Editorial | Devon Dick’s committee good, but …

First, Andrew Swaby’s decision to appoint an independent good governance committee, of sorts, for the Kingston and St Andrew Municipal Corporation (KSAMC), is an unquestionably good idea.

None has been in place, as required by the Local Governance Act, since the legislation was promulgated in 2017, because, according to Mr Swaby, the corporation’s chairman, part of the mechanism by which this was to be done, was not in place. And still is not.

What Mr Swaby has done can perhaps serve as a template or model for other local government authorities, if they face the same problem as the KSAMC.

No one would claim that the 10 members of the committee selected by Mr Swaby are partisan hacks, or, as its chairman, Dr Devon Dick, a Baptist pastor and historian, put it, an assemblage of “yes people”.

Indeed, this newspaper expects that, as Dr Dick says, his team will “speak truth to power”, as well as “give the best advice possible” to the local government council.

All this notwithstanding, Mr Swaby, in the interest of full transparency, must publish the detailed terms of reference by which the committee will operate. He is also reminded that the Local Public Accounts Committee (LPAC), in lieu of which Rev Dick’s group was appointed, is not the only one of the committees established by municipal councils on which non-elected persons can sit.

REPORT FULLY

In that regard, the KSAMC, as well as the other local government bodies, should report fully on how they are meeting the letter and spirit of the law.

Indeed, as this newspaper has several times observed, the Local Governance Act, passed in 2016 after over two decades of stop-start local government reform, is a relatively decent bit of legislation that provides some space for creativity and inclusiveness by municipal councils that are competently led and have ambitious members. Which, unfortunately, has not, for the most part, been the case.

Generally, local government councillors perceive themselves more like low-level assistants and aides to the members of parliament (MPs) or aspiring parliamentarians of their party, rather than representatives in their own right for the divisions in which they were elected. The parties, in recent decades, despite their rhetoric about commitment to local government, have tended to reinforce this perspective of the relationship between MPs and councillors, with respect to their choices of candidates for the national Parliament and municipal corporations.

The municipal corporations can, however, begin to change this narrative by complying with the law and engaging with the residents of the communities, as it obligates them to do. Mr Swaby’s committee is one partial fix.

Section 38 (5) of the Local Governance Act requires the establishment of LPACs, with a mandate “to review the performance of the local authority to determine whether accountability, transparency and ethical standards are being observed”.

MEET SERVICE STANDARDS

These committees are to also determine whether the corporations meet their service standards, which implies not that they should have performance criteria for service delivery, but that these should be widely known. Mr Swaby should say whether service criteria exist at the KSAMC. So, too, should the other chairmen.

LPACs also have the power to examine the financial activities and transactions of the councils for conformity “with applicable legal requirements and standard guidelines”.

Up to one half of the members of the LPACs can be from outside the councils. Alternatively, that can fall to a third, if the majority and minority members of the councils also each account for a third. However, the chairman of an LPAC must be from outside the council.

The law, though, says non-council members are to be nominated by Parish Development Committees (PDCs), which are established by the government’s Social Development Commission.

According to Mr Swaby, no PDC has been in place for Kingston and St Andrew since 2017, hence his independent appointment of Dr Dick’s oversight committee. That could raise questions about the legality of some actions of this committee if, for instance, it sought to exercise the power given to LPACs to “call an officer of the local authority to give account and explain matters” relevant to the performance and operations of the corporation.

This could be important, given Mr Swaby’s declaration that the first order of business of Dr Dick’s committee is to bring up to date the KSAMC’s outstanding financial reports.

Nonetheless, there is still the possibility for external financial oversight and expertise, given the ability of the councils to appoint up to half of the members of their standing finance committees from outside the corporations. While the external members can contribute to debates on the fixing of budgets of the corporations, and help in the oversight of their financial affairs, they are not permitted to vote.

The legislation also requires that local government councils also meet at least once a year with their citizens to report on their activities, while a related law on how they are funded says they should present and discuss their strategic plans and budgets annually to residents, before these are presented to the local government ministry for adoption.

Insofar as these things happen, they are, at best, mere pro forma exercises. It is time for change.