Despite deliberating since 2023 in a bid to sign off on a job description for Members of Parliament (MPs), the Opposition has expressed its preference for a code of conduct for politicians while the Government is all in on job descriptions.

According to Opposition Member of Parliament for St Andrew South Eastern Julian Robinson, based on the draft report, and his own thinking, as well as the fact that 11 of 14 other jurisdictions examined did not have job descriptions, he did not think that was the route Jamaica should take.

“When I think of the Westminster model [which Jamaica practices] I’m not convinced that job descriptions really move us forward, I’m very bought into codes of conduct and ensuring that there are appropriate safeguards, but I think we’re going to struggle to really come down on an agreeable job description and I’m not convinced it is going to assist the process of accountability,” said Robinson.

He was speaking during Thursday’s virtual meeting of the joint select committee dealing with proposals for job descriptions, codes of conduct and performance standards for parliamentarians.

“I think the focus should be more on a code of conduct rather than job description,” Robinson emphasised.

Responding, Juliet Holness, chair of the committee, and Member of Parliament for St Andrew East Rural, said: “A code of conduct can become a part of what persons consider to be intrinsic in the job that we do. The call for Members of Parliament to have job descriptions, in a sense, is connected to what persons feel we should have as the regular system of earning a salary or income from Government and having a duty or responsibility to be able to report on the job we do”.

Holness argued that for many, a code of conduct “was more perceived as how we operate and treat with the public; issues of integrity, issues of accountability for resources, but there is still a disconnect where persons feel that we need to be able to describe exactly what the job that we’re expected to do as MPs is, and be accountable for that job as we’re best able to describe it”.

Robinson, though, argued, “I do understand the public’s desire for job descriptions, it’s just that I see so many challenges with it.”

Stating that it will be difficult to measure the performance of MPs, Robinson said, “It’s going to be difficult, for example, when you look at the implementation of projects. We have some say over the CDF (Constituency Development Fund), which is $20 million. Outside of that we’re totally dependent on other government agencies who may provide funding for various things, we have no control over that”.

Robinson questioned how the performance of back benchers would be measured, remarking that “Frankly, in our system, they really do not have any great opportunity to contribute legislatively since the legislative agenda is driven by the executive. So how do you measure that. Someone who’s not very active in the Parliament per se, do they get a lower grade because they don’t speak much but they could be active in committees? Is that part of the measurement system?”

“All of those things are subjective. It’s very hard to come down on an objective measure for any of those things,” Robinson cautioned while noting that attendance and participation at Parliament, including committee meetings, are easier to measure.

For his part, Government Senator Kavon Gayle said that he was in full support of job descriptions for MPs while noting that there has been a demand for the performance measure.

Gayle said it was important to separate legislative duties from constituency duties. He pointed out that legislatively, politicians are expected to attend and participate in sittings and debates, review bills and vote on bills.

“That’s the parliamentary work,” he said.

Turning to the constituency, Gayle said, “A great degree of expectation is anticipated; what is it that you must do in your constituency, how do you liaison, how do you build out your constituency as a representative of the people? Do you hold regular constituency meetings?”

Said Gayle, “There’s always going be anticipation; the challenge is that in this day and age, who really assesses you? For the MPs the assessment takes place every five years — an election. You will know if you have performed or not, and the people watch you.

“We have to have in place, in the very least, some detailed minimum standards that would form part of a job description and we may want to consider if we roll into that job description, a level of expectation that comes out in terms of the code of conduct,” Gayle continued.

Holness conceded that the Parliament will likely be forced to do some public of the role and function of MPs.

“I don’t believe we do enough of that, and that is part of the reason why this call has been made [for job descriptions],” she said. “We have to meet the public where they are.”

Opposition Senator Lambert Brown said the majority of parliaments do not have job descriptions and, like Robinson, his preference was for a code of conduct for politicians.

Government Senator Abka Fitz-Henley said his view was that job descriptions will be of some utility.

“It might not be the panacea to address, in a comprehensive … manner, the concern emanating from members of the public and members of civil society concerning what is viewed as ambiguity … concerning the function, expectations of a Member of Parliament,” Fitz-Henley said .

He stated that while “the ultimate judge is election day, when the people have their say, it can also assist the Member of Parliament in addressing or clarifying what the expectation really should be, and what the function of the Member of Parliament is across the country”.

On June 20, 2023, Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness tabled in the House of Representatives job descriptions for parliamentarians in the form of a green paper and for ministers, in the form of a white paper.

“These will set out the strategic objective of the post, its purpose, reporting and accountability, the key deliverables and responsibility areas, performance standards, competencies, contacts, and the working conditions,” Holness said at the time.

“In proposing a job description, we are not suggesting anything new or outside our laws and Constitution. However, few people have a full appreciation of what the appointment requires. It is hoped that this job description will help members of the public better appreciate and understand the roles and responsibilities of ministers and Members of Parliament,” he added.