Editorial | Getting small things done

David Abrikian’s latest lament on the subject – as have been recent observations of other columnists and letter writers – has roused an ongoing peeve of this newspaper: Jamaica’s consistent failure at maintenance, even of the small, but important, things.

Or, as reader and letter writer Abrikian put it in the October 15 edition of The Gleaner: “Time and time again, what would be routine maintenance activity becomes a national concern of extreme currency based on prevailing (and usually predictable) circumstances.”

Among Mr Abrikian’s concerns is the absence of consistent upkeep and cleaning of the many paved gullies in Kingston and St Andrew and elsewhere in Jamaica, then the rush to get things done – too often inadequately – as the storm/hurricane season is upon us.

The problem, however, is not only with major gullies. It is apparent, too, among much else – in the debris-filled drains in communities and major thoroughfares, potholed roads, broken sidewalks and pavements, untrimmed verges, and dangerously sprawling trees and shrubs that were planted by the authorities, but seemingly forgotten.

POINTING FINGERS

The usual response of officialdom when faced with these criticisms is, first, to point a finger at citizens, mostly those of poor urban communities, for the improper disposal of garbage and the generally unkempt environment. Indeed, ‘nasty’ has emerged as a seeming term of art at the National Solid Waste Management Authority (NWSMA) for the characterising of citizens in these circumstances.

The next line of defence tends to be a claim about the insufficiency of money for getting things done. Which is not entirely untrue.

This augment, though masks, several important factors. Not least of these is that the failure to plan and execute maintenance on a consistent and timely basis often results in a serious degeneration of infrastructure, which then requires huge sums to rehabilitate. For instance, small potholes on roads are left until they become significant craters, to be addressed only after they contribute to collisions between motor vehicles, sometimes with fatalities. Or it may be a utility company effecting repairs to its infrastructure, then leaves the road or sidewalk in disrepair or mounds of earth on a pavement or in the road.

These things are not expensive to fix. If done on a timely basis, they require little capital, mostly low-wage labour and, critically, good supervision. Leaving hazards on the roadway after a repair job is merely a failure of the latter.

But doing basic maintenance consistently in face of competing demands requires a good sense of what ought to be priority. Governments like big, shiny, showpiece projects, such as highways or high-rise edifices or sprawling recreational facilities. They are presumed to be legacies, and they appeal to voters.

There is, of course, nothing wrong with such projects. They can, and do, bring value to society.

BASIC MAINTENANCE

What is too often missed when there is a competition for resources is the need for basic maintenance, as well as the sometimes unobserved value they bring not only to communities, but to the national welfare.

Indeed, in areas where roads are reasonably well maintained, drains are cleaned, verges trimmed and garbage collected, residents are likely to feel better about their communities and their sense or worth. In such environments, antisocial behaviour tends to be lower, leading to a lower incidence of crime and criminal violence.

Looked at from another perspective, investment in maintenance and doing small things consistently, and doing them right, is also a cheap investment in national security. In a way, the principle is similar to the zones of special operations (ZOSOs) concept being applied in some communities, aimed at rooting out criminals and rebuilding communities. Except that doing the small things early may prevent the need to declare a community a ZOSO area later on. And it is certainly cheaper.

Similarly, the investment in the upkeep of recreational green spaces, with its value to individual and community well-being, is also an indirect investment in national security.

Governments, of course, have the prime responsibility for this kind of national upkeep. It would not be appropriate nor in the national interest for this to be divested to private interests.

However, there are possibilities for creative partnerships with the private sector in specific areas. Reader Abrikian, for instance, mentioned the maintenance of clocks in town squares as something firms could do, or the adoption of parks or community recreational facilities.

The bottom line is that doing the small things and getting them right insists on great energy, consistent effort and the establishment of priorities.

In Jamaica’s case, it also requires that municipal authorities begin to take themselves and their responsibilities seriously, rather than continue to operate as minion appendages to the central administration. And they must be held accountable by citizens for their deliverables.