THERE is an emerging view among countries, and which we strongly share, that representatives of multilateral financial institutions (MFIs) must be mostly seen and not heard. The success or failure of their tenure must be judged by the amount of financial resources delivered and the quality of their technical advice.

They represent the policies and the views of their institutions to the government of a member country and in turn report their impressions to their head office. They should engage in confidential dialogue with the technicians and officials of the economic policy institutions of the country, for example, the Bank of Jamaica.

Of course, on special occasions, they may have audience with a minister or be present when senior officials from the headquarters of their institutions visit Jamaica.

The terms of reference of the local representative of a multilateral financial institution, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), include explaining the policies of that institution to the public. This, of necessity, will involve public statements which may be reported in the press.

However, in their public utterances the local representative of such MFIs must never make critical comments about any action or policy of the Government of Jamaica. This would be a breach of their terms of reference and could be cause for reprimand, recall and dismissal, as such errors show poor judgement, an irresponsible attitude to harmonious relations, lack of confidentiality and disrespect for the affairs of the country.

In our view, representatives must resist the temptation to seek notoriety in the media and avoid the notion that they can enhance influence or access by mobilising public opinion behind any particular position or policy. They must be sure that when they speak to the press that their pronouncements are not careless or sufficiently ambiguous to be open to mischievous misinterpretation.

The occasional mishap or indiscretion is a shame on the representative but if there are serial offences then it affects the image of the MFI. If this happens, the government of a country would be well within its sovereign rights to complain and seek a correction in the press or call for a reprimand, recall or dismissal.

Offences can lead to the breakdown in trust and introduce tension in the relationship between the representative and, by extension, the MFI and the government. This could put in jeopardy policies, programme/project implementation and the disbursement of funds.

Indiscreet publicly reported statements or loose commentary on talk shows have been detrimental to the careers of some representatives. Newly appointed representatives must heed the history of the lessons of those who fell from grace for preaching to governments.

Here in Jamaica, finance ministers have tolerated several instances of politically incorrect behaviour on the part of representatives of MFIs, no doubt because the Government needs the funds so desperately. But we must never be too poor to be proud and never so needy as to not be able to stand up for our rights.