By Lynford Simpson, Parliamentary Reporter
IT WAS revealed in the House of Representatives two weeks ago, that the cash-strapped Government is currently paying out $95 million annually to 58 consultants, so-called special advisers and ambassadors in its employ.
This comes at a time when it is struggling to reduce the Budget deficit, and is claiming an inability to grant teachers a salary increase above six per cent over two years.
Many of the names on the consultants' list have either been part of the Government, having served as Members of Parliament, or are related to current or former members of the governing party.
They include Phyllis Mitchell, Arnold Bertram, Anthony Hylton, Marjorie Taylor, Douglas Manley, Joseph Manley, David Coore, Canute Brown, and Leslie Lloyd.
Talk about creating jobs for the boys...and girls. Rewarding the party faithful, if you like.
Many of the so-called consultants were active on the campaign trail in the run-up to last October's General Election. Is it the work for the party, including being active on the campaign trail that guarantees a consultancy for some, or are they competent in what they are employed to do?
I agree with Maxine Henry-Wilson, general-secretary of the governing People's National Party (PNP), that the country needs consultants. Many will make a difference.
In the current scenario, however, many will not make a mark. They are mere pretenders, "eating a food" at taxpayers expense. I dare say some of those now employed by Government as consultants at significant sums, should be called something else. They will not contribute to the advancement of this country.
Not too many people would argue with the Government for paying $3.3 million per annum to Dr. Ken Rattray, former Solicitor-General and lawyer of great repute. His contribution cannot be questioned. Dr. Rattray is one with a proven track record, and is highly competent in matters relating to the Constitution. That he served for 28 years as Solicitor-General spanning both PNP and JLP administrations, is testimony to his worth.
Also, I have very little problem with Canute Brown being employed as a consultant and his job description does make sense. Anyone who saw Mr. Brown in action during a sitting of any of the parliamentary committees, would agree that he has a lot to offer and will make a difference in the public sphere. He has a sharp, analytical mind and was not your typical politician. Some may argue, however, that it borders on being indecent that, the one-term MP for Hanover Eastern, having not offered himself for re-election last October, wasted little time in taking up such a position with Government.
It would be a waste of time to argue over such appointments as Arnoldo Ventura, the Prime Minister's adviser on Science and Technology. He has a proven track record.
It beats me, however, that anyone in Government could see it fit to offer a consultancy to Arnold Bertram, the former Minister of Local Government who is best remembered for creating the property tax mess. A consultant may yet have to be hired to sort out that mess in order for the Government to be able to collect property taxes due to it.
I don't know but somebody should remind me of the contribution, if any, that former MP Phyllis Mitchell made when she served as a Junior Minister at the Ministry of Education. I'm not aware of any significant contribution, so, I, like many, am baffled as to why she has been made a consultant.
The one that takes the cake, however, is the job description offered for Pat Belifantini, who works out of the Transport and Works Ministry. He's being paid $1.9 million for what any high school graduate could do, namely: "To arrange meetings for the Minister (Robert Pickersgill); arrange for the signing of contracts; write speeches for the Minister; accompany the Minister on tours; make arrangements for journalists wanting to see the Minister (those are never made); media watch; keeping a scrap book; deal with any complaints coming into the Ministry."
Writing that job description must have been like pulling teeth for the person who did so, and must have proved embarrassing for the Government.
The information would never have come to light except for questions tabled in the House of Representatives by Audley Shaw, the Opposition spokesman on Finance. The answers were provided by Dr. Omar Davies, Finance and Planning Minister.
The person who put the document together, however, could have saved the Government some embarrassment by reducing the level of overlap in job description. There was an attempt, as in several instances, no job description was provided.
Does the Government really need so many consultants? If yes, is this an admission that the people who make up the civil service in the first place are largely incompetent?
Listen to Burchell Whiteman, Minister of Information, trying to explain away the position at last Monday's post-Cabinet press briefing at Jamaica House. He reminded the journalists that other administrations, namely the JLP, employed consultants too. Did the JLP employ as many, and at similar cost, and were so many of them ex-JLP MPs or relatives of members of the JLP? Does it make it right for the PNP to do it because the JLP, before it, did the same?
And, the Prime Minister, true to form, has ordered a review of the method of appointing consultants and their performance to date. Based on his track record of setting up committees and review boards for everything under the sun, it is safe to conclude from now, that nothing will come of this review or whatever it is.
With 18 or nearly a third of the consultants based at his office, the Prime Minister should have more than a passing knowledge of the system and how it works. He should be able to tell us about those at the Office of the Prime Minister - whether they have delivered the goods for the money they are being paid. He knows like the rest of us that he is just stalling, wasting time and that is not surprising since he has the Local Government elections to win.
There is absolutely no need for so many consultants. Just look at the numbers. The ratio of consultants to Members of Parliament is almost one to one. And, if divided equally among the 17 ministries, it would be 3.4 to 1. This is the most ingenious way of creating jobs for the boys, and girls. With so many consultants, one is now left to wonder what Permanent Secretaries are left to do.
Mr. Patterson has demonstrated in the past that he can be a political genius, especially when it comes to winning elections against all odds. Unfortunately, he has also demonstrated that he is often too loyal to non-performers.
While we await the review he has ordered to determine whether we are getting value for money from Government consultants, we must ask whether the full list has been published. The parliamentary Opposition does not think so and has promised to get to the bottom of the matter.
FOOTNOTE
The Government's three-day retreat with business leaders, which ended yesterday in Montego Bay, is seemingly designed to accomplish one thing, appeasing the influential private sector ahead of next month's Budget which is bound to offer new challenges for all sectors, including the business community.
Such meetings would achieve a lot more if they were smaller, and if the Government did follow through on the recommendations made. It usually ignores such recommendations. I'm hoping that this time the influential Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica will hold Mr. Patterson and his Government to their word.
Send comments to lsimpson@gleanerjm.com
