Dr. Vincent Richards (Ph.D., Economics) recently reminded me of a reputation that he has earned. He once graduated at the top of his class at a university in North America, with blacks, whites, tout monde, in attendance. Vincent hails from Antigua, and he has reasons to query, what is it that has transpired since graduation, that makes his white classmate(s) more qualified than himself to get a little consultancy work right here at home in the Caribbean.

    Here is another true anecdote: While on assignment at the United Nations in New York in 1985, I sought additional work on a part-time basis at a university, which I will not name. The Dean or Dean equivalent was impressed with my credentials, and we discussed and agreed concerning the terms and conditions of my employment as an adjunct lecturer in accounting at the said university. He promised he would formalize the contract. I thanked him and turned to leave when, seemingly as an afterthought he said:

    “By the way, you may from time to time be approached to give a student an “A”. In such a case you are expected to give that student an “A” mark, whether the student has earned it or not…”

    The following day I called the Dean, begged him for a thousand pardons, and made an excuse why I could no longer take up the assignment.

    Some days later I accepted a position of adjunct lecturer in Advanced Accounting at City University of New York, Hunter College, where there was no such proviso.

    I was not particularly happy at Hunter. It is not that the students were bad or stupid: with few exceptions they seemed not to have mastered the material in earlier accounting courses, which should have prepared them for my advanced course. Other things being equal, they could not have graduated in the UWI environment…not with Advanced Accounting.

    They graduated. Some might have joined Price Waterhouse/Coopers; or Arthur Anderson or others after pursuit of future courses. But even in this age of miracle and wonder, I am not cognizant of any thing that has transpired since 1985, to transform those very students and make them more capable than Caribbean professionals for assignment in the Caribbean.

    I had to swallow hard and pass those people; yet, if there is some consultancy work to be done here in the Caribbean including Dominica those very former students are favoured before us.

    There are a few in the public service who perpetrate the bizarre phenomenon that anything imported is better than themselves. They believe it deeply. For them, that conviction is ideology and religion. That dogma manifests itself in sundry ways.

    Some months ago I was invited to attend and make an input at a meeting relating to an integrated development plan for Dominica. I was present long enough to hear only queries as to the amount of fees or expenses budgeted for the assignment. I told myself that those questions would very probably not have been aired if the consultants were from the North Atlantic. So I handed in my documented contribution. I left and have no intention of attending another meeting. I am confident that the consultants recruited, from Dominica and the wider Caribbean have the capacity to produce what is contracted.

    In addition to the conviction that the money is too much for the local consultant, the average bureaucrat also believes that she/he can do the consultant’s work with at least equal efficiency and effectiveness.

    But if the bureaucrat is so “cock sure”, why continue enjoying the cloak (and dagger??) of anonymity, and the relative security of confirmed salaries and perquisites at predictable intervals? I challenge them to do like the local consultant: abandon their assured remuneration, hang up there shingle, employ some of the many unemployed, and take the risk of getting a “fat” consultancy fee once in a while, perhaps once in a lifetime.

    Furthermore, the dogma manifests itself in the belief that the local “facilitator” must serve god and country for nothing, even while god and country pay ample fees to the foreign counterpart, sometimes for inferior work. If the bureaucrat has occasion to consider the local man, the latter must be under-recruited, insulted and underpaid.

    Some years ago, Trinidad Rio sang a calypso on a similar theme: where compensation had to be paid, he was never invited. Where the pay was “thank you very much”, he was always approached. He was the “free-show King!!”

    Finally, the bureaucrat tries to insulate his mischief in a guise of patriotism. He can even quote to his victims the lofty ideals of JFK: “…ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country”.

    I liked JFK… But consider this: He could only ask what he could do for his country. His country had already created him a millionaire, and had by majority popular vote elected him to the ultimate highest position… that of President of the United States. In his day, he was the youngest ever president. His country had already done everything it could for him. He could not ask for more.

    Today, I believe I am entitled to ask what can my country do for me; but I will not. All I ask is that you Mr. Bureaucrat offer the “gratis” or the slave wage to the outsider in like measure as you offer me. It is wrong for you to shift the goal post, to “negotiate” with the outsider without also negotiating with the local man.

    After all, it is conceivable that your favourite blue-eyed outsider is one of those to whom I refused to grant an “A” because he did not deserve it.

    There is a tendency for sons and daughters of the soil to remain silent in face of such transgressions. They say nothing in the name of decency. But their silence provides the veil and the licence that allow the wrong –doer to continue his machinations, his mischief and his antics. The local professionals must let their voices be heard on these issues.