Letters

THE EDITOR, Sir:

IT IS THE position of the Take Back Jamaica Movement (TBJM) that the Office of the Contractor General (OCG), creation by statute in 1983, has been at the vanguard of the defense of the public purse whilst scrutinizing and spotlighting the actions of public bodies and officers in the discharge of their respective duties. The OCG has been at the heart of several investigations and even scandals as some of them have become known including:

1. 4M Light Bulb

2. Air Jamaica

3. Bureau of Standards

4. Caymanas Track Limited

5. Fat Cat Scandals

6. GEASO

7. Gotel

8. Jamaica Urban Transit Company

9. KSAC

10. National Solid Waste Management Agency (NSWA)

11. Olympic Athletes Homecoming Celebrations

12. PETCOM

13. Portmore Municipality

14. Sandals Whitehouse

15. Social Development Commission

16. Sports Development Foundation

17. University Hospital of the West Indies

The OCG in the listed activities above has demonstrated a track record of performance. More than that, it has delivered great value in providing transparency and preserving the public's purse.

Finding breaches

Within the present statutory framework, the OCG is based on the provisions of Section 21 of the Contractor General Act and obliges it to refer matter relating to breach of duty, misconduct or criminal offences to "the person or persons competent to take such disciplinary or other proceedings as may be appropriate against that officer ... and in all such cases, shall lay a special report before Parliament". This section in effect precludes the contractor general from carrying an investigation to its logical conclusion within the auspices of its office.

Given the competencies which have been developed over time and through repeated investigations, it is submitted that the OCG in many instances is probably the most competent person to take the requisite disciplinary or other proceedings as may be appropriate to its logical conclusion. The TBJM, therefore, officially advocates that the OCG Act, and in particular Section 21 be amended to give disciplinary/prosecutorial powers to the contractor general.

Baseless claims

Recent utterances have been made by Minister of Information Daryl Vaz about public announcements by the contractor general in respect of various investigations. These announcements have been charact-erised as "overzealousness" and likely to dissuade good men and women from pursuing a career in the public service. No evidence whatsoever has been posited to support this position. A re-examination of the list of investigations above, does not reveal or bring to mind any public servants who were wronged in a country where a common complaint is the rampant underperformance which prevails in many public institutions. It is extraordinary that our elected representatives will seek to chide a public servant in performing his job with too much zeal.

TBJM's position is that this view is misconceived and indefensible. If civil servants, public employees and institutions approach their work with similar zeal, the malaise of low productivity will be cured.

Section 24 of the Contractor General Act imposes on the contractor general and his staff the duty to regard all documents and information disclosed to them as confidential. Section 24 (1) (b), however, gives the contractor general the power to make disclosures where he thinks it is necessary in the discharge of his function, or for the purpose of executing certain provisions under the Act. If the contractor general has breached this stricture imposed by Section 24, then there is a clearly articulated procedure for disciplinary action for misbehaviour enshrined under the same Act. To date, no such action or complaint has ever been made against the OCG.

I am, etc.,

Members of Take Back Jamaica Movement

St Andrew