Regardless of our politics or political inclination there is a fundamental truth about public policy formulation, decision-making, funding, and implementation that we can all subscribe to: Public policies must not only appear to be thoroughly thought-through, but implementation must also be equitable, safe, and dispassionate.

Public policy decisions and execution should not seek to “let the perfect be the enemy of the good”. At bare minimum, they should solve problems effectively and efficiently. Sometimes, public policy solutions do not require invention, but simple innovation.

At their core, public policies seek to address societal issues and achieve specific goals for the greater good. Accordingly, public policy development, articulation, and ultimate implementation must eschew the allure and influence of misplaced political zealousness, shadiness, despotic fervour, partisan one-upmanship, excesses, and political expediency. To the contrary, it is best when it involves consultation, consensus and enabling compromise.

It is a universally accepted view that for public policy decision-making processes to be effective they require deliberate algorithms of thought and incremental steps. These steps must include problem identification, verification, policy formulation, risk-benefit assessments, opportunity cost analysis, timing of implementation, and a suite of re-evaluations because not all policies are bankable.

Those stages are often iterative and are predisposed to a range of factors, such as stakeholder engagement with heavy reliance on institutional integrity to purge wasteful spending and fraud. In a nutshell, public-policy decision-makers, especially government ministers, should not barricade themselves behind castles of arrogance constructed to protect them from scrutiny and accountability, or that allow them to swing on the fallacy that “the end justifies the means”.

There are animated discussions going in the society regarding the Government’s decision to import refurbished school buses for deployment at the commencement of the 2025/2026 academic year in September. During his sectoral debate presentation Transport Minister Daryl Vaz re-announced a rural school bus system. According to Vaz, 110 buses will facilitate the phased roll-out of the system which will cover 100 routes and 258 of the island’s more than 850 rural schools, impacting 328,000 students. Mathematics aside, whether the 110 buses with maximum consolidated seating capacity of 4,800 can transport 328,000 children daily is a matter for future deliberations.

On the face of it, this mostly rural school bus system has the potential of becoming a positively transformative and revolutionary feature within the education and transport sectors. Alas, as ideas compete in the political marketplace, the Opposition raised legitimate concerns about the quality, reliability, cost, sustainability, suitability, and safety of the used buses. Unsurprisingly, that was when all hell broke loose. First, memories conveniently faded, hardly anyone remembered that the People’s National Party (PNP) had already announced its RIDE programme.

The RIDE programme intends to build on the existing model, schools contract which Coaster buses to transport students. RIDE proposes a public-private partnership element to provide voucher subsidies to parents so their children can access those buses, and where feasible certified taxis, given the remoteness of rural students relative to the schools they attend, and due to challenging topographies where large wide-bodied buses cannot easily operate. Contrary to what the Government and sections of the 4th & 5th estates are incorrectly propagating, the PNP never suggested — and is not now recommending — replacing any future rural school bus system solely with taxis and Coaster buses. The buses and taxis are accretive.

To the chagrin of the Government, the PNP upped the ante by describing the used buses as old buses, while simultaneously expressing misgivings about the feasibility of the Government’s value proposition, as well as deep concerns for the safety of the children who will use these school buses. The Government is not having it. What started with Vaz quickly metastasised to their political allies and unrepentant adherents in the press. Suddenly they have metamorphosed into hollering and hurling the odiously common epithet: “Gweh ah bad mind di dutty PNP dem bad mind…” at their political opponent. The boorish invective aside, conscious-minded Jamaicans must not allow political apathy to cause them to ignore the banality of buttuism inherent in that phrase.

It is a sad reality when we allow our politicians to censor legitimate dissent by ostracising those who “dare to be Daniels…” The pejorative but equally debasing use of “badmindism” as an attack on adversaries have caused fierce family feuds, fuss, fights, and funerals. The PNP’s concerns about these school buses are reasonable and right, given the cloak of obfuscation that surrounds elements of the arrangements, particularly the indecent rush to go to market. My alignment with the call for additional scrutiny does not mean I dislike Minister Vaz or the prime minister any less. I just happen to love Jamaica more.

In the US, retired school buses mostly go straight to scrapyards for melting down and then recycled as scrap metal or converted into recreational vehicles, tiny homes, or mobile business such as food trucks. The average lifespan of a school bus in New York is between 12 to 15 years. In New Jersey, school buses are retired after 12 to 20 years. On the other hand, Florida retires its school buses based on a combination of factors, such as mileage, age, and unavailable funding for replacements. These states retire or decommission school buses because of the prohibitive cost of maintenance, due to wear and tear, mechanical and electrical problems, as well as to reduce greenhouse gases.

I happen to hold strong divergent views from Minister Vaz given my training and experience that a bus, having clocked 15 – 20 years in service, still has 80 per cent of its useful life. Just maybe it would have been better to start off with fewer new and environmentally friendly buses with less maintenance cost and then pursue a strategy of gradualism.

This writer checked everywhere to obtain comparable quotes, makes and models, essential features, manufacturer, and maintenance warranties, after sale service agreements, guarantees, as well as operator training. The checks show that, on an average, the cost for new 60-seater diesel fuelled, types B through D school buses range of between US$100,000 and US$147,000 ($15.9 million and $23.3 million) per unit. A bill of $1.4 billion would translate to between 88 and 60 spanking new school buses, with consolidated seating capacity between 3,600 and 5,280.

Something is seriously amiss. Based on documents that have come to my attention with specific regards to the status of at least three of these school buses, bearing vehicle identification number (VIN) ending B1113564, A1121285, and B1171134, unless unintentionally incorrect; then something is seriously rotten in the State of Jamaica. There is a hole in the bucket. There is a big hole in the bucket.

First, a VIN is a unique 17-character code that acts as a fingerprint that identifies and tracks a vehicle throughout its lifespan, providing information about its manufacturer, origin, specifications, and even its history. I took extraordinary steps and utilised local, state, private, as well as the US Department of Transport search mechanisms to verify the authenticity of the “new” status claim associated with the referenced VIN numbers as appeared in a letter issued under the jamaica trade board as well as under the alleged signature of the director, licensing certification and enforcement. All five different search mechanisms returned the same results. The Chevrolet Express with VIN# ending B1113564 is 14 years old, the Thomas Bus with VIN# ending A1121285 is 15 years old, and the Chevrolet Express with VIN# ending B1171134 is also 14 years old. The Government’s claims that it spent about $1.4 billion to acquire the 110 school buses. That equates to $12.73 million or US$80,045 per bus, versus US$100,000 to US$147,000 on average for brand-new buses. Further checks revealed that a 10-to-15-year-old, 60-to-75-seater school bus with between 135,000 – 175,000 miles values between US$3,000 and US$30,000 in the New York, New Jersey, and Florida regions, depending on the condition of the vehicle. There is a hole in the bucket. There is a big hole in the bucket.

Assuming the higher end of the scale at US$30,000 per unit, then add an extra 30 per cent for other costs, at an exchange rate of $159 to US$1 that would total $682 million for the 110 buses, or $6.2 million versus $12.73 million per bus. Why should Government pay 105 per cent more per bus for a used bus? Given the alarming deficit of material fact between the representations in that alleged Jamaica Trade Board letter and the reliable results of my investigations, Peter Bunting’s display of compassion and mercy is not a synonym of badmindism or vulgarity. His concerns are eminently justifiable, even if expressed with passion, unchained bravado, and oesophageal fortitude.

Christopher Burns is head of global finance, business & administration for a US multinational. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or burnscg@aol.com.

Christopher Burns