SOME of the most important aspects of the efficient operations of government are honesty (corporate governance), the determination of functional government operations, and the reasonable but clear delineation of regulations, and the administration of those regulations.

This, perhaps, is a difficult concept for most of us in Jamaica as our perceptions of right and wrong have become terribly if not irrevocably warped, and wrong is only recognised if you are caught and convicted. All else is fair game in the view of our jaded society.

In a government conference (prior to my resignations), I was asked to give my comments on how to go about this in the context of governance. My reply was short and simple: “90 per cent of our difficulties in this matter would be solved if we elected honest parliamentarians, and appointed honest officials”.

I must say that the answer was too simple for those who were being paid to investigate or consult on such “difficult problems”, and so, as expected, the simple statement was not the type that could justify a major consultancy. After more than two years, I still contend that the answer is true and very simple.

To do otherwise is to accept the inefficiencies and associated costs to appoint watchers to watch the watchees to watch the watched. It is an inefficient and useless approach as it is powerless if two or more persons agree to collude. It is the same in every walk of life from inventory theft to kickbacks, financial embezzlement, Ponzi schemes, and collusion by willing people is the consistent factor.

Even the mighty USA and billions of dollars of expenditure cannot prevent conspiracy, from drug smuggling through customs, arms sales, terrorism, or Enron and the like. People, especially dishonest people, make wrong things happen. We are in the process of perfecting the art of this serious defect in governance.

The determination of functions of government must consider what is essential or non-essential in pursuit of a mission. Therefore, a careful analysis of the work of the civil service must be part of an assessment. As a simple example, the licensing regime for firearms now takes two months less than the previous system that, by its very nature, lent itself to manipulation by and bribery of the police. Divestment and inspection of this and similar functions are a government regulatory policy function. It is not popular as it possibly prevents known activists from obtaining guns even after several arrests. But that is politics, not governance.

I am certain that the recommendations of the unit studying this from Jamaica House contain many of these measures, yet to be implemented. The reluctance to do so is akin to the slave owner contemplating the loss of power through the abolition of slavery. It is a negative self-interest that benefits a few and exploits others, and fosters an inequity that has no place in governance.

Another example is the nebulous document called a “fit and proper certificate” for persons serving as directors in financially regulated industries. Instead of one procedure the laborious process is conducted separately by the FSC and the BOJ for no apparent reason other than their unwillingness to work together.

The cost of personal and police time is staggering and will serve no purpose if fingerprint records are not stored securely and electronically. The declarations are useless, especially as the association of nefarious persons with others in obscure companies and “shadow” owners and directors is tolerated to allow for political indiscretions to be masked. This has been going on for decades. “Who is H-Oil?” a question that will never be answered, along with countless others like “where did the naughty little school go, nobody know, nobody know”.

So, honest people refuse to speak or participate in healthy democratic governance because they are afraid that they will be harmed with the approbation of their elected officials, or they are waiting for a generous slurp from the trough. Therefore, we all agree to submit to the whims and fancies of a democracy that has tolerated indiscipline and dishonesty at the top. Is that really sensible? Well, not for me. I will not accept that I am prepared to be judged by people who have demonstrated over decades a consistent lack of ethical behaviour.

The usual excuses for taking shortcuts in order to “expedite” certain decisions are not valid. The rules of the procedures are not onerous if one is prepared to be open and transparent, and there are ways to ensure that inordinate delays are not thrust upon the system. Where problems do lie is with civil servants who wish to use delaying tactics for their own personal gain, or by a reluctance to work efficiently. Thus papers and decisions pile up while Mr or Mrs So and So are on extended leave with a desk full of important papers.

Even so, I would be entirely wrong to classify these incidents as the norm, and can personally attest to the helpfulness of nearly all the civil servants that I have worked with in recent years. I have to say that their professionalism is exceptional, and they need to do their important work without ministerial or political pressures for less than honest motives. I therefore have a very positive opinion of those who can say no to directives that do not conform to reasonable regulations.

Our current state of poor governance needs to address the equipment and modern technology that would allow for a smooth workflow. This need stretches across the full spectrum from the management of our legal systems to the award of contracts, or conforming to legal requirements. The matter of conforming to laws cannot be an area of budgetary discretion, as it places public officials and board members in a precarious position with attached liabilities.

In summary, there are burning issues of governance that transcend the political agendas of any single party or politician. Transparency for most Jamaicans is an alien word, except for those who have served on the boards of listed companies where corporate governance is a way of life that preserves the company and your personal integrity. If citizens are to serve voluntarily then they must conform to and be protected by structures that are honest and transparent.