POST CABINET REPORT For June 7, 2023
Board Appointments
The Cabinet had before it an amendment to the Board of Management of the College of Agriculture, Science and Education (CASE). Cabinet approved the recommendation for the appointment of Mr. Everett Hyatt, as Vice Chairman of the Board, in place of Mr. Andrew Warwar, who had resigned.
The Cabinet had before it Submission in connection with the appointment of members to the Falmouth Hospital (FH) Management Committee; and gave approval for the appointment of the following persons to the Management Committee for a period of three years, with effect from 15 May 2023 to 14 May 2026: ·
Mr. Kenneth Grant – Chairman ·
Mrs. Patricia Greaves-Silver
Mr. Keron Young
Mr. O’Brian Miller
Ms. Dionne Campbell
Mr. Jonathan Bartley
Ms. Judith Moore Ex Officio Members
Mr. St. Andrade Sinclair, Regional Director, Western Regional Health Authority (WRHA)
Mrs. Keriesa Bell-Cummings, Chief Executive Officer, FH
Dr. Dianne Campbell-Stennett, Regional Technical Director, WRHA
Dr. Leighton Perrins, Senior Medical Officer, FH
Mrs. Pauline Dawkins-Palmer, Matron, FH
Mrs. Princess Wedderburn, Parish Manager, Trelawny
Mr. Lincoln Dunkley, Nominee of the Chairman, Board of WRHA
Miss Shanique Flemming – Representative of the employees at FH
The Cabinet gave approval for the appointment of the following persons to the Cornwall Regional Hospital (CRH) Management Committee for a period of three years, with effect from 15 May 2023 to 14 May 2026:
Mr. David Baugh – Chairman
Mrs. Odette Soberram-Dyer
Reverend Ruel Robinson
Mrs. Suzette Ramdanie-Linton, JP
Ms. Patrice Ricketts, JP
Ms. Cemone Matherson
Mr. Mark McGann
Ex Officio Members
Mr. St. Andrade Sinclair, Regional Director, Western Regional Health Authority (WRHA)
Mrs. Charmaine Williams-Beckford, Chief Executive Officer, CRH
Dr. Dianne Campbell-Stennett, Regional Technical Director, WRHA
Dr. Derek Harvey, Senior Medical Officer, CRH
Ms. Gillian Ledgister, Matron, CRH
Mr. Lennox Wallace, Parish Manager, St. James
Mr. Dwight Crawford, Nominee of the Chairman, Board of WRHA
Mr. Kimani Jones, Representative of the employees of the CRH
The Cabinet gave approval for the appointment of Mr. Christopher Whyms-Stone to the Board of Directors of the Tourism Product Development Company, with effect from 15 May 2023 to 1 November 2024, when the tenure of the Board would expire.
Cabinet approved the appointment of the following persons to the Independent Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel, with effect from 15 May 2023 to 8 May 2025, when the tenure of the Panel would expire:
Mrs. Meg Georgia Gibson Henlin, KC – Chairperson
Ms. Catherine Minto – Vice Chairperson
Decisions
The Cabinet had before it Submission for the provision of general insurance coverage and brokerage services for the NWC’s facilities islandwide for a period of three years from 2023/2024 to 2025/2026.
Cabinet gave approval for the award of a contract by the National Water Commission (NWC) for the provision of general insurance coverage and brokerage services for the NWC’s facilities island wide for a period of three years from 2023/2024 to 2025/2026, to Gallagher Insurance Brokers Jamaica Limited, with the premium for the 2023/2024 contract year, as under:
- US$3,747,196.00, exclusive of General Consumption Tax (GCT), for the US$ Denominated Risks; and
- (ii) J$17,980,356.00, exclusive of GCT, for the Jamaican Dollar Denominated Risks.
The Committee considered the award of a contract for the construction of a classroom block at Holmwood Technical High School, Christiana, Manchester; and, in keeping with the endorsement of the Public Procurement Commission, recommended for the approval of the Cabinet, the award of a contract in the amount of $184,999,619.06 to C&D Construction and Engineering Limited.
Cabinet considered the award of contracts for the procurement of pharmaceuticals for a period of three years; and, in keeping with the endorsement of the Public Procurement Commission, recommended for the approval of the Cabinet, the award of contracts totalling US$176,775,733.42, inclusive of General Consumption Tax, or $27,400,238,679.86 to 53 supplies under:
Statement to the Press
Hon. Robert Nesta Morgan MP, JP
Minister without Portfolio in the Office of the Prime Minister
with responsibility for Information
I refer to the Integrity Commission Press Release dated June 6 2023.
The commission makes several claims that are not borne out in fact. I will address them in point form as they relate to myself as Minister without Portfolio with Responsibly for Information.
- The Commission states: “The Commission is surprised by the Minister’s comments, particularly having regard to what has in fact transpired in this matter. The Communications Minister, the Hon. Nesta Morgan, has also made a number of public remarks concerning the Commission’s Leadership Code of Conduct that might have confused the public. This is also surprising since the Jamaica Information Service (JIS), which falls under his portfolio, has, from the very outset, benefited directly from extensive clarifications, from the Commission, regarding the Code. The Commission, therefore, wishes to set the record straight so that the public is not in any way misguided.
Response 1. Those interested should note that currently in this administration there is no “Communications Minister, the Hon. Nesta Morgan” The proper form for this post I hold is: Minister Without Portfolio with Responsibility for Information.
Response 2. The commission states at this “Communications Minister, the Hon. Nesta Morgan”, “has also made a number of public remarks concerning the Commission’s Leadership Code of Conduct that might have confused the public”.
The public should be aware that at the Post Cabinet Press Briefing on April 19 2023 a reporter from the RJR Communications Group asked:
“Has the Prime Minister or any Member of Cabinet singed the Leadership Code of Conduct that the integrity Commission invited the PM and his cabinet to sign from last year and if no can you provide an explanation to why this has not been done”.
I responded,
“I have not been presented with a Code of Conduct to sign. I have not been consulted and I am speaking for myself as a duly elected Member of Parliament and as a member of the Cabinet, I have not been presented with a Code of Conduct to sign. No Code of Conduct has been presented to me to sign. No consultations has been had with me as a duly elected Member of Parliament on a Code of Conduct. So I am pretty much unable to comment on a Code of Conduct that I have never seen or had any discussions with anyone about”.
This was the sum of my comment at the Post Cabinet Press Briefing on the matter, a comment caused by a question by the media, not a comment initiated by me.
Yet the Integrity Commission says, “The Communications Minister, the Hon. Nesta Morgan, has also made a number of public remarks concerning the Commission’s Leadership Code of Conduct that might have confused the public.
The question needs to be answered by the Commission as to whether anything I said in my comments reside far from fact.
I assert that nothing I said is erroneous as up to this moment the Commission has never presented me with a Code of Conduct or consulted with me. That the Commission has accused me of statements that in their words: “might have confused the public” is potentially, at least, mischievous and might, worst, undermine my credibility as the Minister with responsibility for Information.
Additionally, the fact the Commission may have engaged the Jamaica Information Service does not defeat the fact that up to today, I, as the minister was never engaged by them directly on a Code.
- In point 3 of their own statement, the Commission states, “The Commission, on November 15, 2022, wrote a joint letter to the Most Hon. Prime Minister (MHPM) and the Opposition Leader, requesting that they should commit to the Code on their own behalf, and on behalf of the Members of their Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet, respectively. The identical Code was appended to both letters.
Response 3. In their own release the Commission has finally admitted that their, “requesting that they (PM and Opposition Leader) should commit to the Code on their own behalf, and on behalf of the Members of their Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet, respectively.
They admit that at no point in their initial correspondence did they indicate that Cabinet Ministers should sign the Code. We must ask the Commission, how did it come to pass that Cabinet Ministers are now required?
Was it the opposition Leader who made that suggestion?
They admit this change in point 6 of their release, “The Opposition Leader was the first Public Official to sign and commit to the Commission’s Leadership Code of Conduct. He did so on January 9, 2023. However, rather than sign on behalf of the Members of his Shadow Cabinet, he wrote to the Commission to seek its authorization for each of them to sign the Code in their own right. The Commission granted its approval to the request. Subsequently, 10 other members of the Shadow Cabinet have since formally signed the Code.”
Is it appropriate for this independent commission which states that it will not, “subject itself to the undue influence or desires of any person, official or authority, while discharging its lawful functions under the law” to make such a fundamental change at the behest of the Opposition Leader?
- In its own press release, the commission states that, “The preamble to the Commission’s Code of Conduct expressly states that it is predicated on the fact that special training has been administered, by the Commission, to the Members of the Cabinet, and to the Members of the Shadow Cabinet. This was done between November 9, 2020 and February 15, 2021, and between November 15, 2021 and May 30, 2022, respectively. The training took the form of 12 specialized “Anti-Corruption and Good Governance Workshops,” that were developed by the Commission for that specific purpose”.
Response 4. I wish to state unequivocally, and I challenge the commission to provide evidence that this Cabinet Minister was invited or received any training from the commission.
This statement that, “training has been administered, by the Commission, to the Members of the Cabinet, and to the Members of the Shadow Cabinet was done between November 9, 2020 and February 15, 2021, and between November 15, 2021 and May 30, 2022, respectively” – is problematic at least.
The public should note that my appointment as Cabinet Minister was on January 10, 2022, this is after such training. For the commission to state in their release that all Cabinet Ministers received training and by extension should acquiesce to the Code based on this training is factually flawed.
Response 5. Like the Integrity Commission, we too have been, “bound by a solemn Statutory Oath of Office. It is the common thread that binds them together. It is an Oath that requires them to faithfully discharge their functions, and to do so only in the public interest”.
Comment.
As a politician in Jamaica, I appreciate the sentiment expressed by the Integrity Commission regarding the importance of integrity, governance, and accountability in public office. It is indeed crucial for political leaders to demonstrate their commitment to these principles. However, I would like to highlight that ministers and members of parliament in Jamaica are already bound by various codes of practice and accountability frameworks.
Jamaica has implemented several measures to ensure the highest standards of conduct and ethics among its political leaders.
In addition to the Integrity Commission Act, we now have the Code of Conduct for Parliamentarians, which provides a comprehensive framework for ethical behaviour and accountability. This code outlines principles such as honesty, integrity, and the responsible use of public resources, emphasizing the standards expected from our political leaders.
Furthermore, various laws and regulations, such as the Financial Administration and Audit Act and the Public Bodies Management and Accountability Act, impose strict financial management and reporting requirements on ministers and public officials. These frameworks aim to ensure responsible and transparent use of public funds, as well as effective governance practices.
It is essential for the public to be aware of these existing codes of practice and accountability frameworks that already bind our political leaders. While signing an additional code could symbolize commitment, it is equally important to recognize the substantial measures already in place to uphold integrity, governance, and accountability. It cannot be reasonable and fair for us to be intimidated and threatened to sign an additional Code without even an iota of consultation.
As a politician in Jamaica, I assure the people that I am dedicated to upholding these principles and adhering to the existing codes and frameworks that govern our conduct. I am committed to serving with transparency, accountability, and the utmost integrity, working towards the betterment of Jamaica and its people.
While I understand the importance of the Integrity Commission and its role in promoting accountability, I believe it is necessary to offer constructive criticism and identify areas for improvement. It cannot be that Parliamentarians are being attacked by the Commission for doing their job of reviewing the law and making suggestions.
One concern that arises is the perception created by the Commission’s statement. While it is essential to assert independence and resistance to undue influence, the tone and wording of the comment may come across as confrontational or defensive. This could inadvertently undermine public confidence in the Commission’s ability to carry out its duties impartially.
Furthermore, there have been instances where the Commission’s actions have been called into question, such as the incident with the Prime Minister, raising concerns about its effectiveness.
Some have criticized the length of time it takes for investigations to be concluded, leading to delays in accountability and justice. This sluggishness can erode public trust and create a perception that the Commission is not efficiently fulfilling its mandate. Despite a budget of 1.2 billion dollars paid by tax payers, the commission has yet to fully fulfil its mandate.
Another area that requires attention is the clarity and transparency of the Commission’s processes. The public deserves a clear understanding of how the Commission operates, the criteria it uses in conducting investigations, and the decisions it makes. Improved communication and transparency can help build trust and demonstrate the Commission’s commitment to accountability.
Lastly, the Commission must ensure that its actions and investigations are perceived as fair and unbiased. Any hint of political favouritism or selective targeting can erode public trust and undermine the integrity of its work. It is crucial that the Commission is seen as acting in the best interests of the country rather than being influenced by external pressures or political motivations.
Constructive criticism is vital for any institution to grow and improve. I believe that by addressing these concerns, the Integrity Commission can enhance its effectiveness, restore public confidence, and fulfil its mandate to promote integrity, governance, and accountability in Jamaica.