THE EDITOR, Sir:

No individual, corporate or national body can function efficiently or even survive without a clear understanding of who or which part is responsible for what - and who is ultimately in charge and/or accountable to whom. This principle is essential in rationally considering the case of the Government/Cabinet versus the contractor general - especially in relation to the Sandals Whitehouse situation.

There is no doubt that the contractor general is doing an excellent job - seemingly without fear or favour - even if he does come across as, perhaps, protesting too much.

Even as we commend Greg Christie's diligence, however, we must also appreciate the value of a prime minister and Cabinet with the political will and courage to be decisive in fulfilling their responsibility to make decisions and take action in what they believe is in the nation's interest, despite the contractor general's still-unsubstantiated fears and suspicions.

What is required is for the CG to be allowed to do his investigative work - with full cooperation, as has been given - from the Government and other relevant persons, and to report and publicise his findings, not just his unsubstantiated and potentially damaging suspicions.

Meanwhile, the Government must take responsibility and remain focused on getting the job done - as the head must remain focused and stay in charge of the body.

If Sandals Whitehouse, like Air Jamaica, etc., is causing financial haemorrhage to the nation, it is the prime minister and his Cabinet who are and will be properly held responsible for the consequences of unnecessary delay in rectifying the situation in the nation's best interests.

Full speed ahead

Neither the Office of the Contractor General (OCG) nor anyone else should be allowed to stop progress, simply by expressing unsubstantiated fears and suspicions, or by issuing virtual stop orders - unless viable alternatives are offered.

Otherwise, let's not just give the OCG prosecutorial powers, but let's go the whole way and put him in charge of Government.

The problem with that, of course, would be: What if it's true that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely? Who, then, would function as contractor general?

I am, etc.,

C. ANTHONY

carltongor@gmail.com