EDITORIAL - Waiting for details of OCG amendment

It is settled opinion that corruption exacts a heavy price on Jamaica's economy and is a major contributor to its underdevelopment.

This newspaper, therefore, is supportive of strong anti-corruption legislation, with robust systems and personalities for their enforcement. There is, perhaps, a case to be made that we have not had sufficient of the latter.

We, nonetheless, are not without sympathy for a proposed amendment to the Contractor General Act that circumscribes the point at which the holder of that office can begin reviews of certain types of contracts negotiated by the Government and its agencies. For oversight ought not to be so onerous as to constrict investment.

But the devil, they say, is in the detail.

In that regard, we look forward to the specifics of the bill to which Mr Patrick Atkinson, the attorney general, has alluded. We suggest that these amendments be subject to hearings by a joint select committee of Parliament, before which interested persons are allowed to testify.

Further, we hope that an amended Contractor General Act is not a scheme to derail the suggested strong, properly resourced single anti-corruption agency, to which the Government says it is committed and for which it has assured the public that legislative drafting has started. This new agency is to have prosecutorial powers.

The current issue has its genesis in the quarrel between political administrations - the current one and its predecessor - and the former contractor general, Mr Greg Christie, over Mr Christie's authority to review agreements ahead of the formal signing of contracts, even if the projects to which they relate are private investments and unsolicited offers.

The Government challenged Mr Christie's insistence that he receive updates from an independent committee appointed to help the Simpson Miller administration with the pre-contractual development/oversight of major infrastructure schemes with Chinese firms.

A judge ruled that a court had previously held that the contractor general possessed such powers and declined the Government's request for a judicial review of the issue. The matter, officially, is at appeal.

Committee within bounds

This newspaper did not then - and does not now - believe that the oversight committee, as conceived, impinged on the independence of the Office of the Contractor General (OCG) and/or its ability to do its job. We are also aware that there are times when it is necessary to move with speed, or miss a window of opportunity for an investment, and of the concern of potential investors with unsolicited projects having their ideas being put to public tender.

Indeed, we interpret Mr Andrew Holness, the opposition leader, to share similar concerns. Hence his suggestion, during the recent debate on the Budget, for parliamentary/political agreement on a number of strategic projects that would not be subject to the normal procurement rules.

Mr Atkinson has said that the amendment being considered "will not preclude the contractor general from doing a complete review of the (contract) process when it is completed" from taking "appropriate actions" in the event of breaches.

A critical ingredient in any success enjoyed by Greg Christie was his ability to win public support by being transparent - some would claim to a fault - about his probes. While we appreciate Mr Atkinson's concern about making public sensitive and proprietary information, the public must be on guard against muzzling the OCG.

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.