It looks like better wisdom prevailed

Mar 21, 2010 AFC Column, Features / Columnists

---

By Sheila Holder, MP and AFC Vice-Chair

The honourable Prime Minister Samuel Hinds has amended his motion threatening to sanction Members of Parliament by hauling them before the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges should they persist in refusing to submit annual declarations to the Integrity Commission (IC).
It is enigmatic how the Prime Minister and his Government intended to ascertain which Members of Parliament were in default given that the IC Act intended it to operate independently from the influence of any person including, the President of Guyana.
This is clearly stated in Section 8 (3) of the Act which makes it pellucid that “in the exercise and discharge of its functions, the Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other person or authority.” It is only the IC members from whom President Jagdeo is authorised to receive declarations according to Part III Section 13 where each of the members of the Commission shall file with the President similar declarations on or before the dates on which such declarations are required by other persons in public life.

The AFC Will Take up the Gauntlet if Necessary
If by bringing this motion to the National Assembly the Guyana Government is signalling that it is ‘throwing down the gauntlet’ then there is no other option open to opposition Members of Parliament vulnerable to this Government’s well known misuse of state power, but to ‘take up the gauntlet.’
It is absolutely necessary that, not only should members of the parliamentary opposition vigorously oppose the audacity of Mr. Hinds’ motion, but also those members on the IC who possess some modicum of independence.
It is truly appalling that PM would advocate such tenacity in view of the international acknowledgement by the Heritage Foundation that Guyana is poorly governed and repressed, listing several areas of governance affected including business, trade, investment, property rights, corruption, labour and the size of the government. It is this World Economic Freedom Rankings that pronounced Guyana the most corrupt country in the Caricom region.

PM’s Motion Follows Improper Edict
Like a Russian Czar, President Jagdeo issued an ‘ukase’ to the IC targeting Members of Parliament apparently ignorant that the Commission was intended to operate independently from the influence of any person including, the President of Guyana.
It is apparent that this motion is coming after that edict failed to elicit the kinds of response desired. So what is the real purpose of this motion? It is, in my opinion intended to hoodwink the public about the true nature of the IC and the true intent of the Guyana Government given the prevailing situation in the IC.
The core issue plaguing the IC is that it is virtually a ‘White Elephant’ for these reasons:
· It is unable to carry out its functions in view of the fact that it seeks to bring under its umbrella too wide and too diverse a number of officials who are required to submit annual returns while not having the ability to interpret and analyse them.
· Bishop George’s resignation from the IC has been in effect since April 2006; essentially making the Commission not properly constituted.
· That the IC has been made ineffective with only three junior level staff members assigned to carry out its functions.
This appears to be a deliberate tactic by government to make the Commission vulnerable to political interference and tampering of submissions for subversive use.
· The fact is that the IC has neither expertise in accounting, nor expertise in financial and judicial matters as stipulated by the Act. This is indicative of the Government’s preference for creating a ‘white elephant’ intended to deceive the public about the true political purpose of the Commission given its lack of investigative capacity.
· In terms of this Motion the Act does not allow for selectively targeting any one group as this Motion intends to do.
· President Jagdeo has essentially already undermined the independence and integrity of the Commission by issuing a directive targeting Members of Parliament; and finally,
· Since the Leader of the Opposition has a matter pertaining to the IC before the High Court the sub judice rule usually applied by the Speaker on matters before the Court should have been sufficient to disallow the PM’s motion.

Beware of PPP/C Propaganda Spin
In anticipation of this Government’s propagandists getting down to work on spreading misinformation about the motives of the Alliance For Change (AFC) in rejecting the motion as emphatically as we intend to, let me make this observation. President Jagdeo and his Government being well aware that the functioning of the IC was in crisis many years ago, commissioned a World Bank (WB) study for the purpose of making recommendations to correct its deficiencies. I attended the WB workshop along with Dr. Roger Luncheon, Head of the Presidential Secretariat, the former IC Chairman Bishop George, Commissioners of the IC and other Members of Parliament.

World Bank Consultants Conclusions
The conclusions of the workshop were that the Commission was broken beyond repair and had to be reinvented. The New Zealand consultancy firm Bradford & Associates submitted eleven specific recommendations, which the Government of Guyana indicated to the World Bank it would adopt, and went as far as submitting an Action Plan for implementation of these recommendations in 2006:

1. There should be a move to a disclosure regime that requires collection of both personal asset financial data, plus a declaration of personal interest.
2. Publication of Personal Interest Information on an annual basis but not financial details of assets.
3. Reduce the number of public office holders that are required to submit returns.
4. The disclosure regime of MPs should be managed by a registrar in the Clerk of Parliament’s Office.
5. It should be agreed that the disclosure regime of public servants, office holders of State agencies, and key executives of RDCs be managed by the IC.
6. The IC should be expanded along the lines of the Trinidad & Tobago model to take on four roles; Prevention, Investigation, Enforcement and Enlistment of Public Support.
7. A new group of four Commissioners should be appointed with experience in chartered accountancy, judicial office, governmental administration and business management.
8. The appointment of the Commissioners should be carried out by the Parliamentary Appointments Committee.
9. On appointment, the new Chair should spend time with the Trinidad & Tobago Commission to understand their systems, their education programmes and the business plan that it has prepared.
10. The Office of the Auditor General should be nominated as the liaison agency for the IC.
11. That the responsibility for funding the Commission be consistent with it being treated as an independent oversight agency of Parliament and not an agency of the Office of the President.
It is now for the Government of Guyana to state why, after agreeing to this eleven point action plan, it has refused its implementation since 2006.

---

---