Orville Taylor | Do right, rightly

Politics are about perceptions and impressions, and my beloved Elder Taylor and Miss Ivy always reminded me of Romans 14:16, “Let not then your good be evil spoken of.”

Inasmuch as I do not burden myself with the unsupportable notion that the collection of culled writings is the unequivocal and infallible word of God, like Saul, I agree that all of these writings are inspired by ‘Them’ and useful for teaching.

We are not in physical Rome, but last week was a teaching moment.

What looks like a growing impasse is widening into a chasm between the Government and the Integrity Commission (IC), and it might be a pit into which ‘electables’ fall.

Those of us, who live under constant public scrutiny, value our privacy very highly. My children are not for public ogling and certainly my spouse is not public fodder. However, when we make the decisions to earn our income, even partially, from what the public thinks of us, the right to have a discrete life becomes compromised.

When we sign contracts as entertainers, broadcasters, and endorsement deals as professional athletes, it is not just about what we do on the track. Our private lives are relevant … up to a certain limit.

If we are out at a public event as a family or couple, there is an obligation to be polite and appreciative to the people who may feel the need to greet us. After all, Jamaicans are typically not ‘frightened for’ celebrities, and thus, we should feel honoured that they step out of their comfort zones to hail us. True, our families do not sign the contracts and have no obligations if we are private citizens. It, therefore, is up to us to protect our personal borders.

Private popular figures who decide to post images of their spouses and family on their pages, publicise their birthdays and weddings, and every time they have lunch or pass gas, fully deserve the backlash or derisive comments.

TWO DIFFERENT KETTLES

However, public figures and public officials are two different kettles of fish. The latter are bound by very clear rules of engagement and are employees of the Jamaican people. The privilege of being elected by the people comes with the obligation of being fully accountable to it.

As a private celebrity, what offspring, wife, or dog earn from their activities is my business, especially when I am asking them to share the grocery or utilities bills.

It is absolutely not the business of government unless the proceeds are from illicit enrichment such as drugs or scamming.

Senior civil servants and political appointees play a different ball game, must bowl within the creases, and never chuck deliveries.

Methinks I might have used up too much of my brain, but the Integrity Commission Act in Section 40 explicitly speaks to “income, assets, and liabilities of the spouse and children”. Recent utterances of the justice minister, despite his attempts to ameliorate, give the public the impression that he was inciting public officials to break the law. And even when he declared that sometimes spouses are recalcitrant, his statement - “that should be the end of the matter” - does not help.

All family members of our politicians and senior public officers fall within the remit of the IC, and if one’s spouse is trying to destroy one’s career and reputation she should get an ‘F’.

Even with half a brain, the logic is obvious because declaring one’s spousal or family income protects the public officials from speculation when their assets and lifestyle are clearly outside of the range of their public salary. When one is committed to zero tolerance for corruption, not even one’s ‘bench and bench’ bosom buddy can buy a drink.

One’s reputation is everything for people like me, who grew without enough faecal matter to make manure, and borrowed money from the church mouse. Thus, my adult son cannot take me into any place where he believes any ill-gotten gains from his associates may do so. None of my family members can give me gifts, which I reasonably cannot explain where they got the money from.

Trust me, as regards the scope of the IC, it is a clear as mud.

NEW RUDDER

On another boat, a new rudder is steering it, and the row is causing a row in the persona of Mr Rowe. Try as one may, the evidence suggests that Lawrence Rowe had been the ‘caretaker’ candidate in Central Kingston constituency and might have had reason to consider himself the candidate to be.

He might not have been on the Rebel Tour, some 42 years ago. However, at the 11th hour, he was bowled a bouncer, and former senior policeman Steve McGregor is at the crease. The umpire gave Rowe the middle finger.

In much the same way as when Duane Smith, son of Derrick, long-standing member of Parliament for St Andrew, North Western, was usurped to accommodate Nigel Clarke, such impositions are dangerous especially when it is a seat, unlike Smith’s that has swung.

Here, the victim seems to be the truth, and if the PNP cannot unite this constituency, it certainly is unfit to unite the nation.

Still, as with the candidacy of Newton Amos, Homer Davis, and Lucius Thomas and others, the open foray into partisan politics threatens to damage not only the legacy of the individual but more so, that of the constabulary.

At some point, someone is going to ask, how much of the erstwhile police work was done ‘without favour, affection, malice, or ill will?’

Indeed, given the perceptional battle that the High Command has in separating its professionalism from the dictates of Jamaica House, some will even speculate that his failure to rise to the laurel wreath category may have been the result of his politics, or vice versa: that his non-promotion led to the recriminating decision.

Either way, we have to do right things in right ways.

Dr Orville Taylor is senior lecturer at the Department of Sociology at The University of the West Indies, a radio talk-show host, and author of ‘Broken Promises, Hearts and Pockets’. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and tayloronblackline@hotmail.com.