three major components:-

1. raising the consciousness of the consumer

2. putting systems in place to protect consumer rights

3. the formation of a consumer co-operative so that people can purchase good-quality products at the cheapest rate.

Raising levels of consumer consciousness or awareness is a critical first step. This necessitates a widespread an on-going consumer education programme.

This goal can be realised with the formation of a Consumer Affairs Division.

Its main role would be to conduct public information/ education programmes sensitizing consumers to their rights and responsibilities.

Montserratians have much to learn in this area; from the basics of good consumer practices (including comparing prices, reading labels & bulk buying), to the intricacies of importing foreign products (especially understanding port procedure & charges.)

It is only when people are well informed that they have a basis on which to make decisions about where and on what products they spend their money.

It is only when the awareness level of the Montserratian consumer is raised will there be a change in our spending attitudes and behavior.

Without consumers actually DOING something, nothing will change. VI am referring to such things as not buying at a place that carries high prices, or demanding that rotting vegetables be removed from the shelves, or questioning why the cost of some items keep inching higher every few weeks.

The key to change from the merchants is for shoppers to move beyond grumbling to themselves to taking SPECIFIC ACTION.

But we will not see action without the education. This is the importance of a Consumer Affairs Division.

Whether this division is a government or non-governmental body it must possess the financial and technical resources necessary to conduct the kind of widespread education programs needed.

The second component as mentioned above is putting in place a system for the protection of consumer rights. One way this can be done is by setting up a Bureau of Standards.

The main purpose of the Bureau would be to monitor the quality of goods and services made available to consumers.

If well-established such a body might even act as an advocate, seeking compensation in cases where a consumer has been unfairly treated or sold faulty or spoilt goods.

In collaboration with the Health Department, it may also act as a 'watchdog,' and spearhead sanctions against merchants who endanger the lives of buyers by failing to adhere to standard safe food-handling practices.

These include not storing goods such as meat, poultry and vegetables under the correct condition, selling goods that have past expiry dates, failing to remove spoilt, rotting fruits and vegetables from the shelves, and maintaining filthy fridges, freezers, and floors.

The Consumer Affairs Divi- sion and the Bureau of Standards can do much to raise the level of consciousness, and will put merchants in a position where they are forced to pay greater attention to the quality of goods and services they provide.

Even with the existence of these two bodies though, it is NOT likely that they will directly address the problem of exorbitant prices.

The fact is that in this part of the world we uphold the principles and practice of free enterprise.

No organisation, consumer body or government can force privately run enterprise to lower prices to a level that is satisfactory to the customer.

In Montserrat, government, through its Price Control Division only has jurisdiction over a limited number of goods.

Beyond that the level of 'mark-up' or profit on products is in the hands of merchants.

What can consumers do if they believe that they are paying too much for goods in the supermarket? They can become merchants as well!

This is where the third component mentioned above comes into play -- that is the formation of a Consumer Co-operative.

Let us use a practical situation. There are hundreds of civil servants in Montserrat.

If they were to decide, as a body, to order grocery items in bulk from abroad -- just as the supermarket owners do - - they would see significant savings on their monthly food bills.

Anyone who is fortunate to have relatives or friends send them items from Puerto Rico, St. Martin and such places will know this.

When you convert the cost from US$ to EC$, plus add shipping charges, one cannot help wonder how some items become so expensive when they arrive on the supermarket shelves.

I use the example of civil servants, but it could apply to any group of workers, community organisations or even families.

Whatever the size, forming a consumer co- operative requires the total commitment of the members, but if people are concerned enough and if they recognise their power as consumers, they will be more inclined to make the effort.

Mind you, there is a procedure for the formation of consumer co-operatives, as well as systems to ensure efficient management and accountability.

It is possible to tap our neighboring islands (where such co- operatives are successful) for technical advice and assistance, if necessary.

This three-pronged approach to consumer problems can work.

I hope that 1995 will be the year when some kind of serious organised effort will be made in any or all of these areas so that some of the concerns of consumers can be allayed.

There has been an ongoing debate regarding the constitutional philosophy as represented by the British form of government and that of the United States.

vThe essential argument revolves around the effectiveness of one versus the other as they may be applied in emerging nations.

In my mind the argument often degenerates to a preference not based on logical findings or research dedicated to the purpose.

It is based merely on an individual's prejudicial experiences in a society espousing one or the other philosophy.

Someone who has lived in the U.S. tends to support that way of thinking. Likewise someone who has lived in the U.K. supports the U.K. model.

This is perfectly understandable since in both instances they have seen the systems at work, and working well for that society.

The problem arises when either philosophy is transferred or an attempt is made to transfer either system to another society.

As a colony of Britain, we have been educated to believe that we are in fact British and consequently what applies in England naturally applies here without question.

We have been educated to feel that the British way is the only civilized and proper way.

We have been educated to believe, that even though we are far removed from England, the British sense of justice and fair play rules.

We have been educated to believe British standards of conduct and deportment are ours.

We are told that British laws are our laws and we are educated to have it no other way.

This is not to say that some things are not worthwhile or admirable. But there are other ways. The other ways may not be perfect but neither is the British way.

They all have their good points and the not so good.

The U.S. system of govern ment works well for them because it has what most people will agree to be some fundamentally sound principles. But most importantly it was painstakingly designed with their society, philosophy and culture in mind.

The British system evolved over hundreds of years, built on their way of life, their culture, their philosophy.

As a colony we have been handed a system designed in part and primarily to maintain and control a piece of territory in the economic and other interests of the British.

It has been modified in recent times to allow the majority residents to contribute more financially and participate more in the local management of the colony but with the primary mandate still in place.

As a colony the views, the philosophy, or the culture of the majority people has never been considered when the matters of constitutional arrangements are made.

Yet, as we are educated to behave, we are expected to accept, as is thought proper, whatever the British propose.

What is even more devastating to our interests is the fact that the system which we are asked to accept is not even democratic in the most rudimentary way that it is considered a norm.

The legislature is a rubber stamp for the executive council.

The present system does not afford the proper representation of the populace and its varying interests.

And it certainly does not allow for proper checks and balances, which are in some ways present in the system it purports to emulate.

Where the British and the American system differ in philosophy is the reliance by the British on tradition and culture to deal with unwritten principles for its proper functioning.

The U.S. system depends on agreed to written principles. Although the written principles are subject to interpretation based on culture and tradition the rules are clearly stated for reference.

Further that interpretation can be challenged in a court that has constitutional authority.

In the British system the Parliament (the house of representatives) is supreme. But culture and tradition demands an accountability to the electorate that does not exist elsewhere.

The British culture demands an adherence to its traditions that is unique. What happens when there is no such tradition?

It cannot be imported by definition. Our lives have been governed in the past by an oligarchical system, a plantocracy overseen by British civil servants.

A system that depends for its viability and for its proper functioning on tradition in our situation will therefore follow inherently non-democratic principles.

Crown colony civil service bureaucracy is our tradition.

Merchant planters managing things to suit their small number is our legacy.

The majority culture is one of a subject people not meant to make decisions, but to have decisions made for them.

As a colonial people, descendants of slaves and sharecroppers, our tradition and culture speak to our being accountable to our government not our government being accountable to us.

We are expected to be grateful and compliant recipients of gifts and hand-outs from a benevolent master; never to take our own destiny in our hands.

As a colony we have often boasted of our excellent record in the field of education.

Many will still boast of our accomplishments in education when compared to our neighbors. We have been well educated.

We have been taught that policies and decisions are only for the few to contemplate, the propertied and the appointed civil servant.

Our education, our tradition and our culture deny the exercise of democratic principles.

Given the above, it would appear to me that there is a need to develop a constitution that will not be so dependant on tradition and culture for its proper functioning.

It needs to be structured on sound written principles, which reflect our culture and tradition insofar as those support the principles of democracy and self- determination.

In this view our constitutional philosophy more resembles that of the U.S. than that of the U.K..

However, this still does not mean a wholesale transfer of that system. Our education and the influence of the British on our culture would dictate a strong leaning toward their way of doing things.

We must also consider the dominant influence of the U.S. culture on our present way of life when developing our own system.

In short our constitutional philosophy must reflect our condition, our situation, past, present and how we perceive our future.

A system built on this type of philosophy, one that reflects us as a people, has a better chance of serving us properly than any other.

We need to develop our own constitution based on this philosophy now.

We need to put a system in place now, whether one feels we are ready for independence or not.

If we are not quite ready we need to put a system in place to get us ready.

If we think we are ready we cannot assume it without putting a suitable system in place. Therefore, the time to act is now.