PARLIAMENT’S Public Administration and Appropriations Committee (PAAC) is not convinced that the Civil Service is doing enough to meet the public sector transformation targets and has demanded that the Cabinet office give a timeline within two weeks.

Government and Opposition members of the PAAC, including its chairman, Opposition Member of Parliament (MP) Edmund Bartlett and Government member Fitz Jackson, expressed frustration with the inability of either the Cabinet office or the Public Sector Monitoring Unit (PSTU) to produce evidence of work proceeding apace with Medium Term Economic Programme targets critical to an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Not even the combined articulation of Cabinet Secretary Ambassador Douglas Saunders, and the Chief Executive Officer of the Public Sector Transformation Unit (PSTU) Patricia Sinclair-McCalla could convince the committee that enough is being done.

Bartlett said that his committee’s main interest now was having timelines from the Cabinet office related to specific outcomes in terms of the “sticking points” with the IMF, by this week.

Pointing out that one of these “sticking points” is public sector rationalisation, Bartlett said there was a need for the timeline to complete the process and begin to achieve the savings and the cost effectiveness that the sector must have.

Opposition MP Marisa Dalrymple-Phillibert questioned whether the things the Government officials said were already in place had resulted in any significant savings for the country.

“We haven’t completed any exercise, except for the E-Census that is now with the ministries for update in terms of the human capital,” Sinclair-McCalla said. The E-Census is a computer software developed by Fiscal Services Limited to capture all employment data for the public sector. However, it is not expected to be effective before the end of 2013

“The fact that whatever is happening is not resulting in any savings for us really doesn’t amount to too much and this is why, as a committee, we are anxious to have the timelines that everybody seems to be dodging,” Dalrymple-Philibert said.

Jackson, meanwhile, told Ambassador Saunders that he was impatient of “the never ending process to get to where we need to go”.

“We can’t make good the enemy of perfection,” Jackson remarked, querying whether January has now been established as the “indicative timeline” for implementation.

“I think we need to be a little more definitive here, in terms of what we are speaking about,” Ambassador Saunders responded.

“Are we saying that the rationalisation programme must commence by 2013, in order to achieve the 2016 timeframe for rationalisation?” Bartlett asked him.

“In that sense, certainly,” Ambassador Saunders reacted. “But I just want to underline that not everything will go with that timeline. There are some things that will be achievable before; there are some things in respect of which activities are already underway,” Saunders said. “So, the point is, while the IMF framework is 2015/2016, and that would be the ultimate timeline in terms of commitments under any IMF agreement, there are some things that we would expect to be implemented before the ultimate timeline.”

“There are several activities that are currently ongoing. We are not twiddling our thumbs, while we are waiting for a complete sign off,” Sinclair McCalla added.

She noted, however, that the PSTU is a small department of the Cabinet Office and, therefore, the permanent secretaries are responsible for facilitating implementation within their respective ministries.

“They have to own the process, because if we go in and do it for them, it’s not theirs. They have to be responsible for the changes,” she said.

Sinclair-McCalla said that what the PSTU seeks to do is to work with various international development partners to get funding and to find the technical assistance and the consultants to work on the ground with the permanent secretaries and the various agencies to facilitate the changes.

But, a clearly frustrated Fitz Jackson was not convinced.

“I would suggest, to make it simple, just point out who is to do what and is not doing it. Just identify those in a one or two-page log sheet and give it to us. Our parliamentary obligation is to ensure administrative efficiency,” he urged the CEO.

“If you give us that little one-pager, two-pager or three-pager, identifying what each ministry ought to be doing, then we will deal with the ministry. I don’t want us to have the buck keep being passed around. We keep hearing is that one, then that one says is that one and you hear all kinds of explanation and, at the end of the day, nothing is happening,” Jackson stated.

Chairman Bartlett said that was the position of the entire PAAC.

“We will write you a note requiring the PSTU to give us a schedule of where you are in terms of the programme itself, and the responsibility centres as indicated, areas of action as required and we will assist you,” Bartlett offered.

“It cannot be in Jamaica’s interest, IMF or no IMF, for the wage bill to continue to represent such a large percentage of the GDP and, therefore, what has to be done must be done and done in good time. The strategic remit as a government is to enable the well-being of our people, and that well-being cannot be maximised if we are strapped with ability to spend based on overhangs or debt bundles and fiscal space strictures,” Bartlett said.