The Walker pay report leaves no doubt that something is rotten in the state boardrooms of Jamaica. It catalogues a pattern of abuse of government guidelines at the Bank of Jamaica, National Investment Bank of Jamaica, the National Development Bank, Jamaica Promotions Limited, HEART/NTA and Port Authority. It blames the problems on a failure to communicate adequately, ignorance of proper procedure, and silence on the part of government ministers from the various portfolios.

“It has been the government’s stated policy since 1984 that any proposal for the increase of emoluments to officers in all statutory bodies and government companies require the prior approval of the Ministry responsible for the Public Service… the entities did not adhere to the guidelines set by Cabinet and/or the relevant acts in negotiating and setting rates for the staff… senior officers of the various entities and their respective boards operated as if the responsibility for determining emoluments payable to all levels of staff rested primarily, if not solely with the board.”

The report particularly criticizes the BOJ’s 1997 implementation of a job evaluation done by the Canadian Hay Group. It said the ministry was advised of the results only after the study was concluded. But BOJ governor Derick Latibeaudiere insists that he kept Donald Buchanan, minister of state in the finance ministry with responsibility for public sector salaries, fully informed. He says they had two meetings on the issue and cites a letter to Mr. Buchanan giving full costing of the salaries and benefits negotiated.

According to Mr. Latibeaudiere “I don’t use definitive words like “wrong”, but I think he [Mr. Walker] may have had it incorrect.” Mr. Buchanan, since named Minister of Labour and Social Security, has refused to comment on the matter.

Last year the BOJ’s non-executive board members submitted to Finance Minister Omar Davis a report partially penned by financial secretary Shirley Tyndall expressing doubt in Mr. Latibeaudiere’s probity. The Finance Minister dismissed the report and reaffirmed his confidence in the governor. The bank’s board has not met since, despite being mandated to have at least 10 meetings per year.

No market economy can function effectively without a credible central bank. Can the bank function efficiently if board members have no confidence in the governor, who is executive chairman of the board? Can it function properly if the board is not meeting on a regular basis? Can it function effectively if the financial secretary, who must be a member of the bank’s board under the Bank of Jamaica act, is not on cordial speaking terms with the governor?

While the governor’s salary was rising, lower level staff were being laid off. Can the public be sure that the governor, who has in effect usurped the board’s power, was not acting in his own interest? This is not to question Mr. Latibeaudiere’s integrity. But Caesar’s wife must be seen to be virtuous.

Mr. Latibeaudiere, Mr. Walker, Mr. Buchanan and Ms. Tyndall can not all be correct. Someone was either incompetent or dishonest. But who is in charge? Who is ultimately responsible for having allowed such an untenable situation to arise? The answer must be Finance Minister Davis and Prime Minister Patterson. Only they can decide who was at fault and act accordingly.

The issue here is one of principle, not personality. The salary scandal broke over 11 months ago. Yet no board member or CEO has been publicly fired. The NDB’s Nathan Richards was on the move before it came out. And the NIBJ’s Gavin Chen seems to have left voluntarily with a golden handshake. Except for commissioning the Walker report, the government has done nothing

But so what is new? There have been countless cases of public sector mismanagement or worse over the years. The only results have been reports. In the last decade alone we saw

- Report of UNDP Management Development Programme Mission to Jamaica, Stowe and Morgan 1991.

- Report of Committee of Advisors on Government Structure, Nettleford, 1992.

- Jamaica Public Service Reform, Jenkins, 1994.

- Project Completion Report, Jamaica, Public Administration Reform Project, 1995.

- Report of Committee Appointed to Examine and Make Recommendations to the Jamaican Government to Improve Efficiency and Accountability of Public Sector Entities, Thorburn, 1995.

- Task Force to Reduce Waste in the Public Sector, Orane, 1999.

Yet the recommendations of such reports are never heeded. And when yet another scandal breaks out, tax payers’ money is again wasted on restating the obvious. Because they all come to the same conclusion.

“Processes of governance are thus fettered by lack of urgency in policy implementation [and] inattention to norms of accountability” – Nettleford.

“The problem lies at the centre and top of the government of Jamaica – and here there is a void, a black hole, where there should be authority and skill, command and control.” Stowe and Morgan.

“There are many reports looking at the systems, well written and well argued, both by Jamaicans and by outside observers. What is missing is effective implementation.” Jenkins.

“The lack of action in key areas called into question the commitment to reform at the high levels of government.” PAR Project.

“A symptom of our failure as a nation in this regard is the seemingly unending stream of committees, task forces, consultants and advisors to study this subject.” Orane.

Clearly our politicians like things the way they are, as it allows them greater discretion and hence more power. An efficiently run public service would only threaten their hegemony. Whitehall was the model for our civil service, where ministers only set policy and left implementation to professional and apolitical bureaucrats. But we have drifted far away from that. Ministers and lower level politicians now manage the small aspects of their ministries and there is virtually no transparency or accountability. The dismal results are all around us.

The main recommendation of the Thorburn Report was for umbrella legislation with one set of uniform rules and standardized documentation for all public sector bodies. It also argued in favour of a decentralized New Zealand style system. The Ministry of Finance it found was simply unable to monitor everything adequately.

If the government had used these straightforward guidelines to formulate official policy, the current pay scandal would likely never have arisen. But those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.