Wednesday, September 09, 1998

What is it we really need in Venezuela?

We are being confronted on a daily basis with an endless litany of proposals, some fanatical and others just irrelevant and misguided compliance with a perceived social obligation. Both types are bad and make it harder for us to focus on how to really solve our problems.

The fanatics, who all share the wish of looking good on CNN's "Crossfire", cover the extreme sides of the advisory rainbow. On one side we find those who want us to foster nationalism and patriotism through isolation in true Robinson Crusoe style while casting old Fidel as young Friday. On the other are those who hype the benefits of economic opening and globalization to such a degree that we begin to feel that the only ones with the real right to be called Venezuelans are our compatriots in Miami.

Some twenty years ago, I used to vehemently oppose excessive use of protectionism, considering then that this was causing us to slowly degenerate into an inefficient and lazy nation. Additionally, having studied in Sweden and therefore carrying the social democratic values of that society on my back, I found the pockets of political patronage and power this protectionism created very disagreeable.

Today, however, I consider that in many ways Venezuela has opened itself up to the world excessively. In our effort to be part of every economic fad the world developed, we have actually become poorer and run the risk of slowly being wiped out as a nation. 

In spite of this switch, I am convinced that I have not changed my way of analyzing economic problems one bit since at all times my only goal has been to search for what is best for the nation, at a given moment and under a specific set of circumstances. 

I honestly think that a majority of my colleagues, all advisors and consultants, some formally assigned to this role, and others, volunteers, self-empowered and nosey, have been, albeit not on purpose, basing their recommendations more on how they fit a specific model of thought than on what the country really needs to get ahead. This is tragic.

The second category of proposals are those generated by all the individuals and organizations who seem to live by the motto “if we don’t have a Web Page on the Internet we don’t exist” or in this case, "if we are not able to develop a ‘do-it-in-20-easy-steps’ proposal on how to save Venezuela we have not fulfilled our social duty". Most of the proposals that fall under this category, some more relevant than others, are basically harmless. Even I recently published a humble proposal about what I would do if I were to become President (obviously in an allegorical sense) which had to be published in two articles in order to satisfy its boundless degree of ambition.

Other entities, given their importance in the development of public opinion due to their ample presence in the national scene and in the media, simply do not have the right to treat the process of the generation of proposals lightly. Among these entities we can mention Fedecámaras.

I know there is a wealth of material on the politics of oil and it could very well be that the last Fedecámaras General Assembly generated some others I do not know of. However, what you can find in the document known as the Assembly’s Central Document, all 36 pages of which can be downloaded off the Internet, and that is certified as Copyright© Fedecámaras, seems to me to be a relatively poor proposal. The document includes a list or mix of 63 vital proposals. Obviously, he who has 63 vital issues on his mind, really has none.

In addition the Fedecamaras document does not grasp the realities. It barely touches the issue of how to reactivate the internal economy and it ignores the need to improve the distribution of wealth while urging increased use of the General Sales Tax rather than the Income Tax. The issue of reducing government spending is treated with kid’s gloves; trivial matters such as privatization of jails and the approval of the Code of Ethics of Public Servants are addressed; the creation of the Macroeconomic Stabilization Fund is belatedly discussed; and even further confusion is created when the reform of the Judicial Sector is mentioned by saying that “Maybe it would be convenient to hand over all responsibility to the Supreme Court of Justice”.

In a moment such as this, when there is hunger and unemployment in Venezuela, when the economic crisis becomes worse every day and when the world is full of uncertainties, an organization such as Fedecámaras must either present a well developed and thought out proposal or simply keep quiet. The duty of those members of the private sector that feel they are or should be represented by Fedecámaras is to express their opinions.