“In giving to charity nothing is lost. It’s like casting your bread upon the water. It comes back to you.”

— Marcus Garvey

JAMAICA has had unparalleled success in creating poor people. In a land of unusual blessing, the statistics show an ever-increasing amount of the populace living below the official poverty line.

It’s not hard to find evidence to support the view that we (Jamaicans) don’t love poor people. One sees it in the injustice, neglect, disrespect, and downright cruelty meted out every day to people whose only sin against society is being poor. One can become numb to it (ie to the maltreatment); accepting it as if it were the norm. Recently two episodes shook me out of my stupor back to the reality of the uncaring society that we are.

The first episode was triggered by the decision by the honourable prime minister to restart the National Housing Trust (NHT) Inner-city Housing Project (ICHP). Almost instantaneously, the switchboard in the various media houses that survive on talk came alive. Callers and some hosts berated the prime minister for the decision — ostensibly on the grounds that benefits were being given to non-subscribers and the practice would inevitably lead to bankruptcy of the NHT. In expressing their angst, contributors to the imbroglio generally did not concern themselves with the facts such as the NHT Act, which gives to the minister the means to consider for benefits persons whose employment is of a casual or subsidiary nature; or that in the schemes already completed and occupied mortgagees were allowed to prequalify so that by the time the units were ready to be occupied eligibility was not an issue; or that by the Special Benefits Act the legal basis and precedence had been established for the NHT to go into priority areas on the justification of delivering a social good.

While issues concerning the NHT’s continued viability cannot be taken lightly, consider how the conversation might have changed had someone pointed to the work of Peruvian economist Hernando Desoto. He has made it his lifelong work to move the poorest of the poor into homeownership; realising that without real assets a significant percentage of a country’s populace is excluded from participation in the mainstream economy, for they possess no collateral to raise capital. Whether out of ignorance or playing politics it is clear that many of those raising objections to the NHT ICHP do not love the poor.

The second episode, which evidenced a lack of concern for the less fortunate in our midst, arose out of the alleged misappropriation of Food for the Poor housing units in Trelawny involving Member of Parliament Marisa Dalrymple-Philibert. Under the guise of investigative journalism and acting in the public interest, media personnel and a suspecting public were allowed to go on for too long; in the process damaging reputations and running the dangerous risk of overseas donors coming to the conclusion that there is massive corruption in the distribution of the units, with the likelihood of this negatively affecting future donations to Jamaica. When it seemed like the aspersions were getting out of hand, Food for the Poor Chairman Andrew MahFood went on Nationwide Radio and killed the “waste argument” with one sentence. He said that, although he could not guarantee that there was not a single case of a housing unit going to someone it should not go to, (Food for the Poor distributes in the region of 600 units per month not counting units delivered under the arrangement with the NHT), it would be a far more useful expenditure of energy to try and figure out how to get units to the many who need them, but for whom there was none. I wish I had his words verbatim. They portray the kind of attitude one expects from someone who truly loves the poor.

Although not rising to the level of an episode, there is another situation that raises doubts about our professed love for the poor. This one has to do with me, but it makes it no less significant. It has been close to one month since the public defender issued his preliminary report on the Tivoli incursion. Policymakers, media commentators and the general public have been taking positions on the various findings with many clamouring for a full-scale investigation by an internationally supervised panel. It’s truly amazing that beyond the preoccupation with the forensics, blame finding, compensation and the like, I have not heard a single comment about what could be the report’s most important recommendation; how to heal Tivoli and reduce the likelihood of a recurrence.

On page 176, section 70.3, the public defender writes thus. “The main conclusion is that there is the need for a medium to long-term rehabilitation and revitalisation programme for the affected communities to functionally integrate them into the Jamaican society; that the central focus of any programme of renewal should be to create the institutions and incentives for persons in the communities to generate wealth from productive activity.”

As with every good report, this one goes beyond conclusions to give recommendations. Referring to the work of Agency for Inner-city Renewal (AIR) and its subsidiary, Institute for Social Entrepreneurship and Equity (I-SEE), in the neighbouring community of Trench Town. The public defender remarks at section 70.7 on page 179 that it (the work) “offers something of a template for sustainable social and economic development of Tivoli Gardens and West Kingston. It aims to support self-reliance by tapping into the muscle, creativity and ingenuity of the people. Application of the AIR/I-SEE model would be comparatively cost-effective, requiring minimal State financial outlay. Its success would greatly weaken the pervasive influence of political dons, rendering them increasingly redundant”.

In section 70.8, page 180, the public defender continues. “The Public Defender therefore recommends to the Government that, as a beginning, AIR/I-SEE be asked to investigate the social and economic competencies now existing in the community with a view to identifying the people’s preferences for economic activity. Purposeful government support for what will likely be practical recommendations for a custom-tailored model of self-sustainable social and economic development of Tivoli Gardens and West Kingston, which is not patronage based, would quite probably help to reverse chronic stagnation.”

Ahead of publication of the report, the public defender telephoned to put me on notice of his direct reference to the work I have been called to lead. He said the antidote to the problem of zones of social and economic exclusion is hope born of love. I wish I could bask in self-righteousness. The truth is, while some are to be blamed for outsourcing love for our fellowman to dons and assorted miscreants who feed off the poor, we share collective responsibility for finding a solution.

hmorgan@cwjamaica.com