In the three years since he has been Mayor of Kingston, Desmond McKenzie has proven that he is athletic enough to jump across gullies.
He has also placed on display his presumed skills as architect, engineer and building inspector, and has been able to assure us that, unlike his predecessor's, his administration is not comatose. Indeed, we know that Mr. McKenzie actually exists, which could hardly be said of Mrs. Marie Atkins.
Mr. McKenzie and Mrs. Atkins do share something in common. Neither has demonstrated a capacity for running a city, or at least a city that is clean.
In the case of Mayor Atkins, the reason was simple as it was apparent: She was in a tenured trance, totally oblivious of the demands on her perhaps. When she occasionally stirred, Mrs. Atkins probably thought she was doing a good job.
For the frenetic Mr. McKenzie, it is not just that he equates perpetual motion with actual achievement and superior performance. It is something far more dangerously subtle: Desmond McKenzie operates as a politician of the old order.
He hinted at that more than a year ago when he at first resisted the proposal for contracts of a certain size to be automatically made public documents. Mr. McKenzie's party leader eventually pressured him into acquiescence, but it suggested that the mayor was someone with reservations about transparency.
But the chairman of the KSAC and mayor of Kingston gave fresh impetus to this perception last week when, in speaking about the programme for cleaning up the city in preparation for the Cricket World Cup matches to be held in Jamaica, he lamented that he has a budget of only $28 million. He had originally proposed to spend $191 million.
It is perhaps true that given the current state of the city, it would require nearly $200 million to clean up. The more important factor though, is that it shouldn't have been allowed to come to this. It has, because in the politics into which Mr. McKenzie was schooled, even the simplest of projects demand big bucks. What is important, in our view, whether in the management of the central government, a municipal authority or a private business, is to spend money wisely and ensure that you get the best return on the investment.
The point we make is that keeping the city in relative cleanliness ought not to be an overly expensive business. Indeed, it is largely low-wage labour that is required to clean drains, trim verges or bush vacant lots.
The problem faced by those who run these things and have been unable to break free of the old strictures, is that most of the cash allocated to projects does not go towards getting the job done. Such systems may be good for the distribution of pork, but not for efficiency. And it shows only too well in the city, particularly downtown, in areas not far from where Mr. McKenzie has his office.
If Mr. McKenzie wishes to test our hypotheses, he need only walk to St. William Grant Park, recently highlighted by this newspaper. We hope his constitution is strong.
The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.
