EDITORIAL - Derrick Kellier defends the trough

We are not surprised that Derrick Kellier, the labour and social security minister, doesn't "see what the fuss is all about".

Our shock, which we would have welcomed, would have been if he had understood or cared. For that would have meant that there was a chip, however small, in the old order of morality in government and a deeper appreciation, on the minister's part, of the concept of conflict of interest. It would have suggested, too, that Mr Kellier would have thought about, and appreciated his job as a political representative in a Westminster-style parliamentary democracy.

But beyond conceptual issues raised by the Kellier affair, this is another example of the corrosive influence on government and governance of the euphemistically named Constituency Development Fund (CDF), that ladling trough from which politicians share out bits of pork to keep constituents beholden to them.

THE CDF CORRUPTS

Under the CDF, each member of parliament (MP) is allocated $14 million to be spent on projects of his or her choice in his constituency, monitored, ostensibly, by an oversight unit in the prime minister's office.

But as this newspaper has often argued, the CDF fundamentally corrupts government, but in a larger sense than Mr Kellier seems to divine the concept. In the minister's terms, it seems, if your hand is not in the till and you are not the direct beneficiary of a scheme, then "run with it".

In the immediate case, Mr Kellier, in his role as MP for South St James, apparently identified a number of projects to be funded from the CDF trough, including the patching of roads.

In more than one case, having identified the project, and organised the financing, with the National Works Agency as overseer, Mr Kellier recommended his brother's company to do the job.

That firm was duly awarded the contracts which are now being scrutinised by the Office of the Contractor General. Mr Kellier throws up his hands, figuratively of course, declaring that he merely recommended the contractor, but did not award the contract. That is what MPs do under the CDF.

So they do.

BEYOND LEGALISM

In the first instance, however, registration with the National Contracts Commission and tax compliance notwithstanding, we hope most people in Mr Kellier's position would consider it morally wrong and a clear conflict of interest to recommend their brother's company for a contract to be paid for out of the public purse. But having done so, we would expect they would be ashamed, rather than unabashed about their action.

This is beyond legalism. It ought to be a deep ethical issue, particularly for those entrusted with the public weal.

Regarding the CDF, the concept is inherently flawed. It blurs the line of demarcation between the MP as legislator and constituency representative/ advocate and the professional, non-political bureaucrat who supposedly implements policy articulated by the political executive. Indeed, such incursions into the bureaucracy, too long tolerated by Jamaicans, weaken the civil service with costly economic, social and political results.

We, however, do not expect that Mr Kellier, or other self-declared defenders of the CDF, such as young Arnaldo Brown and Daryl Vaz, will willingly or easily retreat from the oily trough and its help in the purveyance of patronage.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.