During his lengthy intervention in the Budget Debate in Parliament on Tuesday, Prime Minister Bruce Golding said surprisingly little about agriculture. And his remarks were mostly platitudinous declarations about possibilities. But Mr Golding did make one fundamental point, which we hope can be a staging point for something transformational.

He said: "The agriculture sector represents part of the hope for the future. I reject the notion that we can't be competitive in both the domestic and export markets.

"Our soil can grow many more things. It is we who are not making it grow the things it can grow."

Indeed, while, like Mr Golding, we see in agriculture "part of the hope for the future", we discern in it a protective cushion to the crisis of the present. This, however, will demand more than glib calls for improved technology and better management to drive efficiency, but a fundamental shift in settled policy that might place Jamaica on a collision course with some global trading partners and powerful domestic interests.

Unpopular decisions

The Government, therefore, will have to be prepared to take initially unpopular decisions and be ready to stand its ground in the face of the backlash.

But this, first, is the context within which the issues have to be considered. The global economic crisis is hitting Jamaica hard, causing, among other things, a near total collapse of its bauxite mining and alumina refining sectors. This has left thousands of people, mostly in rural communities, jobless or substantially underemployed.

With the spin-off effect of this downturn, several communities face potential ruin. This situation is exacerbated by the soft market for tourism and the slowdown in the amount of cash Jamaicans who live abroad, but who are themselves confronting recession, send to family and friends back home.

At the same time, domestic agriculture has been in retreat for a long time - a victim of global trade rules and, in some instances, Jamaica's own overeagerness to liberalise its market. And it is not always that we compete on a level playing field. Jamaica cannot afford the farm subsidies offered by some developed countries, including the United States and European Union, to their farmers.

It might be difficult

There is a third point: in the current economic environment with its huge current account deficit, a gap in its fiscal accounts of seven per cent of GDP and the country's growing difficulty in borrowing, Jamaica may increasingly find it difficult to afford the US$750 million it spends on imported food. This gives credence to Mr Golding's urging that "we feed ourselves substantially more than we are doing". Or, put another way, the question of food security looms large.

But Jamaica's improving its capacity to feed itself won't happen in a vacuum. Farmers have to be given incentives to produce, starting with an ability to command a space in the domestic market.

This will demand more than technological enhancements and improved management - supposing that they can be financed - but profound policy action, starting, we insist, with tariff protection for agricultural production. Some are likely to suggest in certain cases outright import restrictions will be necessary.

Whatever the requirement, as said in these columns last Friday, it is urgent that we start the conversation. The growing crisis in rural Jamaica is impatient of delay.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.