The painful price of politics - Public service drains and stains; turns away young talent

Christopher Tufton, Contributor

The Gleaner headline of Monday, July 23, was telling. 'Hibbert's house woes', it read. The house of Joseph Hibbert, former Jamaica Labour Party member of parliament (MP) for East Rural St Andrew, was placed on the auction block for mortgage arrears.

The impact of the headline seemed to have been amplified by the facial expression of former MP Hibbert, photographed scantily dressed and apparently with mortgage default advisory in hand. It's no wonder that the former MP admitted in the interview that if nothing else, embarrassment was a natural consequence of this media exposure.

Joe was elected MP in 2002 and then again in 2007, but did not seek re-election four years later. This past week, the former MP was facing the prospects, in his later years, of losing his house to the auctioneer, because of delays in payments from an inefficient government pension system. Before political activity, Joe Hibbert was a civil servant in the same Ministry of Transport and Works where he was a junior minister.

One could argue, therefore, that he spent most of his productive years working as a public servant. It appears, however, that even with the prospects of losing what could be reasonably considered his most significant asset, and the extreme possibility of being left homeless, there seemed to have been little sympathy for Mr Hibbert. The comments on the blog below the article in The Gleaner were, for the most part, questioning Mr Hibbert's right to a pension after nine years of public service and his apparent inability to secure himself in his golden years.

The former politician did find some sympathy with a current MP of the governing People's National Party, Fitz Jackson. In the same article, Jackson outlined the perils of public service, including financing constituents from personal income and savings. "Many times we have to use our own resources to service the needs of our constituency," Jackson said in response to Hibbert's dilemma. Although Fitz hastened to add: "It is our responsibility as individuals to make rational and judicious decisions as it relates to our personal finances."

JUST ONE OF MANY

Joe Hibbert's case is not unique. His name could be replaced by many elected officials, past and present, who have fallen on hard times in our post-Independence history, and whose economic state can be directly attributed to years of public service. Indeed, it is more the norm than the exception that if you commit to a life of public service, you should prepare to lose much of the wealth you have created before politics, gain very little during your tenure in politics, and/or be likely condemned to a life that is so stigmatised by negative connotations based on the popular perception that all politicians are corrupt and/or incompetent. Undoubtedly, Jamaican politicians, after 50 years of Independence, would likely earn the prize from a voting public as the ones most people love to hate.

With those sentiments and the gossip that can easily emerge from idle chatter or political opportunism, the image of the typical Jamaican politician normally restricts gainful engagement after they have served. This is not the case in other jurisdictions, where retired political operatives end up getting book deals, consultancies and directorships or opportunities on the lecture circuit.

ECONOMICS OF PUBLIC SERVICE

For example, an MP in today's Jamaica could take home a net salary of between $250,000 and $350,000 per month, depending on whether he or she is part of the Cabinet or just an MP. If that politician is a minister, he has to relinquish direct involvement in external income-generating activities, including directorships or management positions on boards or any other private pursuits.

More often than not, if politicians are independent business operatives, their businesses suffer significantly from their absence. Meantime, their workload could easily double with increasing demands from constituencies comprising voter populations of between 20,000 and 30,000, many of whom make demands exceeding the official state-financing capacity to respond.

With personal obligations to themselves and family, as well as demands from constituents, it is not long before they are confronted with the dilemma of using any resources they possess or can source to satisfy the appeals. Some are fortunate to have business and other supportive partners and family members to lean on for management and financial support.

However, this is not always possible, and where this support is absent, the inevitable occurs. In these circumstances, harsh economic times are easier to come by than an honest path to personal economic viability.

TEMPTATION TO DEVIANCE

It is at these moments that judgement can get clouded and temptations could be viewed as options for economic viability. This is where politicians are seen by those seeking economic advantage as representing the power and authority to make it happen, and recognition of their economic burden, if not their personal greed, can be seen as fair game for attempts at manipulation to support unethical or corrupt behaviour.

In these circumstances, public servants have to lean heavily on their strength of character and personal integrity as they are guided and encouraged by the system of checks and balances that supports the administration of political governance.

Despite this, there is never a reason to justify corruption in public life. Those who offer themselves for public service have a choice, and, therefore, should accept the terms and conditions of political representation. The fact that there are economic realities, coupled with impossible demands that are made by constituents, cannot be a reason to justify corruption. The challenge of economics and constituency obligations do not go away, however, when an elected official remains true to the mission of selfless service.

ATTRACTING TALENT

Within this political context, there is a dilemma associated with public service that has contributed to Jamaica's underperformance since Independence 50 years ago. Key to our economic fortunes (or misfortunes) has been the inability of the political process to attract talent on a sustainable basis. This applies not just to elected officials, but appointed public servants, with the focus to provide undivided attention to support and sustain economic development. The risks associated with personal and family well-being are too great.

As we reflect on Jamaica 50 and how to proceed for the next 50 years, there is already general consensus that the politics of the last 50 years has failed us. Part of the solution must be to make the case for political reforms that offer greater incentives for attracting intelligent capacity for political service - people with passion, commitment and sufficient know-how in a world that increasingly depends on knowledge of personal and collective wealth creation and society's well-being.

Our crisis today is that public service no longer generates pride, particularly among the youth and more so among the intelligentsia. Public service has too many negative connotations and severe reputation damage.

As said recently by the minister of finance, there is a trust deficit that has to be reconciled. It has to be rebuilt if Jamaica is to advance. This has to include sufficient reflection in a number of areas - from parliamentary protocol to campaign financing. Importantly, also, there has to be a change in the public discourse that tends to condemn, rather than support, the pursuit of public service and the well-being of public servants.

Joe Hibbert's dilemma is another blow to the possibility of attracting talent to the political arena. Many who could contribute to nation building would view his case as a reason not to get involved. Those who gain satisfaction from his dilemma, either because they think he deserves it or they just don't care, may unwittingly be supporting further disengagement of talent from political activity in our country. In the process, this would contribute to our collective economic demise.

Dr Christopher Tufton is a senator, opposition spokesman on foreign affairs, foreign trade and investment, and co-executive director of CaPRI. The views in this column do not necessarily represent those of the above-mentioned entities. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and cctufton@yahoo.com.