I first met Karl Blythe sometime in 2002. As a columnist for this newspaper, it was my intention to endorse him either singly or in a duality with Portia Simpson Miller as the next leadership “structure” of the PNP.

I had driven to the west of the island to meet the man who was then one of the most powerful in the PJ Patterson PNP Cabinet at the time – the Water and Housing Minister. I had been ardently watching him, following up his moves in the Operation PRIDE projects and was sufficiently moved to signal to those close to him that I wanted to have a meeting with him in an attempt to stare the man in the eyes, have discussions with him, and in moving inside of his thought processes, determine if he was or wasn’t the real deal.

That day as I left for the long trip back to Kingston I was convinced that Karl Blythe was more than a breath of fresh air in the stink of Jamaican politics. To me, he was the real deal, and since that time in following him through the travails of what was then seen as the NHDC/ Operation PRIDE scandal and in having many meetings with him right up to the time in 2006 when I made a conscious decision to endorse Portia Simpson Miller over him for the presidency of the PNP, I had always remained firm in my belief that Karl Blythe did not fit the mould of the run-of-the-mill politician.

I can remember the day in 2006 when we spoke to each other on the campus of Jamaica College where the PNP presidential elections were being held. He was extremely gracious to me, knowing that I, a supposedly “influential” newspaper columnist, had been openly endorsing Portia Simpson Miller and not Karl Blythe. At that time I saw Peter Phillips as too much of an academic to lead the PNP, and of course, Omar Davies was to me too much outside of the profile of one who could lead any political party.

All of that is now water under the bridge. Portia Simpson Miller won the presidency and to me, much of it was engineered by what the inner sanctum of leadership loyal to the outgoing prime minister, PJ Patterson, wanted. Portia became prime minister for a short time, made no significant mark on the post and was eventually displaced when the JLP, under the leadership of Bruce Golding, won the elections in September 2007.

In recent times Karl Blythe has stung his former colleagues in the PNP government of the 1989 to 2007 period when he blamed the policies of that administration for what was then seen as the meltdown of the financial sector. Blythe went further and apologised to the people of the country on behalf of the administration. As expected, the PNP has dissociated itself from the position taken by Dr Blythe, while former finance minister, Dr Omar Davies, has taken to the airwaves to defend the PNP policies of the times.

To me, Karl Blythe is to be commended. Yesterday when I heard Omar Davies trying to defend the high-interest rate policy imposed at the time, designed to protect the exchange rate by mopping up excess liquidity, the journalists on Nationwide did not ask him one of the major questions that I felt needed to be asked.

Before I pose the question, let me state that the formation of Finsac was good for this country. It saved the hundreds of thousands of depositors their money, if not the interest, and I agree with former prime minister, PJ Patterson, that there would have been riots, a “bloodbath”, if these funds were not protected.

But what was it which brought on the meltdown? We have been told that the system was rich with “excess liquidity”. Omar Davies and all of his colleagues have never explained to us what brought on this excess liquidity. The presenters on Nationwide posited the view that “printing money” could have been one of the major causes as if the typical Jamaican knew what the term meant. I would have preferred them to have asked, was the payment of mature government bonds to the big money players a feature which caused this money to be chasing down the best investment – the purchase of US dollars?

To my mind, another question needed to be asked: to what extent did drug money floating around at the time – hundreds of millions of dollars worth of it – fuel buying US dollars?

But, back to the main question that I wished the Nationwide presenters had asked the former finance minister. Why after Finsac was formed was the clock still on in the interest charged on debtors’ loans? That to me was the severe lack of a human face on the whole debacle which brought about the reason for Finsac.

How could someone borrow $5 million at 17 per cent, see the interest rate move to 80 per cent, pay back $30 million and still owe $70 million? That is where the evils of Finsac and the American company, euphemistically called the Jamaica Redevelopment Foundation (JRF), are featured. At no time – and even as I write this – has the clock stopped on the interest being charged to these debtors. To me there is something highly immoral about that, especially when most of the people involved have been unable to see full accounting of matters concerning them.

The insult piled on the injury is that in Finsac selling the outstanding loans to JRF for less that 20 per cent of its worth, JRF has done what any other foreign company in its position would do – sell to the highest bidder, pay the government its cut, then convert the funds to US currency, and send it where? You guessed it!

A few years ago, an individual from JRF met with me and wanted to give me a list of the politicians who were on the Finsac list but who had been given favourable terms, unlike what had killed and destroyed other people not so connected. We had met at a seedy bar on Molynes Road and even though I had confirmed that the person worked at JRF, I was still unsure of her motive. There was no follow-up and today I regret it, just as I regret not trusting the person who had made contact with me in an attempt to blow the whistle on the Special Intelligence Unit connected to the JCF in 1999. Eventually, the person gave the story to the Observer.

Yesterday, the former finance minister was on Nationwide telling its presenters that Don Crawford of the former Century National Bank was “untrustworthy”. I immediately called Crawford and sought comment from him. Of course, I cannot repeat his exact words, only to say that he will have a story to tell when he gives evidence via video-conferencing at a later date.

To me the worst aspect of Finsac is that in recognising, as Dr Karl Blythe has recognised and has had the decency to admit and apologise for, is the continuation of the high interest rate policy long after some of the debtors had either been driven to madness or had committed suicide.

That was like trying to kill a person long after his death.

Accuse Karl Blythe of impatience during his time, but at this time, the only “accusation” that can be levelled at him is honesty.

observemark@gmail.com