The Integrity Commission has issued its first news release. In a statement dated May 22, 2018, the commission advised, among other things, that as an interim measure it has assigned senior personnel of the legacy agencies to act as heads of the divisions:

• Joy Powell — information and complaints

• David Grey — investigation

• Dirk Harrison — corruption prosecution

With this development we may now say, the show is on the road!

Prime Minister Andrew Holness continues to speak eloquently about the issue of corruption. The most recent was at the Eighth Summit of the Americas held in Lima, Peru. He asserted that his Administration is committed to combating bribery, organised crime, international graft, and other forms of corruption. He spoke again to the issue while giving the keynote address at the official ground-breaking ceremony for Foreshore Estate in Delacree Pen. Said he: “There is a challenge with bureaucracy in our country. We have to get it right. We need the rules to ensure integrity, transparency, fairness and that there is no corruption in what we’re doing.”

While both the forward movement by the Integrity Commission and the comments by the prime minister should be welcome, the problem with the assertion from the prime minister is that the Government has not shown the level of commitment that his words suggest. In what can be characterised as a giving with one hand but taking back with the other, the prime minister, in announcing the names of the members of Integrity Commission, gave them the mandate of making Jamaica the “least corrupt place on Earth”. While this is a noble mandate, the stamping out of corruption requires leadership by action, not mere words.

Had Holness been true to his words on combating corruption then he would not have dithered for the last 10 months in response to the Office of the Contractor General’s report on the $600-million de-bushing scandal. It is to be recalled that Holness, in his party’s 2016 manifesto, as well as at his swearing-in, promised to address reports of the kind within 30 days. It is, therefore, not unreasonable for anyone to question his commitment to fighting corruption.

Inefficiency breeds opportunity for corruption

It is not to be overlooked that the prime minister has assigned to himself the portfolios that carry the largest amount of capital expenditure — works, water, the environment, and housing. These are the portfolios in which the opportunity for corruption is greatest. Given this possibility, the prime minister has an even greater duty to ensure that he subjects the processes of expenditure in these portfolios to the highest level of transparency.

The spend in the run-up to the by-elections in St Mary South Eastern and St Andrew North Western, compared to the expenditure in St Andrew South Western and St Andrew Southern — the latter two being seats that Holness’s Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) knew it would not win — tells a story about Holness’s mindset.

But one really need not deduce anything from Holness’s actions in how funds are spent ahead of by-elections, one just needs to listen to his very words. He asserted that he sees nothing wrong in spending on roads in constituencies ahead of by-elections. The obvious question, therefore, is: If the roads needed fixing, why wait for a by-election to fix them?

The opportunity for corruption in the portfolios directly controlled by the prime minister, especially in the mega Ministry of Economic Growth and Job Creation, also arises because of the sheer size of the ministry and the inefficiency it inevitably breeds. There are some 50 agencies under that ministry in the Office of the Prime Minister. The long time it may take for approvals to be received places investments at risk, and inefficiency breeds corruption — as Justice Minister Delroy Chuck said about the justice system.

The prime minister has also acknowledged this in relation to delays in investment projects, the approval of which fall under the control of his ministry. I recall my good friend Martin Henry, who writes for another paper, chiding the prime minister on his repeated “Ask Daryl”, pointing out that an individual is not a system. Someone needs to do a process flow at the Office of the Prime Minister to assess efficiency.

I have had direct exposure to the perils of the inefficiency. Having endured a torturous journey since 2009 to get phase 2 of a small subdivision approved, the environmental permit was finally obtained in June 2016, but the conditions of approval were not received from the relevant municipal corporation until January 2018. These were signed and returned promptly, but to date the final approval is yet to be received. I had spoken with a contact person in the Ministry of Economic Growth and Job Creation in February of this year concerning the matter and she advised that, while the documentation was received, the ministry had advised that no further signed applications would be returned to her unit until the end of March. At the time of writing (end of April) the final documentation had not been received.

Having spoken to the contact person and receiving the unsatisfactory answer I wrote to the relevant minister, who in this case is the prime minister. The fact that I had to write to the minister means that the system is broken. Happily, and unsurprisingly, the prime minister passed the matter to, you’ve guessed it, Daryl Vaz. Minister Vaz contacted me and within a week the documents were signed. While I am grateful for the speedy intervention (after two years of waiting) the prompt response is not a sign of an efficient system, but a broken one.

My friends have told me that if I was not so ‘mean’, there could have been an easier route and I would have got the approval years ago.

The face of corruption

The US State Department’s annual International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) report states that corruption remains entrenched and widespread in Jamaica. Corruption sucks five per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) annually from the economy. Think for a moment what a legacy it would be if Holness were to raise the bar on probity, transparency, fairness, and good governance and were able to reduce corruption to one per cent of GDP over the next two years. That would translate to four per cent in GDP growth. Given the choking and deterring effect of corruption on investments, reducing corruption would significantly spur a level of economic activity that would be unprecedented.

Transparency International defines corruption as: “The abuse of entrusted power for private gain.” This gain can be financial and non-financial. The World Bank asserts that corruption is a major hindrance to economic growth and has a corrosive impact on the fabric of society. It further posits that the impact on the private sector is also considerable as it distorts competition and is estimated to add 10 per cent or more to the costs of doing business in many parts of the world. In Jamaica, the added cost of corruption to projects is perhaps in the region of 30 per cent.

Hector Boham and Sam Rockson Asamoah, in a 2011 article, discuss 10 ways in which corruption hampers economic development. The list includes higher consumer prices, reduced investments and the consequential reduction in available goods and services resulting in inflation, reduced foreign direct investment, and reduced ability of government to provide vital services as budgets are underfunded.

Corruption is the main reason for public apathy and mistrust of politicians and political parties. It is partly to be blamed for the meltdown of the financial sector in the 1990s. The massive overruns on projects and the fees paid for security and other community costs are all related to corruption. Election campaign spending is a major avenue for corrupt activity. Corruption is the reason behind many murders and contract killings. Corruption is partly responsible for the delays in the justice system, delays in the subdivision approval process, the congestion at Customs, etc.

Leading from in front

Given the undeniable stranglehold that corruption has on the society and the economy, I urge Prime Minister Holness and Leader of the Opposition Dr Peter Phillips to truly make the elimination of all forms of corruption their mission.

The prime minister must become the chief apostle for the mandate he has given the newly appointed Integrity Commission to make Jamaica the “least corrupt place on Earth”. The leadership of this mission is his job, first and foremost, and he must lead from in front. The leader of the Opposition has the second-highest duty in this matter, and he too must lead from in front.

Leading from in front means giving the Integrity Commission all the support and resources it needs to do its job.

Leading from in front means that the prime minister and the leader of the Opposition must hold the members to the highest standards of probity and transparency, which means, as a start, that they both disclose all their assets. Both leaders must also hold the parliamentarians on their respective sides to the same high bar of transparency and probity.

Leading from the front means managing the selection and accountability processes of their parties in such a way that:

(a) Members of Parliament or Cabinet who utter corrupt intent or engage in corrupt behaviour must be brought to account.

(b) Members of Parliament and ministers who evade taxes must be exposed.

“Make Jamaica corrupt-free” would be a powerful campaign slogan for either party, but more importantly a wealth-creating mission. Under this banner could be packed further campaign finance reform, constitutional reform, public sector reform, transformation of the justice system, significantly reducing waste of public resources, and much more.

Our role in the fight

I must confess my loss of faith in the commitment of large sections of the media and civil society to probity and accountability. I am of the view that the Government of the day is getting a pass on many things. I think every reasonable person would agree that the acerbic criticism of government which was characteristic of most media outlets up to recently has disappeared. Civil society groups seem to no longer exist. But citizens can be assured that the new Integrity Commission Act provides the space for each of us to be part of the fight against corruption.

Two provisions of the Act are worth noting:

Part IV, Section 35 (1): “Any person may orally or in writing, make a complaint, or give information on, or notify the commission about a matter which involves or may involve an act of corruption or non-compliance with the provisions of (the) Act.”

Part IV, Section 35 (6): “No action, suit, prosecution, or other proceedings shall be instituted against a person who makes a complaint under subsection (1) in good faith in pursuance of the provisions of (the) Act.”

Corruption is the number one problem that the country faces. Let’s end the talk and actively pursue the exposure and elimination of corruption, in all its forms, wherever in the system it may exist.

Dr Canute Thompson is head of the Caribbean Centre for Educational Planning, lecturer in the School of Education, and co-founder and chief consultant for the Caribbean Leadership Re-Imagination Initiative, at The University of the West Indies, Mona. He is also author of three books and several articles on leadership. Send comments to the Observer or canutethompson1@gmail.com.