By Vernon Daley, Parliamentary ReporterTHE LEADERS of this country have an unfortunate habit of setting up task forces and commissions to study major national issues, then turn around and ignore the findings of such groups.
Since Independence in 1962 we have expended substantial sums of money to do a great number of studies, many of which are covered in thick dust in 'never, never land' of the various Ministries and their departments.
Many of the problems relating to crime and the economy, with which we are now struggling have been extensively studied in the past. Perhaps some have even been over-studied. Regrettably, our leaders seem to think that the mere setting up of task forces is an end in itself. How else can we explain the listless approach they take in using the recommendations of such groups?
In his 11 years as leader of this country, Prime Minister P.J. Patterson has shown a curious love for setting up task forces and committees whenever there is a major national crisis and a certain solid substance hits the fan. This is an unenviable distinction, if there was ever one.
During his stewardship, the Prime Minister has mandated at least 17 committees, task forces or commissions of enquiry. Sadly, the recommendations from several of them have not been used.
For example the task force on sugar headed by Marjorie Henriques, in 2001 recommended radical measures to turn around the sugar industry, including lay-offs and factory closures. The Government still has not stated whether it will take on any of the recommendations.
All of this becomes relevant because the government is to set up yet another task force. This time, the issue at hand is the whole business of state funding for political parties. In the Senate last Friday, Leader of Government Business Burchell Whiteman indicated that the government would set up a broad-based commission within the first quarter of the next financial year, to look at the issue.
Government Senator, Professor Trevor Munroe, who tabled the resolution last year calling for such a commission, must be pleased at the news. The issue of financing for the political parties is a crucial matter at this time given the great expense involved in running an election campaign.
During the last election, the secretariat of the governing People's National Party (PNP) reportedly spent in the region of $300 million while the Opposition Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) is said to have shelled out about half that amount. This, of course, doesn't include the money individual candidates raised for their campaigns.
The question that arises is this: Where is all this money coming from? The parties say members' dues do not account for much, and so the major source of funding would be contributions from corporate Jamaica. But does corporate Jamaica really have that kind of money to back political parties? And if they do make that level of expenditure, what are they getting in return?
Even more troubling, as has been suggested by some political watchers, is the possibility that 'dirty money' from the drug trade could be finding its way into the coffers of political representatives at the constituency level.
Is it possible that our politicians are representing 'other interests' than the ones they were elected to serve? A troubling thought, indeed!
Following the October 2002 polls, many losing candidates cried foul, claiming that they were outspent by their opponents who had access to illicit funds. This has not been fully brought out in public, but the whisperings continue. It might be a case of sour grapes, but I suspect there is something more to these concerns.
Even while this threat to our electoral system is clear and present, the current law, which should give some protection, has no sting. Under the Represent-ation of the People Act, no candidate should spend more than $3 million on his election campaign between Nomination Day and Election Day. A candidate who exceeds this amount can lose his right to vote in or contest elections for up to 10 years.
But who is going to know if a candidate goes beyond the limit? Apart, from that candidate having a severe attack of conscience, which robs him of the essence of being a politician, there is little chance that he would be revealing his misdeeds to our electoral officials. At the same time, there is no set procedure for auditing the candidates accounts, which leaves us all in a rather helpless state.
These are matters that this commission on party financing will have to consider deeply when it is named. It will also have to look seriously at whether the time has come when we have to commit substantial resources as a country to finance the work of our political parties.
This is not an easily sold idea. With politicians being so unpopular, fierce opposition to such a suggestion is not difficult to image. But, if our democracy is important to us, then as a country we can't shy away from the need to wean the political parties from the corporate donors, and possibly the drug dealers, who seek to extend their influence and control.
One only hopes that the Prime Minister will take the recommendations of this commission seriously, no matter what they are, and show us that he is not about setting up such bodies for their own sake.
Send comments to: vernon.daley@gleanerjm.com.
