Well, it is now official that, as I stated in last Thursday's column, the JDIP funds are almost all used up, either in money paid for work done or, in forward commitments - for work to be done.

In a statement to Parliament on Tuesday, Transport and Works Minister Dr Omar Davies said that of the US$400 million which was the fund's total, $398 million had been used up, either in money paid out for work certified to have been done or, in additional contracts/work orders issued.

"This means that if as minister I accepted the status quo, all but US$1.8 million of the US$400 million loan which was scheduled to be expended over a five-year period would have been totally completely committed before the end of the second year of the programme. Let me make it abundantly clear, I am speaking on behalf of the administration that we will not accept this situation."

If I were a contractor under the JDIP holding work orders and contract advances, I would be tempted, somewhat reluctantly to hold off on the purchase of any spanking new 2012 Audi, Range Rover or Prado. Even more troubling I would have to gird my loins and put off the trip to Las Vegas, the "business conference" with the mistress.

I do not know by what means the technocrats had figured out the programme to run for five years. Whatever it was, with spending beginning in 2010, the now Opposition JLP needs to explain what seems like an awful hurry to have those funds used up.

A further breakdown indicates that $209.6 million accounts for payments already made for, we assume, actual work on the ground and advances for new contracts. The remaining $188.5 million would cover the remainder on new contracts issued.

It would be safe to assume that since Minister Davies has said that his administration would not accept the situation, he intends to do something about it like, maybe, invoking a specific law to stall or break those contracts or utilising some of those very contractors to work within new JEEP guidelines to be formulated.

Ex-Minister of Finance Audley Shaw seems to have got the hang of it when he said, in response to Davies' presentation: "The minister by his own admission has said that the remaining US$188 million would be subject to his review or possible reassignment, realignment ... .I simply want to establish that and to say that the Opposition awaits the detailed report of the audit."

Whatever the basis on which the JDIP experts had decreed the programme a five-year one, it could not have taken into account the real broken down state of our road infrastructure. If we are to believe what ex-Prime Minister Andrew Holness told us that JDIP funds could fix only 10 per cent of Jamaica's roads needing to be fixed, then, for all we know, the entire US$400 million could have been spent in one year and 90 per cent of our road network would still be in shambles.

I am, however, willing to go along with the expertise of the technocrats who made it into a five-year programme. On that basis, why did the JLP Government spend over 50 per cent in little over a year? But even if it wanted to claim excess pro-activity and a recognition of the time value of money and go overboard in spending that 50 per cent, why was there a rush to tie up the remainder in contracts, knowing that an election date would be in the centre of the fund's life?

Was there some cronyism at work there, or was it just politics as usual, Jamaican-style, where the administration in power ensures that, in the event of an election loss, the incoming one must inherit the least the cupboard can hold. Either way we lose!

One public official, so sorry, ex-public official needs to respond to claims that he acquired two high-end vehicles, and possibly, a third, in the space of less than two months outside of any attachment to funds disbursed under any government supervised/funded programme, JDIP or no.

The forensic audit would not only confirm the exact amount of work on the ground and match it to the certified disbursements but it would also identify where third parties who had no signing privileges or authority, inserted themselves into the process in a manner that we are much too familiar with.

As I have stated before, the advancement of the cause of the people and the nation is largely an unintended consequence of political administrations in Jamaica. Raping the public purse seems to be the main objective of too many of those lining up in party politics although I've gathered or seen no hard evidence that that is what the last administration did.

"Mi nuh mind if a politician tief," said a young man to me early this week as we stood by a calaloo vendor. "Yuh cyaan stop him, but mek wi eat something nuh!" This seems to be the prevailing view of many Jamaicans.

Minister Davies and Finance Minister Peter Phillips have been saying all the right things and taking the right stances. These will be the men to watch in this PNP administration and if their signals are anything to go by, then woe be to any minister, junior or not who walks across that line in the sand.

The other effect of the tough talk of Davies and Phillips is that it prepares the Opposition JLP for any negatives which may be unearthed about its time at the wicket. Most important, it prepares the nation for what may result from the forensic audit of key programmes which were being run during the time of the JLP administration.

It is well known that, once the JDIP was brought into disrepute by the reported refurbishing of the offices of the NWA for over $100 million and the then minister said he was unaware of it, Holness had no other choice but to arrange the separation of Mike Henry and the Transport and Works Ministry.

Now that the former minister has griped and his constituents have become agitated, all on their own, we are led to believe, it makes even more sense that Henry, the powerful chairman of the JLP, was sidelined from the line-up of Opposition spokespersons.

The sense of entitlement to power and position as a destructive trait is directly proportional to age. Yet, wisdom, which we are told, comes with age, ought best to prepare us for the inevitable acceptance of change. There is a caveat. It does not apply to politicians, a particularly stubborn breed among all creatures.

observemark@gmail.com

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  11 comments

  5 comments

  0 comments

  23 comments

  0 comments

  2 comments

  5 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  1 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  0 comments

  1 comments