 The panel, the discussion, an objective and impartial view of the issues of interest to you. Nation Beat is on now. Welcome to Nation Beat. And on this episode, we are looking at innovation and creativity because we are now celebrating the 2024 Innovation and Creativity Week. I am your moderator, Kentelia Louie, and I have a very interesting panel with me today. I know we're going to have a very lively discussion. And so we will start off with our panelists, co-systeme. We have Ms. Volney. And Ms. Volney is the Sustainable Development and Environment Officer with the Department of Sustainable Development. She is the Lead Officer for Sustainable Consumption and Production for Small Island Development States Developmental Agenda. Hope I said that correctly. Yes. Okay. And she'll be here especially to lead us and make us understand a little more about the SDGs. We'll come back to what that means. We have next to her, of course, one of our icons, our creative industries icons, Dr. Adrian Oje. He's a Caribbean laureate and he is known to be a man of many hats. We know him for carnival. We know him as a producer, a designer, an actor, a writer. He's also an economist and he has quite a bit of experience, not just in solution but throughout the region. So again, thank you for being here. Thank you. And last but not least, we have Ms. Nora Shapir-Noel and she's an entrepreneur and the co-founder of Invictus Inc., which is a climate change adaptation company. It's a mouthful. I love it. I want to know more about what that means and they specialize in smart ocean technologies. Yes. So again, thank you for being here. And we will be discussing, as we said, the SDGs, especially SDG9 and the role of creativity, innovation and the creative industries. How can we help to ensure that St. Lucia is able to reach their goals where that particular SDG is concerned? So let's start off. Let me say SDGs. What do we mean by that? And I'm looking at our sustainable officer here. What is an SDG? Okay. So it's the Sustainable Development Goals. It's coming out of a global agenda. It's called Agenda 2030, Transforming Our World for Sustainable Development. So the Sustainable Development Goals are targeting sustainable development. There are 17 sustainable development goals. And it looks at all areas such as people, planet, prosperity, peace and importantly partnership. And we are looking at SDG9, that is industry innovation and infrastructure. However, all the SDGs are linked and in achieving or promoting SDG9, we can target other SDGs as well. Okay. All right. So they are all interconnected, as you said. Yes. So when you say that, it makes me think how as a society, if you have 17, how do you break them apart? Are there specific areas that one SDG will, you know, focus on? So for example, we're talking about creative industries and culture. Do you think that all the SDGs are connected to it or maybe some specific ones? Some of them are connected to it. For the SDG9, we look at areas such as sustainable infrastructure, looking to retrofit our infrastructure so that it's more environmentally conscious. We have better technologies so that it can assist us in becoming more sustainable in our infrastructure. The innovation part of it of course looks at the greening, the creativity and ensuring that our culture is included in our strategic planning so that we have more innovative ways of creating more sustainable infrastructure and also industries that are more environmentally friendly and it can reach all persons. So therefore with industry, we look at SDG8, which is economic growth and decent jobs. So when we bring creative industries and culture and innovation in all of this, we're ensuring that we have longevity and ensure that there are quality jobs for our people and to ensure that our environment is not degraded in the process of creating these quality jobs. And then of course in creating quality jobs, we now ensure that our socio-economic position is better. So we're looking at SDG1 and 2 where we're looking at zero hunger and also no poverty. And in creativity and innovation, all of this ensures that we help persons come out of extreme poverty because SDG1 looks at reducing, eliminating poverty, but is extreme poverty. And furthermore, it will also assist with climate action, SDG13, sustainable consumption and production, that's SDG12. So all of them are connected to all. They are connected in so many ways. In all ways. Now I heard you mentioned that the creative industries and culture will help with prosperity and longevity. Dr. Auger, what are your thoughts on this, that she's saying that for us to achieve our SDGs, we're assuming then it means that creative industries and culture has a core role to play. Have you, I mean, you're a man of quite a bit of experience, both in terms of, as we said, not just economics, but governance as well as the creative industries. Do you agree with what she has said? Do you think that this currently exists? I think that SDG's special development goals have to be contextualized. The business of development is maybe 70 years old. It's a post-World War II subject. And the Bretton Woods organizations like the IMF and the World Bank, which were formed after the World War II, basically funded a lot of really destructive and ill-conceived projects which ruined economies, which ruined environments and caused a lot of disequilibrium in the world, in the world economy, and in domestic economies as well. And so there was a need, many, many decades later, there was a need which was finally recognized that unbridled development, unbridled capitalism, unbridled innovation, even without a sort of social and environmental conscience, is not getting us anywhere. And so the vast inequalities in the world today have actually been funded by development agencies in part who were well-intentioned but did not recognize that they were actually contributing to greater inequity in the globe. So the plight of the developing world has not improved substantially despite millions and millions of dollars poured into Sub-Saharan Africa or East Asia or the Caribbean for that matter. And so you look at, you know, 50 years later, you look at the economic and social impact of major projects, including heavy infrastructural wars like dams, for example, which have been disaster in many, many cases to the, you know, the hinterland and the downstream and so forth. So what these international organizations have done is to come together and finally recognize that you can't measure everything in dollars and cents. You can't measure everything in even increased employment. You've got to measure things really in qualitative terms. And this is where the SDGs come out of that sort of new development thinking that you've got to have a holistic approach. And you've got to have, therefore, holistic markers or indices or objectives which say that it is not enough to give a man a job. You must give a man a job that is going to be there when he needs it or woman for that matter that you can't have child labor producing Gucci shoes because it's cheap and it sells well and it makes millions of dollars, but for whom? And it's the same thing that we have to think about in our economy. When we spend a dollar, what is the long-term impact of that? Is that contributing to a better society? Is that contributing to a better environment, a more sustainable way of life? And the big question is for whom? So if the money spent previously, the resources dispensed with all of this very expensive institutional infrastructure is not producing a better quality of life for the little lady down on the beach in Ansleray, then what's the point? And this is where we have come to about 75 years later after pouring a lot of money into developing countries and not seeing the kind of significant increase that we should be seeing in quality of life and quality of existence, not just the usual markers of income and employment is your access to health care better? Are you living a safer life? Is the child less likely to be battered because of all those traumas and what it produces? So that's a noble thing, but making it real for the vast majority of the population is where we have not yet begun to invest. This is still being discussed and debated at the level of ministries. You know, look at us in our fine clothes, in our air-conditioned comfort, with our government jobs. We come here. We're not at risk. We're not at risk, but the people who are at risk, what is development doing for them? How is their life being changed? And for that to happen, you really need cohesive approaches, inclusion. You need community-based solutions. You need consultation. And I'm not so sure that we are seriously ready to do this. So my fear is that we're going to have another elevated debate for maybe 5, 10, 15 years while this is sexy. And then what is the life of the lady down on the beach in Ansari going to have changed substantially? Or that of her children, who will by then be finished secondary school and in the same rat race of looking for a job and being paid low wages and maybe never breaking out of the cycle of poverty. That's where we need to focus our attention. So you were saying that, as you said, let's stop being so top-heavy. Let's look at the lady on the beach. Let's go down to the man-woman who's been affected. Well, let's go where the need is. Where the real need is. So it is no longer of any use to us to keep mentioning visitor arrivals. Or visitor arrivals went up by 25%. So what the hell? Did the income of someone change substantially that they can now have better access to health care? Or they can be less hungry? Or they can be more assured of their living conditions, for example? So you spoke about, for example, the woman in Ansari. Yes. And I just want to come to you, Miss, because we talked about... The lady from the library. Yes. There you go. Because, again, when we talk about adaptation, we look at climate change, especially in a country like ours, which is affecting, as you said, the man on the streets. Yes? What's in your experience, as Mr. Oje said, 75 years we've been talking, have you seen in the last few years, have you seen any improvement changes? What are the trends happening here in San Lucia? Well, for me, I think I have heard an increase in lip service. I think the SDGs are meant to be achieved by 2030. We're in 2024. We have six years to go. Yes. And we are nowhere near achieving the 17 SDGs. We talk about innovation. We talk about sustainability. We talk about creating employment for... And I will not say the lady from Ansari, because I'm from the library. Yes. And so we're talking about ladies. So the lady from the library who is attached to the fishing industry. A lot of times you don't think of ladies or women being involved in the fishing industry. But they are. Right. They are an increasing number of fisher women. We are seeing an increasing number of wives or girlfriends or partners of fishermen who are taking more of an interest in the fishing industry. They clean the fish. They prepare it for a sale. You know, sometimes when the fishermen come, the fish has already been sold, because the women have already said, you know, he's coming back. Right, yes. It's not the days when I was growing up, when the fishermen come in. That's when you know what fish is, you know, on board and how much and you sell it then. Now the fishermen can call. Right, yes. And say... When do I add it? Yeah, we, when do I add it, when we don't. You know, and then they come and they knock on my door. Right. Does mommy need it? Because my mom is, you know... So the villagers know. They know the customers. Does mommy need any fish? I have Dorado coming in. I have tuna. Lobster. Lobster. Well, the lobster season is good. When it's the season. Yeah. But they do, yes. That's an economic difference to the family that day. Right, yes. If you have lobster in lobster season and you have three or four hotels waiting for lobster or prime restaurants waiting for lobster, it makes a difference to the family cash flow to date. It makes a difference. However, my thing is, we are... In as much as I think Sinlisha has been seeing a decline in the population growth. People like me didn't have kids. So you can see that there's a decline in the population growth. You can see the schools are less populated than they were before. You find that there is a greater demand on the resources that we have, but we're not using them, the resources that we have sustainably. And what do I mean by that? Yes. I'm from Hungary and I'm coming from a fishing village. And we are working on a project. My company that is working on a project that will elevate the fishing industry and the experience of the fisher folk. We have a thing now. When I was growing up, I didn't know about it. But now we have this fish called Pinky. When the fishermen come in and say, what do you have? Oh, Pinky Mweni. What is Pinky? Pinky is a juvenile tuna. I wish I had a picture to show because I took a picture a few years ago, a couple of years ago with my niece. She was about five at the time, holding a tuna in her hand. She's five years old. She's holding a tuna. And most of us think of tuna as this big fish, but she was holding it in her hand. It's called a Pinky. It's called a juvenile tuna. And she's holding that. And this is what we're selling. And in an era where we're talking about sustainability, how can we sustain the fishing industry? How can we protect our food source when we're catching juvenile tuna? By choice. By choice. By choice. By choice. By choice. Because we can say, OK, I'm going to throw that tuna back and allow it to grow to be at least 60 pounds, 100 pounds. And we know tuna can grow to be hundreds of pounds. But we catch that because, again, climate change and a number of things. We do not understand the migratory part of the fish. We do not know where they're going, where, why they're going, where they're going. Where to get them. When we think about things like fads, we have a fad. We place it today. And by tomorrow it's gone because maybe there was a system or whatever. We didn't measure the depth of the waters where we're deploying the fad. The fad disappears. The fishermen do not know where to get the fish. So sometimes this is what they catch. This is what they get. And we have a choice. It's always a choice. We can say we're going to look for the fish, the mature fish, or we're going to form the need now and we want to get out of the water. We'll just catch the pinky, bring it in, and the people will buy it. So question to you, and I want you to think about that, because the SDG we are looking at, we talk about industry. And when we talk about industry, we always talk about we want more. So maybe this might be a result of persons making sure, you know, we have more variety, more fish, more, you know. That's not variety out there. That's not variety. So think about that. What can we do now to ensure, as you said, the fishermen know, okay, this is going to affect them in the long term? How do we bring that information out to them? Because I'm sure it's known to some extent. Is this where the creative industries come in? Is it means that the ministry has some work to do in that area? We're going to take a short break, and when we come back, we will discuss this further. Fisher folk in St. Lucia are facing many negative effects of climate change. Life is more difficult because it can go deeper. We can't buy more fuel to make our lives better, but we can go further in gasoline. In the future, life can be more difficult. Part of the problem is that it can affect our lives. It can affect our lives, it can affect our laws, and it can affect our machines. Also, it can affect the fishing situation. It's difficult to fish in St. Lucia. Conduct the best and adapt to climate change. Climate change is happening. Are you prepared? Welcome back to our discussion. We were speaking just before we went to break about how can we ensure that there's sustainability. We're talking about the fishing industry. I know we're looking at SDG-9, and a major part of it is infrastructure. When we talk about longevity, I'm asking, is it that we have not put in the correct infrastructure to ensure, as you said, Britain, not just the fishing industry, but in other industries, that there's a lack of understanding that whatever we do may have an effect. Maybe not now, but 20 years down the road. What do you think may be the reasoning behind what our dear panelist has brought out for us? It may not mean that we don't have the correct infrastructure. We may need to be more creative and be more modern in the infrastructure that we're putting in so that we don't lose the fish, but it could be anything else. We don't lose what our natural environment is giving us. We need to ensure that when we think about extracting from our environment, our natural environment, we think about what's going to happen in the future. This is where the circular economy also comes in. We don't want to continue in a linear approach where we extract, we use, and destroy. We want to ensure that we think from the start what is going to happen after I have taken this item from the environment. How is it going to come back in this full circle so that our future generation uses it up? You talked about being creative, and I have to go to that. We talked about being creative and some of the things that are going on. Is it that it's part of our culture to think of the now and not think of the future? Is it that in terms of how, maybe that's one of the areas too, we might have to make sure there's some level of innovation or new narratives being told? Dr. Oje? I like where you're going with that. For sure what the planet is telling us is we can't keep doing things the same way. The whole planet. I flew in from St. Vincent this morning. There is seaweed from the north coast of St. Vincent all the way down to the south coast of St. Lucerne. And you can see it coming. It's almost like a coastline you can see it coming. That's global warming. That's not us, but we're going to have to live with the consequences. So in the same way I said earlier that we've spent all of these millions of dollars on development and we've not improved, and in some cases we have worsened the livelihoods of the people who are supposed to be the target of the development. So the first thing we have to do I think is up here. We've got to, and it brings us to the question of innovation. Innovation is changed by the introduction of new ideas. So new ideas come from their mind. So unless we are prepared to change our thinking, which is a question of really a value system, and I want to come back to your question of our culture. It's a value system and what the SDGs are trying to do is to implant a new value system on the development conversation, on the modalities of development funding particularly, on the way governments decide their national budgets and their long-term public sector investment programs. So do not just think of building a 100-foot bridge. Think about the lives on both sides of those bridges and in the water and downstream and upstream and how you're really affecting the entire macrocosm into which you are putting this expenditure. On the question of our culture, I don't think that it is a cultural problem of not wishing to change because as poor black people we have had to innovate all our lives to survive even. I mean how does the lady on the beach get her five children through school or through a day or through a term or through a year? She has to innovate. She has to understand and figure out how she's going to stretch that dollar and sometimes it goes stretch. So I don't think that there is a resistance to innovation as in finding new ways to do things. I think we are extremely innovative. In fact, I find we are subversive in our ability to get around and underneath and behind and through a lot of government red tape for example. We can make a wrap. We know how to make a wrap. We know how to get into the Fed. We know how to scam the ticket. We know how to get around the COVID regulations. We're good at that. The question is are we changing our national thinking about what development is supposed to achieve? We're constantly running behind a big, fancy, sexy infrastructural project because it has money in it for us and our friends. Let's call a spade a spade. Going down now into the village and asking ma...whoever. Pasha. Ma-Pasha. That's just a lady that didn't even just get into my mic. Ma'am, what's your problem? How do we help you? What are the things that are preventing you from going forward, from growing, from feeding your children, from sustaining your job, from not being molested, from sleeping at night? We don't want to have those conversations at a level that is going to create meaningful change, and that's the beginning of our problem. Everything is top focused, and everything changes every five years. The focus changes every five years according to what turns whoever on. It does not have to do with a long-term view of where we should be going as a society. I'm talking about that tomorrow night at UE. On the moon, what are our own values as a society, as a nation, as a developing country? What are our values? And we have become this valueless society, and you can disagree with me if you want. We've become a valueless society because of the constant flip-flopping of policy, of personalities, of programs, of projects, so that the solution people, I think, are now adrift, and more adrift than they were, say, 20 years ago, when we thought we were a rural economy transitioning to urban. We were an agricultural economy transitioning to services. We were a three-part, tripartite economy based on services, tourism, agriculture. There was a certain predictability about life and decision-making, and you could kind of imagine, okay, these are the components of a strategic plan or whatever. We have very little of that now. We have a lot of talking heads who put out divergent things and the cohesion that the society should be perceiving. Ah, okay, that's connected to that by this strategy, by this direction, by this part. I don't think we're perceiving that as a nation anymore. So our ability to wrap our heads around a particular strategy or objective or program or project, I think is largely diminished. But I don't think we lack the willingness or the capacity. We just lack the culture of thinking critically about our circumstances and bringing those fresh ideas to play. Well, I see you're waiting to respawn and I'm going to come across to you. I want to build upon what Adrian has just been saying and go back to my opening salvo when I said that I think we pay a lot of lip service to issues. For instance, we talk a lot about food security. I was very surprised when I met with some farmers who told me that providing water to farms is not a priority. No, it's not. It's not a priority. In fact, Glasgow does not produce any water of any farm agricultural slash environmental nature. It is not demanded, am I correct? You are correct. To provide agricultural type irrigation, type water to anybody. Now, we are living in a society in an era where climate change is a household term. Our waters are becoming increasingly brackish. It means therefore that farmers no longer have the luxury of tapping into river water to irrigate their farms because the water is becoming brackish. What do I mean by brackish water? The salt level, the salinity of the river water is higher. So you find there is a higher deposit of salt in our river water which is supposed to be fresh water. So can you imagine, as a farmer, let's say tomatoes, you're cultivating tomatoes and you're using that brackish water to irrigate your plot, your farm. We're going to have no tomatoes. We're going to have none of those sensitive vegetables which depend on fresh water for irrigation. Yet it has not become a policy for us to ensure that our farmers have proper irrigation, that they have proper water for irrigation. However, we do have within our country a product that can assist with that. We are surrounded by water. Yes, it's salted water. It is the ocean. But we can desalinate water. Now the environmentalists are going to say, oh, but the brine, it's going to be more detrimental to the ecosystem. But we have an award-winning product in St. Lucia that can deal with the management of the brine, right? That it does not affect the ecosystem on land or the marine ecosystem. And here goes the lip service. That product, the LifeCube, which is a flagship product of my company, was awarded the Prime Minister's Award for Innovation. But none of the administrations, neither SLP, UWP, PLP, any of the P's have seen fit to use that technology that innovation within the agriculture sector to ensure that food security is on our priority list. So you see where the lip service, we have the innovation, but we're not making use of it. We acknowledge the innovation, but let's just go somewhere else so we can get money and do whatever it is that we want to do with it. Just to make the point, so the drawing of water from rivers for agricultural purposes is seen as a competitive activity to the processing of water for domestic and commercial and industrial use. So we need to bear that. In fact, if you look at the tariff, and correct me if I'm wrong, if you look at the tariff, there is domestic, there's commercial, there's industrial, consumers of water. I do not believe that there's an agricultural category. So that is reflected in our very thinking that agriculture does not need water. Agriculture will draw water from the natural environment, but still behind or underneath that thinking is the concept that this is a competitive activity which actually deprives the utility of sufficient levels of water to fulfill its primary mandate, which is getting water to domestic commercial and industrial use. So it's a mixed match of objectives. But jump in if you must. It's a competitive environment. So we're talking about creativity. I have had farmers come to me and ask me, my husband myself, because I'm a natural company, how can we build a dam so that they can harvest water? And that question usually comes around during drought. How can we create a dam? And then we're going to have a small one of your... You have prepared one of your system for us where we can extract the salt from the water because the water is brackish, but we're going to create a dam. So we use that to irrigate our farms. And it's a conundrum because we are saying, plant more of what we eat and eat what we plant. How can we, when we are not being given the resources that will allow us farmers that is to do... And we have to say, no, that's illegal. You can't create, you can't just block the water. We are hearing that there's innovation happening, there's creativity happening, but somewhere there's a disconnect. So there's a choke hold. There's a creativity available. Available, yes. So Ms. Volney. But it's frustrated. I know you're on the other side. Yes, yes. So your comments on this? Just to add, the SDGs, especially SDG9, is very people-centered, and all its linked SDGs are people-centered. So without including people, as my colleagues have said, there is no way we would be able to achieve sustainable development. We have to use what we have available to us, our innovative persons, the technology we have available to us, so that we can try to push the country forward. But also we need to ensure we add those cultural ideas, all these cultural creativity into our strategies, our plans, because it will get lost. If we don't start mainstreaming it into our planning process, it will get lost along the way. So what are you saying currently that does not exist in our current strategies? It does exist. We have in our medium-term development strategy, it has been included in a lot of our development planning. We do need to implement these ideas and include our people, include our creative persons, our cultural persons. I'm watching you though, right? On paper. On paper. I'm saying we now need to implement. No, no, because even the business of putting it, excuse me, even the business of putting it on paper should be a collaborative effort. Definitely, but it is collaborative. You cannot include me in private and then send to inform me, oh by the way, I want you to participate in that. I may not want to participate. I may not even think that what you are doing is valid or is relevant, because you haven't asked me about my life. You haven't come along in the village and asked me about my life. You sit down in your ministry and you decide let's have the creative industries included in this and you write a paper, just now, and you write a paper and you put words in a document which stays on a shelf and largely collects dust. And then we come here, we put all the processes on consulting. They are not. They include all our persons. Ladies and gentlemen have to. Ladies and gentlemen, yes. As you were saying. Yes. So from what you were saying, Dr. Oje, you were saying that we are not included. Again, going back to what you said about being top heavy. I'm assuming that's your point. I think that was your word. Okay. From the top coming down. I'm going to ascribe to it. You'll ascribe to it. Okay, yes. It's not even top bottom. It's not even top bottom. I have a phrase I published not so long ago. It says, you cannot consult in public and decide in private. Okay. And then you will say, oh, but we spoke to the community. Yes. But when you are finished consulting in public. Yes. You can go into caucus and put some. You must come back to the public for its endorsement, for its buy-in. If you want real participation, you cannot hand down a decision to an entire community. You can say, come, let us talk. You go back to the ministry. You draft something and you bring it back to the community and say, is this what we agreed? Did we get it right? Are you in agreement? Do you buy in? Will you participate? The presumption that you can prescribe for people and then they will participate willingly means that you think you got it right and you probably didn't get it right. But there is a process. You have to continue now. After you have developed it. No, you have to continue. We are there waiting. So let's just say you have to develop. You have to come. There are a lot of people to start. They should. Okay, ladies and gentlemen, let's just give Ms. Walney an opportunity. Why? To just answer as you said. Let's just make sure that you say Dr. Ojé is ready. What exists? During the development process, all our strategies and planning development, we do consult. And then once we've done the consulting, we do come, you know, and during the implementation process, we have to come down to the people. We have to. It is always important. I think we should. It must be done. But is it being done? It is being done. So there may be incidences that if you miss- I wish this was a calling program. Is it being done? It is being done. Okay. So my thing is this, right? My husband says to me, you're going to these things again? Yeah. I have told you, I'm not going to these things. But your inclusion in this almost says we are coming to you. But I'm a very stubborn person. And so I will go. But he won't go because he's like, I'm tired. Because here is what we think we see as the consultation process. And I hate to be there against us, but this is what we see as the consultation process. Invictus would like you to be part of this. We're having this forum come. We want to hear your views. No, we want window dressing. So we come to hear the views. And they ask us our opinions. We give their opinions. Can you hear it? The crickets? We hear nothing afterwards. And the question is, how do you know that you've got it correct if you do not continue the dialogue, if you do not come back to us and say, this is what we heard you say. And this is what we take away from it. Did we get it right? Okay. So let's put a pin in it right there. Did we get it right? And how can we get it right to make sure that we have, as we said, the right creativity, the right innovative strategies. So we're going to break right now. And when we come back, we'll continue. So hold those thoughts. Yes. I want to go first. Get ready to be enchanted at the St. Lucia Jaws and Arts Festival from April 30th to May 12th, 2024. Dance to the beats of TJ. Self-injured sensations of Samara Joy. Guess who I saw today? And John Patatucci. And let the soulful gospel of Donnie McLeodding uplift your spirit. Feel the energy with Marcia Montana. And sway to Barris Hammond's timeless tunes. And jump to Davido's hits. Don't miss air supplies, classics, and babyfaces' brilliance. Explore the full lineup and secure your tickets at stluxajawsandartsfestival.com today. And welcome back to Nation Beat and in celebration of this year's Innovation and Creativity Week. We're having quite a lovely discussion, lively discussion, lovely and lively discussion. Looking at how do we ensure there is creativity in the implementation of our SDG9 goal here in St. Lucia. And when we ended up, Miss Noel, you asked a very important question. So let's take it from there. Let's get back to it. And I'm going to, once you're done, let's hear what Miss Bonny has to say about that. Yes. So the question is, did we get it right? And I'm speaking from the policymakers' point of view. Did they get it right? When they come to us and they ask us for our opinions, and like Adrian Wright rightly said, it's almost as if it's a window dressing. It's doing something with an international body and there are certain markers that we have to meet. And so one of the things, we must do a vulnerability risk assessment. So we're going to have this forum and we're going to include and we're going to invite persons. Mind you, a lot of the times it's not open to just the general public for persons to just come in at will and speak. When we go to these sit-downs, it's usually people speaking at us and not engaging us. And even when they engage us, the thought is they have a project to write and they're getting us to write the project for them. Because we do not feel that whatever we say is going to be taken into consideration and that is going to be implemented. We have a lobster fishery, right? There are times you can get lobsters, you can catch it at will, and there are times you can't. Why can't we have a tuna fishery? Because we know that we are catching juvenile tuna. We know that, but we're doing nothing about it. And again, when you take something from the people, you have to give something else. You have to give an alternative. The resources are there, the innovations are there, but we're not using it, right? So now when you come and tell the people, oh, don't catch the pinkie. Let them grow into 600 pounds, you know? And the answer is, and I'm going to send my child to school. And in today's world, we have to ask, how am I going to send my grandchildren to school? Because the young people are killing themselves or faster than they can see their children grow. So it's left to the grandparents to do that. At that age, how do I provide for my grandchildren? How does the future generation create leave? How do they sustain themselves, you know? But by you not coming back to us and asking, did we get it right? How can we implement it? Then it's spinning top in mud. It's exercise and futility. So I'm hearing you saying that you do not believe they're coming back to you for the feedback. But I'm hearing you say that you are coming to them for the feedback. Well, definitely I can say for the Department of Sustainable Development, checkups are done. We have our projects and we go into the communities, as you said, to develop those projects. And there are checkups done to see how are things going. The project may end and you may not get the same project coordinator going in. So then somebody else will now have to go in and check up. And maybe in the next five years, you come in and the work is not being continued. Maybe we need to move away from projects and go into facilities because a project has a beginning and it has an end. But we're talking about sustainability. We're talking about sustainable development. How can we talk about sustainable development? The monastery is important. Let's get your perspective in here. What do you think? I like to go to fundamentals. I like to understand why things are the way they are. And this is again a difficult question which we as a nation do not like to address. Somewhere in the 90s, we abandoned our fiscal sense. Which is to say that we stopped emphasizing the national savings component, public sector savings component of the national budget. That means that we do not go looking for funding with five cents in our pocket. We usually go with nothing in our pocket. That does not give us any leverage at the development table when we are having conversations with World Bank or UNESCO or whoever is funding our latest fantasy. So what happens is that the values that have become sexy in the international development forum, conversation, et cetera, are imposed upon us. And it is what the international agencies have decided is sexy for the next ten years. We have become the little pawns. That's not the word I want to use, but we're in polite company. We become the pawns who are required. And you just talk about evaluation and monitoring and so forth. They are boxed to be ticked. You want another million dollars? You will do these things. So yes, go and have a public consultation. Make sure women are included. Make sure you tick off vulnerable youth. Make sure you tick off some modicum of sustainability, something or the other. And our public sector people bless their hearts, tick off the boxes and think they've done a great job. That's not enough because the thing is outside driven. And we are not consulting and we come back to creativity. You think the lady on the beach in Ansari or in Laby does not know how to solve her problem? She does. But there is no space in the conversation for the solution that she wants for herself. This is the problem because the money is coming from outside and the whole development apparatus of the country is geared to complying with what the development association has decided, what the development community thinks is appropriate at this point in time. So I remember a day as a junior economist in the Ministry of Planning when we used to tell USAID this is our priority based on our public sector investment program. And you will either fund it as we want it or you will not. We will go somewhere else. And we'll go with our five cents and we'll make the best of it. At that point we were driving our development. We were deciding our priorities. And we were saying, no, no, no, no. This is important because it fits with that. It fits with that. It fits with that. Because we had our own sustainable development goals which had to do with moving our people and our country and our economy forward. So we had defined sustainability for ourselves. The problem is that we've lost that autonomy. And we can debate this because I could be wrong. I could be wrong. Let's put that on the table. But this is how I have observed it over the last several decades. We have lost our autonomy in terms of deciding what is good for us. And so therefore the lady on the beach has been excluded from the conversation of what is necessary, what is vital, what is a priority. Because we are answerable to development institutions. We are answerable to whoever is providing the money. And their concern is not us. Their concern is making themselves look good. Their concern is abiding by whatever the sexy parameters are this decade. And we keep adopting, and this is the problem I have with the SDGs. We keep adopting things from on high, from our betters, from our people outside of our economy. And we sign off to them. We sign off on them before we even consult and say, OK, is this goal good for us? Is this... This is our own sustainable development goal. No, but SDGs don't have to make it country-driven. It's international. It's very global and large. No, it has to come down national. Of course I get that. I didn't go to school on Sunday. I get that. But the point is that that is a national conversation which is not a process of arbitrary decision-making. It is actually consulting on a bottom-up approach because the most vulnerable are at the bottom of the economy and they don't have a voice and they're not at the table. And the process of consultation is to call to the table the people you like. Do not call the extremists to the table because they will just rock the boat which hopefully we're doing today. So we call the opinions that we like. The people at the bottom, the people that we claim that we are looking out for ask any one of them what is an SDG, much less what is SDG 9 and see the response. But these SDGs are supposed to be helping them. It's not in the lexicon. They don't know it. They don't understand what it means. It's something you would hospital for actually or the doctor. You know what people are asking us? It has to be, it has to be down to the people who these SDGs are supposed to be helping. There is a disconnect. If they don't understand it and there is no buy-in there's no skin in the game. How can you sit on high and think that you have the answers for them? So we seem to have come to a place where we all agree. There's a disconnect, as you said, between what's on the ground and this understanding of SDGs. So how can we fix that? What can we do to ensure, okay, we want to make sure that we achieve this goal but as you said it's people driven. Yes. Okay so first of all the process of consultation has to be a genuine one. It cannot be a matter of window dressing and it cannot be a matter of let's take the opinions that we want. If government understands its role it is at least part arbitrator. Which is to say that Mary, John, Peter and Sue are going to have conflicting priorities. The role of government in such a consultation is to listen to everybody and try and arbitrate and do a little of each and take them on board. Either you find a superior solution that actually delivers more than John, Peter, Mary and Sue wanted or you're going to find something a little below that. And this is why you've got to go back to the community and say did we get it right? That's right. Because it is not an option to satisfy three of the needs and then leave one person out. That is 25% of your target, of your segment. So you have 25% of your target community who are not satisfied by the solution. Do you think they're going to evaporate and melt away and keep quiet? No, they're going to be plunged deeper into despair by the inadequate solution that you think is wonderful but only addresses 75% of the need. And in this little island of ours, 25% is a lot of people and it's a lot of people with limited access to the solution. So we need to come back to creativity. What do you think about this strategy? She agrees, she agrees. We do have to go down to the community. It's very important for us to go down to the community and understand what their lives are like. Why do you say go down, by the way? Go down as in I'm not saying no, no. It's just a word that I'm using. But be careful. Because without getting our communities involved, we cannot go anyway. And as you said, 25% can be a very large amount. That 25% can cause a good bit of environmental degradation for us and we do not want persons to go into more extreme poverty or go into poverty, as you also mentioned. We don't want to increase the divide between the rich and the poor in St. Lucia. We want to try and get... We get that you're not an evil person. You know, we get it. You're just doing evil things because you're asked to. That's okay. We do have to ensure that there is monitoring for the sustainability of any projects. Defined by whom? Sustainability defined by whom? That is the question. By our country, our people, we have to make sure that the sustainability is our people. We cannot take the definition from out there because we may want to be like a metropolitan country but St. Lucia is different. We have to adjust it for us. It has to be for St. Lucia. Can I get an Alleluia? Yes, Miss Noel. I've been waiting for the other shoe to drop and I've been waiting for her to say that we have these consultations and they are poorly attended. I've been waiting for her to say that because they are poorly attended when they do have the window dressing consultation because you know why? People are tired. I come to these things and I'm not being heard. You are herring me with a view to answering but not understanding. You are herring me just because you want the sound bite but not because you are going to do anything about it so people stay away. But how many times has any of the ministries said I'm going to look at the local community leaders and I'm going to charge you with mobilizing your community to come and hear their voices be heard in a town hall setting. Not us speaking to them or at them but to hear them to document what they are saying and in a couple of months come back and say to them this is what we heard and then to have that dialogue for them to say no, no, no, no, that's not what we said. This is what we said and to have this continuous back and forth until we get it right and when we get it right to put into place structures, policies that are going to lead to an end, not a project but play the long game, an outcome, that's the word an outcome. A sustainable outcome. A sustainable outcome. How are we going to do that? Projects, they don't cut it. They're 10 weeks, a year even and then what? What is the outcome? Another project. Another project. Another project. What have we achieved and this is what for me I would like to see. I would like to see outcomes and I would like to see us upscale those outcomes. Okay, so we got in at the bottom level. Now we're going to the second level. Duplicate. Replicate. Replicate. Yes. So we're closing off now so you've said what you would like to see. Dr. Oje, what would you like to see as we close off? I would like to see this country really collectively decide what are our priorities? What are our problems? What are our priority issues? What are the priority solutions we're going to bring to them? That requires our minds and our critical thinking. That requires us to be first dissatisfied with our with our existences. Innovation does not come because everybody's happy. Innovation comes because people look at these circumstances and say this could be better. It could be cleaner. It could be faster. It could be more efficient. It could cost less. It could yield more. It could employ better. It could give us more joy. It could give us more happiness. It could give us more satisfaction or what we call in economics, more utility. It is time for us to stop going to people and say we got $3 million for fishing boats. Who wants a fishing boat? Mohana Bato is somewhere we can say a machine. Oh no, there's no money for that. There's no money for that. Or I have a machine but it's missing a part. No, there's no money for parts. There's money for boats. Who decided that that was the priority? Where are we going? Where are the parts? Where are we going? I want funding to do something that is driven by my daily existence. Chances are there's a mixed match between what's available for funding. We should be deciding what our national priorities are in a process of national consultation. Using what we have. And then we decide okay, you know what? And we can't have everything. Let's be practical. So we've got my preferred strategy there. So the creative application of ideas. And what I like about this is that we've really innovated here. We can see that everybody has put in their perspective. So miss, let's just end with you. Let's close up with you. What do you think about what has been discussed there? Can you see it being applicable? Because I know from the ministry perspective, we keep coming back to that. Yes, it's applicable. I believe that it can be done. We have to change as we have mentioned our strategies of consultation, of development. We have to come together. And I would like to see coming on a panel one day that my creative persons do not try to attack me. We are mainly trying to show you the error of your ways because we love you. But we want to ensure that we have unity and ensure that sustainability actually happens and there is the three dimensions coming together. So what are using the resources that we have? The innovation that you, not you, but you as in government have already acknowledged. We have the resources. We have the innovation. We have the technology. We have the people. So let us use our people. Residents in Saint Lucia to resolve our problems. What I love about this, ladies and gentlemen, in the time that we have had, we have shown what is involved when you are being innovative. We've been creative. You have to leave space for everybody's perspective. There will be the argument, everything comes from a place of passion, full of passion here. And at the end of it, we have some wonderful ideas and great strategies coming out of this. So at this point in time, I want to thank each and every one of you for being here and giving your advice, giving your perspective. And I'm very sure going forward, we're going to see something coming out of this. So again, on behalf of the Department of Sustainability as well as the Department of Innovation and of course all our guests here, we just want to say thank you for joining us on Nation Beat. Thank you. The discussion, an objective and impartial view of the issues of interest to you. Nation Beat is on now.