Beware the tensions

For us, the people of Jamaica in this storm of troubled times, the year 2010 will surely be unforgettable in the album of our collective memory. In my contribution to The Sunday Gleaner on January 3, I sought to suggest that 2010 was a year of "crisis and possibility". We remained in crisis throughout the entire 12 months. The possibilities have been ignored.

That contribution began: "We have now entered the final year of the first decade of the 21st century. It is a time of crisis and a time of possibility. Here in Jamaica, although we have ambitiously set the year 2030 as that moment in time when we should mark unprecedented levels of social and economic development as a country, we are yet to project the vision, long-term or otherwise, as to the route that we should travel. That has to change post-haste; we have only a short 20 years to go.

"At the best of times, a long-term plan is an essential requirement. In times of deep crisis, such as now, patchwork plans and the guessing and blame game only serve to deepen the dilemma. It is surely time to turn away from that course."

Profound tensions

Those suggestions did not appear to strike a responsive chord within the halls of Government. The unsavoury, ill-advised activities of those at the helm have served only to plunge Jamaica even deeper into crisis. And, for the year 2011, we should be extremely wary of the profound tensions that abound throughout the entire society. They are very real, and they must not be allowed to reach suffocating proportions.

Up until now, the people of Jamaica, including the parliamentary Opposition, have been studiedly responsible in their reaction to the brick-wall approach to governance that the present administration has foisted upon the public. To the discerning observer, however, there is a strikingly lurking danger. That danger lurks in the cloudy, secretive manner in which the management of the wide-ranging infrastructure development programme is being approached.

Properly handled, this programme can prove to be an undertaking of profound historical significance, and it must be projected to the public as such. This is not to be regarded as a mere road-patching or road-repairing exercise; it is not a programme that should be approached or used as an election-spending conduit; and it is certainly not a journey that should be permitted to attract bickering, doubt and suspicion. It is a programme that is pregnant with positive possibilities.

This is the first time that Jamaica and China are entering into an economic, developmental arrangement of such considerable proportions. Within our scope, this is a big, big-money venture. Over the years, we have entered into arrangements with countries of Europe and North America. But this is the breaking of new ground with the China economic powerhouse. It ought not, therefore, to escape us that first impressions are lasting. Our management of this infrastructure rehabilitation programme could be the means by which a desirable, healthy future relationship with China will ultimately come to be judged.

Partisan bickering

And already, tensions abound across the land. We read and hear of this tension and unease being expressed concerning the choice and distribution of work under the programme. And the reports are widespread. This must be cauterised. Our Chinese partners cannot be allowed to see us as a bungling, fractious people who are not mature enough to have this signpost programme administered within a developmental framework.

From all reports, the Chinese firm that is anchoring the project comes with solid experience of such partnerships in several countries across the globe. Their expertise is beyond question. With the legendary work ethic and discipline of the people of that nation, however developed, it would certainly be an unusual experience for them to witness their first venture into Jamaica mired in controversy and partisan bickering. It is our duty to ensure that they experience the maturing of Jamaica's approach to that kind of developmental engagement. In that regard, they could become helpful ambassadors.

Over the years and the decades, Jamaica's infrastructure - our roads, our bridges, our river training, environmental protection, the gullies, the drainage, and more - has experienced steady and sure deterioration. It is creaking. A largely unknown and equally creaking programme has apparently been put in place, aimed, according to the Government, at strengthening and rehabilitating that infrastructure. That cannot be allowed to continue. For, such a programme has to be structured on a foundation of many parts.

That structure has to be built on an understanding by our people that we are seeking both to strengthen our means of survival and to enhance Jamaica's productive capacity. It has to be developed on an appreciation that, although the deterioration of our infrastructure is to be laid at the doorstep of acts of God in considerable measure, our own indolence, lack of care and destructive habits, over time, have been significant contributory factors.

The programme has to be erected on an acknowledgment that the repayment of that huge debt - over US$400 million - by ourselves and our descendants, is atonement for our own contribution, and the contribution of those before us, to the devastation; and that we must vow that, never again, should Jamaicans be competing with acts of God for pride of place in that consistent hole-digging activity.

The programme has to be structured on the imperative that its success and legacy must be grounded on the consciousness of a need for consensus-building; that we have not, within memory, been presented with this kind of opportunity to forge a national agreement around an exercise of such vast developmental quality. This is not a minister-of-works programme; it is not a member-of-parliament, or parish-council programme. It is my programme; it is our programme; it is Jamaica's programme. We want in!

So, the danger that lurks, as we approach the year 2011, lies in a partisan, non-inclusive plan to implement the Jamaica Development Infrastructure Programme (JDIP). There are two roads before us; we must pick our choice. The early "it is none of your business" response, by one of the faces of the implementation process, to a question from a journalist and a taxpaying citizen concerning who was funding certain preparatory activities, sent an ominous signal. We have not heard a word of rebuke from the authorities.

The danger is exacerbated by the crushing level of poverty that the Government's Survey of Living Conditions projects. It is to be understood that that condition must be alleviated, not exploited, by the authorities. If it is sought to be exploited by a manipulation of this programme, we must be prepared to deal with the inevitable tension and reaction that will flow from such unjust activities.

Fairness and justice

But, there is another way. We can decide that we are not only borrowing, and must repay a huge debt, but that we are prepared to borrow an ethic. That ethic is anchored on fairness and justice. Some have frowned on the insistence of the leader of the Opposition on consensus-building in certain pointed areas. Well, if none is forged around this programme in 2011, beware the tensions!

Sadly, we are not encouraged that lessons are being learnt as we go along. That early contribution of January 3, this year, centred on a "spirited outburst of the minister of education, Andrew Holness, concerning members of the public service (not) dancing to the tune of the political directorate", and in which he was admonished and encouraged to abandon that path.

He was advised then that, within our model, there is no such thing as "the prime minister's men" in the manner of "the President's men", as exists in the United States (US). In the Westminster system of government, the successful minister is usually one whose permanent secretary has the gumption to say "no minister", simply because he or she is protecting the minister from pitfalls of which the minister would not be aware.

And, he was told that struggling Jamaica, unlike the US, for example, is not blessed with the vast wealth of human resources as to be able to jettison, at will, individuals who are "suspected of not singing from the same hymn sheet as members of the political directorate".

Now, as 2011 approaches, we are being bombarded with the same line by the 'renewal brigade' of the governing political party. Their view is that, "removing known PNP activists and supporters from sensitive positions in government is not political victimisation, but political astuteness". They declare that the pursuit of the Government's goals "cannot be led by PNP functionaries dressed in civil servants' suits and perceived as being impartial". In other words, it is only the JLP supporter and functionary who can be trusted to direct and carry out government policy.

That is the woolly thinking within which the implementation process of the JDIP appears to have been fashioned. This programme is to be recognised as a consensus-building venture, for our long-term gain. Any other route is fraught with potentially uncontrolled danger - a fierce tiger that must remain caged.

A.J. Nicholson is opposition spokesman on justice. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com

"Over the years and the decades, Jamaica's infrastructure - our roads, our bridges, our river training, environmental protection, the gullies, the drainage, and more - has experienced steady and sure deterioration."