Where we stand‎ > ‎News & Comment‎ > ‎

FARRELL’S MISCHIEF By Eugene Reynald

posted 23 Dec 2015, 05:51 by Gerry Kangalee   [ updated 23 Dec 2015, 05:52 ]
Terrence Farrell
Terrence Farrell’s article which appeared in the Express of December 15th 2015 is a rationalisation which is obvious sophistry, a gross insult to the intelligence of citizens. It argues for the right of Government and big business to claim the patrimony of citizens and will further entrench graft/corruption and discontent of the masses, impair the moral authority of Government to call on citizens to make sacrifices, etc, etc.

Like any con trick the article commences with condescension and a clear attempt to give the impression that Farrell has knowledge and intelligence superior to that of the reader. This is reflected in the title “Mischief and Misinformation” (a clear example of what psychologist calls “transference”) and obvious statements that a child would know such as “Yes indeed the oil and gas in the ground within the territory is the national patrimony. But it is worth nothing if it stays in the ground. It is extracted mainly by foreign companies...” as if we all don’t know that and more.

The issue of the legality of the comments of Rambarran has been effectively dealt with by others and the fact that what he did was deemed quite legal tells us that previous Governors and employees of the Bank have not been serving the public, as they should, in not reporting directly to us, as Rambarran did, certain facts which we should know by right. Besides that I would state that Laws are to be constantly challenged and renewed otherwise we would all still be slaves, apartheid would still be alive and well in South Africa, etc. etc. If justice is not a cloistered virtue then the Law also has to be the same – and the same goes for Judges.

My main concern is with the right being claimed, by the parasitic oligarchy and their agents, to confidentiality and secrecy in their interactions with supposed trustees of the people’s patrimony when such patrimony of citizens is being transacted. The rationalisation put out by Farrell, who is the main economic advisor to Cabinet, is an argument for the right being claimed by the oligarchy and their agents.

Farrell, in arguing the case for these parasites in his article, agrees that the oil and gas in the ground belong to all of us; it is our patrimony, He however makes a leap from there to state that the earnings/proceeds/revenues from transacting such patrimony which is returned to the Government, who is the trustee of the people patrimony, is not our patrimony. Somehow he sees these US dollars that accrue to the State from taxes and whatever else that is paid to Government, as belonging to someone else other than the citizens of the country. Farrell doesn’t state who that “someone else” is but Farrell’s inference is it belongs to whoever can get it and we know who does.

This argument is not economics, so Farrell has no superior claim to an opinion on the subject, and it is not grounded in logic. Anyone can see that Farrell’s opinion is as flawed as one and one making five and it does bring to mind the famous Truman saying that his economic advisors always tell him “on the one hand…and on the other...” except that Farrell is not even demonstrating such even handedness.

It is this argument from Farrell that has those parasites in the Chambers of Commerce and elsewhere claiming special rights to our foreign exchange and confidentiality and secrecy about how they acquire and use it. If they want foreign exchange they should damn well go out and earn it; not conspire with persons of influence and in Cabinet to get what belongs to all.

What is dangerous about Farrell is that he is the main economic advisor to the Government and if he cannot get the logic right how the hell can we expect him to do so with the economics?

Farrell’s colleague in the economics advisory committee has to correct the nonsense spoken by Farrell before the credibility of the entire team comes up for questioning.
Comments