Editorial | Holness, Patterson, Mitchell and addressing crime

With Jamaicans sceptical of the reported 10 per cent decline in major crimes last year, Prime Minister Andrew Holness has repeated his promise of a radically new approach to the crisis in 2024.

Apart from the regular policing, he hopes to “engineer a social and cultural transformation of the … society away from crime and violence”.

“We are seeking to bring about a cultural revolution in Jamaica,” Mr Holness told The Observer newspaper. “I am confident we can make Jamaica a kinder, gentler, fairer, prosperous, and peaceful society.”

This newspaper, in concert with the vast majority of Jamaicans, hopes so, too. In this regard, we have two suggestions for the prime minister, neither of which is new.

The first is about putting the police and other institutions of the State in positions to prevent and/or respond to crimes, and the oversight mechanism for ensuring that those things are done.

Put plainly, our call is for the administration to fast-track the implementation of its commitments in a consensus agreement with the political Opposition and civic society groups over three years ago, half of which are overdue.

Second, although the policing and security-related policy initiatives are separate from the new social transformation agenda Mr Holness is about to launch, he should use it as the platform to publicly reset his government’s relationship with the Lloyd Distant-chaired Crime Oversight Monitoring Committee (CMOC), which tracks performance under the consensus agreement.

SIGNIFICANT MOVE

Mr Holness has already made a significant move on that front with his appointment of Dana Morris-Dixon, a minister without portfolio in his office, as the Government’s primary liaison with the CMOC, replacing the national security minister, Horace Chang, whose relationship with the committee was often fraught. Dr Morris-Dixon, by temperament, plus her experience in change management, is likely to be a better fit in the role than Dr Chang – a professional politician and general secretary of the governing party – whose political antennas are always active.

In a November report on what has been achieved since the consensus agreement was signed in August 2020, CMOC said: “Of the thirty-eight agreements in the initial consensus, nineteen agreements (50 per cent) are either complete or at an advanced state of progress; fifteen agreements (39 per cent) have been satisfactorily achieved; and four agreements (11 per cent) have had their timelines reset. Of the remaining (19) agreements, four agreements (11 per cent) are flagged green, meaning that they are on track to being met, ten agreements (26 per cent) are flagged red, meaning timelines have been missed without new target dates being agreed, and five agreements (13 per cent) are flagged amber, meaning they are tracking behind and likely to miss the agreed timelines.”

If the initial timetables were kept, most things would have been completed more than a year ago. Some of the delays, especially with respect to things that require money, are because of the Government’s fiscal constraints. Others, however, are for the failure of the administration to bring relevant bills to Parliament. Among these are the promised update to the bribery law to make it more straightforward to tackle corruption; power for judges to issue orders for the confiscation of unexplained wealth; and enhanced security measures that fall short of the declaration of states of emergency (SOEs) for crime-fighting, which, used in that context, the Opposition does not support, although its backing is required for the two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament for SOEs to continue after an initial 14 days.

BREAK THE LOGJAM

Hopefully, Dr Morris-Dixon can help to break the logjam on these and other issues. But more importantly, a public relaunch of the Government’s relationship with CMOC would add credence to Mr Holness’ wish to make his anti-crime transformation project “a comprehensive, all-of-society enterprise”.

In the context of that prime minister’s (PM’s) intended broad-tent approach to the initiative, we again commend to him our December 19 suggestion of how it should be managed. We again say no to the formation of a new ministry.

While Mr Holness has not fully framed his plan, what is in the public sphere has more than hints of the values and attitudes campaign attempted three decades ago by the former prime minister, P.J. Patterson, whose concept was recently reprised by the lawyer and businessman Howard Mitchell. Mr Mitchell’s twist is to have civil society and the private sector at the centre of the scheme, rather than government, to avoid the partisan baggage that doomed Mr Patterson’s initiative before it got off the ground.

Mr Patterson, of the opposite camp to Mr Holness, is now past the daily hurly-burly of competitive politics. He has assumed the mien of elder statesman.

Importantly, he, in non-partisan fashion, and without reference to his own efforts, embraced Mr Mitchell’s call for Jamaica’s social reset. Fundamentally, both men are on the same page with Mr Holness.

Our view, therefore, is that the PM should invite Mr Patterson to be the patron of a crusade for values and civic responsibilities, which would fall under a national commission on values, attitudes and civic behaviour, for which Mr Mitchell, at least for a year and half, would have executive responsibility as deputy chairman, operating with the imprimatur of Mr Holness as chairman.

Mr Mitchell has a track record for getting things done, and Mr Patterson, as patron, would kill, or make difficult, any opposition impulse to undermine the project.