Dear Editor,

We refer to an article published in your newspaper of Sunday, April 2, 2017 headlined ‘Cash-Rich NHT escapes rationalisation plan’. We note the erroneous conclusion drawn by the writer, both in the headline and at least at two other places in the article, neither of which are supported by the facts.

While the article covered a number of issues unrelated to the sensational headline, our response is being restricted to the headline and related contents in the article, as these seem to have emanated from the questions submitted to the Trust recently by the writer, Mrs Avia Collinder.

The facts are as follows:

On Monday, March 20, 2017, the Trust received the following questions from your reporter, Mrs Avia Collinder:

Query:

We understand that the NHT is about to engage in a staff reduction and restructuring exercise.

1. Please share with us the main changes planned in relation to this.

2. Please indicate what level of staff reduction is being considered and the approach to be taken (voluntary redundancy, etc).

3. How is the structure of the Trust being rationalised/ reorganised, and with what specific objectives?

Any response which can be provided this week would be appreciated.

On Thursday, March 23, 2017, the Trust sent the following sole response to Mrs Collinder:

“There is no plan to engage in a staff reduction exercise at this time.”

When the NHT’s response was being sent to Mrs Collinder, the questions she had posed also accompanied it. Mrs Collinder therefore was left in no doubt that the response she was receiving from the Trust on March 23, 2017, was in respect of her media query of March 20, 2017.

The following critical observations must be made:

1. When Mrs Collinder had submitted her question-list to the Trust on March 20, 2017, she had made absolutely no mention of the Public Sector Transformation Project of the GOJ.

2. The specific context in which Mrs Collinder posed the questions to the Trust was one relating to her “understanding” that “the NHT is about to engage in a staff reduction and restructuring exercise”. We again emphasise that absent from her mail to the Trust was any reference to the transformation programme, whether directly or indirectly.

3. The NHT responded to Mrs Collinder’s query based on the state of affairs which now exists in the organisation, and not based on any current or intended plans by the Public Sector Transformation Unit.

It would have been reasonable to expect that if Mrs Collinder wanted specific information about the GOJ’s Public Sector Transformation Programme she would have contacted that unit for the relevant information. The NHT has no authority to speak on behalf of the unit, and neither did the Trust seek to do so in responding to Mrs Collinder’s query of March 20, 2017.

We have found it necessary to contextualise the matter, as we believe the impression created by the offending sections could do irreparable damage to the NHT’s reputation. We also hope that the foregoing has served to clarify the situation for your readers, who would have been misled by the erroneous reporting on the matter.

It is also our expectation that within the context of the journalistic principles of truth, accuracy and fair representation, that you will publish our response in your newspaper, in an equally prominent position as that occupied by the erroneous article.

Corporate Communications Department

National Housing Trust

4 Park Boulevard

Kingston 5