After close to a three-year wait for its tabling, the arrival of the Office of Public Defender’s report on the Tivoli Gardens incursion last Wednesday, almost knocked the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) off the front pages.

It was a clash between the report on what was probably the most significant act of violence perpetrated against the civilian population of Jamaica since the Morant Bay Rebellion, as Public Defender Earl Witter suggested; and probably the most important economic funding agreement Jamaica has undertaken with a multilateral body since the 1970s. However, unfortunately the Public Defender got in the way of his report.

The report failed us in that it did not provide answers to the questions that the media and the public were asking then and are still asking now, and there seems to be little or no value for the $26.4 million spent by the previous and current governments on the exercise.

The issue is whether or not the Office of the Public Defender (OPB) is appropriately staffed and financed for the job that it is supposed to do. There is no question that public defender Witter is an experienced and well-read, as well as verbose lawyer, but the fact that he seems to perform alone or with the limited staff, suggests that the office is incapable of taking on any sizeable challenge.

But, this seems to be a thread running through virtually all the commissions which fall under Parliament, including the Office of the Political Ombudsman and the Corruption Prevention Commission. And, to make matters worse, there is total confusion trying to figure what are the problems that beset these commissions, because: (1) they fail to table their reports, including annual reports, on time; and (2) they usually under-spend their budgets with no explanation.

How can a commission of Parliament be years behind in getting an independently audited annual report tabled on time, yet it can show that there are millions of dollars in its budget which has not been spent and which it returns to Parliament at the end of the financial year? Something doesn’t seem quite right here.

Probably it is time that respective governments when choosing a Speaker do not focus entirely on rewarding a loyal and faithful MP, but instead choose someone with some corporate experience who can ensure that not only does the House manage its financial affairs properly, but also the affairs of its various commissions which are being financed by our taxes. Or, maybe a business manager for Gordon House could be employed to handle business matters. This is the 21st century.

It was no surprise to me that an incomplete report was tabled in the House last week, having asked the Speaker the week before whether or not he was confident that it would be ready for last week, and being told by him that anywhere it had reached he would be demanding it from the public defender that Friday. In fact, I was surprised that the public defender was given an extra two days and the report arrived for tabling on Wednesday afternoon.

It was unfortunate that it was titled an “interim report”, which it is not. It was obvious that the Speaker decided that he would not wait any longer, and took the incomplete report from the public defender.

There is no doubt that the public defender did a tireless job of conducting an investigation which, obviously, the security forces did not welcome and failed to give him the respect and support he needed. But, if the security forces were obstructing him from getting the facts, then the public defender should rely on the evidence of the available victims, and let the security forces respond to a report of their pain.

Instead the public defender proceeded to act in judgment of not only the security forces, but the media, the health service, the Member of Parliament for West Kingston after the incursion, who was elected some 18 months after the event, although he was the Councillor for Tivoli Gardens at the time, and several others.

The result was an overblown report which promised much but offered little and certainly should not have used up so much government paper, and as a last resort the public defender seemed to have turned to the idea of reiterating the call for a commission of enquiry, something which he and several civil bodies had already recommended from the very beginning but which he hoped would placate the public.

So what’s new?

The country is probably drained from that prolonged exercise and the failure to offer any closure, and now wants to have the victims compensated, the issue documented and move on with life under a new IMF/EFF which, as Minister of Finance and Planning, Dr Peter Phillips, reminded us in the House of Representatives Wednesday, offers a new period of challenges.

“It involves sacrifice, and it will involve different choices for the future, but I am confident that with the guidance of the almighty and with confidence in ourselves as a people, we will continue to move in the right direction and expand opportunities for all and restore hope in Jamaica’s bright future,” Dr Phillips ended his speech. Selah.