Theresa Rodriguez-Moodie and Mickel Jackson | Building back better requires more than a name

“Build Back Better” and “Resilience” are two terms that have been repeated ad nauseam since Hurricane Melissa. They are dusted off after every major disaster, inspiring good talk that does not always translate into meaningful change.

Most recently, on March 16, Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness tabled the bill establishing the National Reconstruction and Resilience Authority (NaRRA). The Authority is intended to drive reconstruction after Hurricane Melissa devastated parts of the island last October and has been allocated approximately US$1.15 billion.

While we fully support the creation of NaRRA, the bill, in its current form, needs significant improvement. It is too narrow, too centralised, and lacks important safeguards for transparency, accountability, public input, and long-term planning. Global experience shows that post-disaster reconstruction is especially vulnerable to corruption, with aid diverted, contracts misallocated, and communities left exposed. Without strong safeguards, “resilience” risks becoming another slogan masking inequity and exploitation.

Jamaica, like other small island developing states, faces intensifying climate impacts – stronger hurricanes, unpredictable rainfall, prolonged droughts, and rising temperatures. Recovery legislation must go beyond immediate reconstruction and embed long-term climate resilience, transparency, accountability, equity, and public participation from the outset.

KEY GAPS IN THE BILL

One major concern is that the bill is too narrowly focused. It is framed mainly as a response to the “catastrophic consequences” of Hurricane Melissa instead of setting out a clear, long-term vision for resilience. Resilience appears only as a technical standard for “works,” not a guiding national objective. Other countries have taken a broader approach. In Dominica, for example, the law establishing its reconstruction agency clearly set out goals such as building stronger infrastructure, reducing future risks, and helping all sectors of society prepare for disasters. Jamaica should do the same.

Governance is also troubling. Too much power is concentrated in the hands of a few individuals, with the bill placing heavy emphasis on the CEO. Additionally, while the Jamaica Reconstruction and Resilience Oversight Committee (JAMRROC) exists, it is not mentioned in the bill, leaving it vulnerable to change or removal. The bill allows the prime minister to appoint the CEO for a three-year term, renewable annually with no requirement for merit-based selection or independent vetting. Ministerial directions are broad, allowing influence over specific projects. This concentration of power has caused problems elsewhere, including in New Zealand’s Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA). We recommend statutory recognition for JAMRROC, a merit-based CEO appointment process with parliamentary oversight, and limiting ministerial directions to high-level policy only, with all directions published and tabled in Parliament.

Transparency and accountability provisions are also weak. The bill imposes criminal penalties for unauthorised disclosure. Exceptions are narrowly drawn and do not expressly protect whistleblowers. At the same time, the bill creates an indemnity regime that can cover legal defence costs, settlements, and even judgments in criminal proceedings using public funds. While indemnity clauses are common in private-sector corporate law, the overly generous application to a public body managing billions in reconstruction funds raises serious concerns about accountability and the deterrent effect of Jamaica’s anti-corruption framework. We propose narrowing the secrecy offence to genuinely sensitive information, inserting explicit whistleblower protections, and expressly stating the circumstances within which indemnity provisions do not apply. When billions of dollars are at stake, the public must be able to see how decisions are made and how money is spent.

‘RELEVANT PERSONS’

The bill only refers to consultation with “relevant persons” without explaining who that includes or requiring meaningful engagement. Communities, civil society, and vulnerable groups must have a real voice in decisions that affect them. Without this, reconstruction risks leaving out those most in need or repeating existing inequalities.

The bill does not include clear, mandatory requirements for environmental and social-impact assessments. While it refers to environmental considerations, this falls short of requiring safeguards to prevent harm. Without these, reconstruction could create new risks and increase vulnerability.

The bill also needs to better address how projects will be carried out. It contains only a general power to procure. While the Ministry of Finance’s Guidance Note 2/2025 provides administrative flexibility for emergencies, it is not statutory. We recommend embedding fast-track procurement pathways directly in the bill, with safeguards such as clear justification, public disclosure, and mandatory auditor general post-audit for contracts above a defined monetary value and real-time online dashboards.

At the same time, NaRRA must be able to coordinate effectively across Government. Without clear authority, there is a risk of confusion, delays, and conflict between agencies. The law should also ensure that resilience efforts continue beyond NaRRA’s lifespan by preserving institutional knowledge and securing long-term funding.

LEARNING FROM GLOBAL EXPERIENCE

There are useful lessons from other countries. As mentioned, Dominica’s Climate Resilience Execution Agency for Dominica (CREAD), created under the Climate Resilience Act 2018, takes a broad, values-driven approach with strong transparency and inclusivity, unlike NaRRA’s narrow, temporary, and highly centralised design. By contrast, New Zealand’s CERA suffered from excessive centralisation, limited community input and poor transition planning, leading to public distrust and loss of institutional knowledge. Queensland’s Reconstruction Authority (Australia) demonstrated success through strong statutory powers, funding for “betterment,” and transparent tools such as live project dashboards. Jamaica can benefit from examining both the successes and challenges of these models.

We recognise that reconstruction must move quickly. “Fast-tracking”, however, must never mean cutting corners. The process must still include transparency, public participation, environmental safeguards, and proper oversight. Only by getting it right and moving quickly can we build truly resilient communities and a stronger, safer Jamaica.

Jamaica Enviornment Trust and Jamaicans for Justice have provided detailed recommendations to strengthen the bill and welcome the opportunity to engage further with the Government in support of this process.

Theresa Rodriguez-Moodie, PhD, is the chief executive officer of the Jamaica Environment Trust and Mickel Jacksonis the executive director, of Jamaicans for Justice. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.