CDF good in principle but not transparent enough

Sunday, September 26, 2010

Dear Editor,

One of the platforms on which the current government gained political power was the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) to which every Member of Parliament is entitled in equal amounts regardless of their political ticket. The stated objective of the CDF was to empower the MP to respond to the needs and priorities articulated by their constituents in a timely manner. These needs and priorities should be across party lines as each constituency consists of supporters from both major political parties.

Some of the main thrusts of the CDF are:

1) Promote human and infrastructural development at the community and constituency level;

2) Improve service delivery by the elected official;

3) Increase the response capacity of the elected representative and

4) Bring government and the people closer together.

Based on the above, I would like to think that the CDF, if utilised in the proper manner, can be a very important tool in the governance of communities and would eliminate most of the "we want justice" cries for basic infrastructural amenities such as toilet facilities, piped water, capacity building through training workshops, bushing and mosquito eradication in communities like Portmore.

But as with everything else, use of the CDF must not be left to the discretion of the MP alone. There must be some oversight from regulatory bodies such as the Office of the Contractor General, the Auditor General, the Public Accounts Committee or any other arm of the public service with the requisite manpower and expertise. And while I don't want to go finger-pointing without evidence to support my grumbling, the fact is the CDF's funding of $20 million per financial year is much larger than the $3 million limit in place for candidates to fund their electoral campaigns.

While the funds were meant for usage across party lines, one suspects that with the current push into election mode, there is the high probability that substantial parts of the fund will be used to gain voter support while real community needs are left unattended. The CDF must be strictly regulated for it to be fully transparent.

Another shortcoming of the CDF is that whereas it recognises the MP as the agent of development in his constituency, and whereas the MP is expected to contribute to community projects, these functions are not limited to him alone. The mayor of the parish or the municipality, in the case of Portmore where I reside, also has a lot of responsibility, but unlike the MP he has no access to the CDF.

I would like to ask why mayors aren't given part of the CDF. Another question I would like to be addressed is why there are no formally arranged consultations between mayors and MPs as it relates to how the CDF is used within constituencies.

I speak specifically to Portmore where the Mayor and MPs are of different political parties and might find it politically challenging to sit around a common table to discuss the development of the community. There are three MPs to one mayor but it's the mayor who gets the first call for bushings, mosquito eradication, bad roads, etc.

On the other hand, mayors with established parish council offices are easier contacted than MPs who operate out of constituency offices for their parties. I suggest that independent offices be established to facilitate the CDF consultations.

Another fundamental weakness of the fund is an absence of public education to let all and sundry know what it is, how it is supposed to work, and most importantly, how to make it work for them.

If the CDF is to achieve its stated objective, then it must be tweaked and amended to ensure that it does not become a facilitator for "pork-barrel" politics, but rather a very good tool of constituency governance.

Howard Hamilton

Portmore Pines

Do you feel buying into Facebook now is a good investment for the long-run?
	Yes
	No

View Results
Results published weekly in Sunday Finance

Username:
Password:

Emergency work disrupts water supply in St Ann

CDF good in principle but not transparent enough