Commentary

Gordon Robinson, Contributor

For the umpteenth time during the domino session, The Dunce faced a block-the-game option. He'd blocked every time so the result of his pseudo 'reading' was no mystery. Sure enough, he quickly made the blocking play while chanting his favourite philosophical ditty "if a macca, mek it jook yu ...".

Dessie was distraught. "Whey yu block fa?"

The Dunce explained, "Pardi, me no know wha' dem 'ave. If me block, dem haffe show me."

"But Dunce," Dessie shouted, "Is count YOU haffe count. You block de game!"

"Oops!" came the Dunce's sheepish rejoinder, "Well, if a macca, mek it jook yu ... ." exposing several high counting dominoes.

The Jamaica Labour Party's (JLP) perennial blocking of proposed political party funding reforms exposes a scheme which any NFL offensive line coach would be proud to have authored. Furthering an obvious agenda to avoid publicly showing its cards, it recently went so far as to oppose state funding of political parties under the pretext of concern for Jamaica's parlous financial condition. Such a pious political ploy is easy for the JLP as it's now the main beneficiary of the current informal state funding of political parties - the Constituency Development Fund (CDF). Both political parties embrace the CDF's conspicuous lack of ethical quid pro quo for its enhancement of the pork barrel from which political favours are pulled. The PNP has appeared to capture this issue's moral high ground by voluntarily publishing audited accounts but it's just another political trick. Audited accounts are limited in scope to ensuring that proper accounting practices have been maintained. Auditors rely heavily on information received from the audited and don't explore the propriety of funding sources nor the misuse of funds unless special forensic methods are employed.

The PNP's ploy doesn't go nearly far enough. The PNP's gamesmanship on this, over the years, only serves to bait the JLP whose persistent hostility to full disclosure keeps it biting at the hidden hook. Once the JLP blocks transparency, the PNP can blame the JLP while itself remaining opaque.

Espeut's camp

This is where the Electoral Advisory Commission (EAC), who Jamaica expects to protect the integrity of elections, comes in. In the recent war of words between Peter Espeut and Errol Miller, I'm firmly in Espeut's camp. Can you imagine a Greg Christie, in Miller's job, pandering to insidious political games being played by partisans? Not that I'm holding up Christie as any paragon as his palpable thirst for publicity and widespread exuberance are themselves troubling signs of mediocrity and indiscretion properly anathema to his office. .

However, I'm certain, as EAC chairman, he'd be telling BOTH political parties the correct time of day and exposing their spurious arguments against transparency islandwide. Jamaicans are depending on Errol Miller to be proactive and not to take on the role of a sort of mollycoddling mediator concerned only with the amelioration of opposing political views.

In the wake of one party leader alleging that "tainted" money influenced internal party elections and a foreign government of Jamaica contractor's $30 million plus payment to another party's officer, the mercurial Abe Dabdoub, then an 'independent' MP, tabled a private member's bill in Parliament. The bill sought to legislate the registration of political parties and their officers; the auditing and publication of parties' accounts; full disclosure of party donations; restrictions on donations from anonymous or tainted sources; forfeiture of impermissible donations; restrictions on campaign expenditure; and state assistance in referendum campaigns for "independent" views.

This excellent, comprehensive draft legislation caused a furore among JLP MPs when it was debated. The then leader of the opposition forcefully opposed the bill because, in his view, "the matter ought to be put within the scope ... of the EAC". Based on the PNP's public utterances, you'd have expected them to grab the chance to pass this outstanding legislative initiative. Instead, self-interest trumped rhetoric and GOJ point man Paul Robertson, accepting the Opposition's sinister proposal for an egregious dereliction of legislative duty, meekly capitulated. "I agree with the leader of the opposition. We certainly wouldn't move to finalise legislation in this matter without the input of the EAC ..." thus passing the buck to the politically charged EAC.

Now that the EAC has (surprise, surprise!) ignored the proposed bill's high ideals and instead produced a political compromise as 'input', the hot potato is back in Parliament. Will legislators hide behind the EAC's shameful abandonment of principle? Or will they pass Dabdoub's bill leaving its consequences to the wondrous works of The Dunce's mantra?

If a macca, mek it jook yu!

Peace and love.

Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com.