Michael Abrahams | The rural school bus programme: observations and concerns

I support the establishment of a rural school bus programme. However, after observing the rollout of the one proposed by our government, I have concerns on multiple levels.

For instance, why are there so many conflicting reports regarding the procurement process? It was said that the Government awarded Elhydro Limited a J$1.4 billion contract to import 110 used school buses, and there is a letter from the Trade Board to Transport Minister Daryl Vaz granting approval to Elhydro “to import” the buses on behalf of the Ministry of Science, Energy, Telecommunications and Transport (MSETT).

The Trade Board said that Elhydro is neither certified as an importer of the buses nor as a dealer of either new or used motor vehicles, and that the buses were shipped without pre-shipment inspection certificates (PSIC), as required by the 2014 Motor Vehicle Import Policy, as a waiver had been granted to Elhydro.

However, the Ministry clarified that it is the importer of the vehicles, not Elhydro. According to a communiqué from the Ministry, “El Hydro received permission from the Trade Board to facilitate the importation of the buses on behalf of the Ministry. For emphasis, the Ministry is the documented licensed importer of the 110 buses.” It further stated: “El Hydro would not be required to be registered with the Trade Board as a used motor vehicle dealer as school buses are specialised units which are not imported for re-sale as would be the case for dealers who trade in the business of used vehicles.”

Based on contractual arrangements, El Hydro had responsibility for sourcing, shipping and clearing the buses on arrival in Jamaica and handing over to the Ministry. The importation licence obtained by the Ministry was the premise upon which the vehicles were allowed into Jamaica.

El Hydro was granted a permit by the Trade Board to import only three buses under a private pilot initiative. This was issued in keeping with the motor vehicle importation policy. With respect to concerns regarding the inspection waiver, the Ministry claimed Jamaica Urban Transit Company (JUTC) engineers visited the United States and subjected the buses to “rigorous inspection,” that the buses were “certified” and “assessed by specialist bus inspection entities” approved by the Department of Transportation, and that on arrival in Jamaica, the Island Traffic Authority (ITA) “certified” and issued “certification of fitness” for them.

TYRE DETACHED

After the first day of route testing, when at least one video circulated showing a tyre detached from its rim on one of the buses, Vaz said the process had revealed “a few tyre issues” and that orders were placed for the shipment of new tyres to replace existing tyres on “all” the buses. However, if the buses underwent inspection by multiple entities, why would the tyres on all of them need to be replaced so soon?

And why was Elhydro chosen? The Trade Board stated that the company, a manufacturer, supplier, and distributor of industrial lubricants and chemicals, is neither certified to import buses nor certified as a motor vehicle dealer. So why was this company chosen for such a gigantic and transformational project?

I came across an invoice addressed to the MSETT for 26 of the buses. Nine of the buses were priced at US$20,000. All the others were priced lower, with the lowest at US$9,979.99. If we price all buses at the upper end at US$20,000 and use a generous exchange rate of J$160 to US$1, the cost for 110 buses would be J$352 million, roughly one-quarter of the J$1.4 billion announced. What sense does it make to spend four times the cost of the buses on purchasing, accessorising, refurbishing and retrofitting them? Was the remaining J$1 billion really spent doing this?

And why the rush? In 2016, then-Education Minister Ruel Reid stated that he was collaborating with Transport Minister Mike Henry to establish a school bus system, aiming to begin operations in January 2017. In 2018, Reid said that $204 million was committed towards the system. So why is Vaz now calling this an “emergency” and rushing to roll out the programme by next month?

GREATER RISK

Recently, on a social media post, Vaz mentioned that the Government “brought in 270 brand new JUTC buses.” These buses are all right-hand drive vehicles. Research has shown that wrong-hand drive vehicles, such as left-hand drive vehicles driving on the left, are at a greater risk of being involved in accidents than vehicles with the steering wheels on the opposite side. The evidence is so compelling that some countries ban them. Many of the school buses are also old, some over fourteen years, and are more likely to develop mechanical and electrical problems than new ones.

So, if research has found that left-hand drive vehicles are more likely to meet in accidents when driving on the left when compared with right-hand drive ones, why was the less safe option chosen for our children? If the Government can buy 270 new right-hand drive buses for public transportation, why did they buy 110 old left-hand drive ones, to be driven in a country with a high road traffic fatality rate (we are near the top 25 per cent globally), in areas where the thoroughfares are often narrow and winding, with uneven surfaces and potholes, often meandering through hilly terrain? And why buy over 100 buses with their doors opening on the right, only to have to retrofit them and create doors on the other side? Does that make sense?

Vaz has issued a stern warning against politicising the buses. However, some Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) members are doing just that. There are videos on social media of JLP supporters travelling in the buses, clad in green and blowing their horns and waving their flags, with some in convoys where songs praising Prime Minister Andrew Holness and the JLP blast through loudspeakers in accompanying cars. And most inappropriate, are videos of children on the buses chanting party slogans such as “we say showa” and “vote for Labour” while making “v” signs with their fingers. One shows children on one of the buses gleefully chanting “No Peter Bunting”, dismissing the People’s National Party (PNP) stalwart, while being joined by JLP candidate Ian Ives, wearing a green shirt and cap, who chants and dances along with them.

The concerns regarding safety and other issues are valid. My article “Why left-hand-drive school buses place our children at risk” was published in The Gleaner on July 29. Over the next seven days, I saw videos of four accidents involving the school buses. However, when we express our concerns, we are gaslighted by being dismissed and called “badmind”.

I wholeheartedly support the principle of a rural school bus programme. But the procurement process, apparent cost disparity, hasty implementation, age and types of vehicles, politicisation and attempts to bully and silence critics make me seriously question the motives of those instituting this initiative.

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator, and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on X , formerly Twitter, @mikeyabrahams