In case you missed it, the prime minister announced the national Constituency Mitigation and Cleaning Programme, which is to be implemented next month through the National Works Agency (NWA) and the National Solid Waste Management Authority (NSWMA).

Under this programme, all 63 constituencies will receive an individual allocation of $22 million to tackle minor civil works and public sanitation for the following:

1) $10 million for road repair and patching of potholes in major communities, housing schemes roads, or re-sheeting where possible;

2) $6 million: de-bushing of verges and overgrown drains to include removing debris, cutting and pruning trees, and foliage from roadways, sidewalks, gully banks, and other thoroughfares;

3) $3 million: cleaning and de-silting drains;

4) $3 million: beautification, sanitation, and carting away waste

To be clear, Members of Parliament (MP) do not receive this money to spend. Instead, they recommend areas for these works and possible contractors to the State agencies. It is the NWA, and the NSWMA who will implement and certify that all the specified work is completed properly under this programme, and they undertake to pay the suppliers directly. They are accountable for operating, maintaining, and improving the country’s leading main road network and flood control systems.

Meanwhile, parish municipal corporations are responsible for arterial roads. However, this management system doesn’t matter to a resident when his/her road is terrible. “Dem nuh business,” if it’s a parochial road represented by the councillor or a main road represented by the MP.

Year after year, I’ve highlighted that, as a rural MP, the needs are different in accomplishing this task. St Ann South Eastern is one of Jamaica’s largest, if not the largest, geographical constituencies. Therefore, allocating the same amount of money to land areas that are less than half the size of us is not rational. This approach forces rural MPs like myself to choose which areas have the greatest need.

Look, for example, at the size of Kingston constituencies versus rural constituencies. Should we continue to allocate the exact amounts for bushing and drain cleaning to Trelawny Southern as we do for St Andrew West Central or St Andrew Southern, which has more paved sidewalks?

Since we do not have a national ongoing routine maintenance programme for trimming and removing overgrown bushes throughout the year, shouldn’t we distribute the resources for these kinds of activities according to the size of a constituency?

Recall last year when islandwide protests erupted in constituencies as motorists demonstrated against bad road conditions calling on their political representatives and the Government to address the matter. Rural constituencies were where the anger overflowed as residents blocked traffic and complained about the expensive reality of maintaining the front-end parts of their cars. Others lamented the size of potholes, dust, and frustration because of the neglect.

Recognising the reality, the minister with responsibility for works declared to Parliament, “The NWA estimates that [it] needs somewhere in the region of $100 billion to start to make a dent in this problem faced by many Jamaicans.”

My frustration led me to pen ‘We Need Better Roads’ last July.

Today, we still do not have an equitable system to allocate funding to districts, nor do we have a transparent system for establishing consistent quality standards to ensure how more roads are rehabilitated (not patched), how our road networks are de-bushed, and how regular maintenance will allow them to last and not need remedial work annually.

For as long as I have been elected an MP I can tell you that I have had to fix the same roads year after year. Why? Because as soon as rain comes the little ‘patching’ the NWA certifies washes off. So, invariably, the monies for roadwork are perpetually spent repeatedly on the same spaces.

It feels like insanity, simply doing the same thing over and over, the same way with the same faulty results every time.

What’s more, de-bushing is an annual exercise that we must allocate through our Constituency Development Fund as a project, or wait until the minister of works or the prime minister announces monies for this activity and be glad that our constituencies have been allocated monies for ‘likkle’ annual works, as MPs.

The fact that we are equating de-bushing with developing a constituency is ridiculous and retrograde. Why don’t we fund the NWA and the municipal corporations adequately and let them manage and implement these activities throughout the year. Members of Parliament ought not to be associated with how de-bushing or fixing roads are managed. Yet, our constituents have come to rely on us for these activities, and we are judged harshly when they are not done.

If our objective is better governance then we cannot continue to rely on the systems that don’t work. Or is it always the objective of spending some money at Christmas to give the people a short-term impression that the Government is addressing the problem?

Let me repeat: It is time we step away from the Santa Claus status we have taken on as leaders. What are we really known for to the public? Giving away fertilisers, fixing and de-bushing roads, and back-to-school vouchers?

It’s time to press reset, and for us to think seriously and set policies for actual long-term development, moving away from doing what’s popular to now doing what’s right.

Development is not a one-size-fits-all, but rather a careful deliberation of the look, size, character, and culture of a town and its people. If we say we want to build Jamaica, then let’s build it using key metrics to solve our problems and bring solutions.

One way to start is to prorate funds for roads and works according to the kilometres of road in a constituency, and the traffic load that traverse the areas. Taking a long-term approach, we would also ensure that the drainage is adequate before we spend money to fix the roads.

Let us do the things that will leave lasting footprints of our leadership.