Desmond HenryTREASURE BEACH: The sudden announcement by the Ministry of Local Government of a complete reversal in its post-reform administrative structure, is an honest admission that things have not gone well. It has, apparently, caught the public by surprise. A public, that is, which has not been following the pattern of Local Government decay, and which remains blind to the absolute deficiencies in a system celebrated more in ceremonies than in successes.
Over time, I have written no fewer than four columns (might be more) warning of the inevitable failure of a reform programme conceived in sharing "the power of governance", rather than in reforming the equitable division of labour. I pointed out that in a rural context the sharing of power almost always means political power, and has very little to do with the melding of talent - technical, administrative, managerial or productive. And because of these misplaced emphases, our Local Government system remains highly disproportionate and dysfunctional. For example, we spend unavailable resources propping up and supporting oversized administrative structures, when quite the reverse should be taking place. By spreading less resources over a wider area, we are in fact guaranteeing the certain impoverishment of the system.
And so, when two years ago I described the present Local Government Reform as Local Government Chloroform, I incurred the internal anger of the programme managers. My aim was not to belittle, but to indicate the levels of anaesthetic-like incomprehension that afflicted leaders at the local level concerning the reform. And so, whereas before I used to be advised of meetings and discussions, I was no longer told anything. Neither were most rural leaders. And thus poor communicative practices became a fundamental flaw in the system. Bureaucrats, by nature, assume that most people understand most things in precisely the way they do. Which means that any attempts at informed communication is to them, an unnecessary bother. The operating logic it seems to me is, 'I'll tell them when I feel like, and if I don't they'll know eventually, somehow'. And that is precisely the story of the Local Government Reform.
For a programme so fundamentally important to the fate of rural life to be communicated in so casual a fashion is nothing short of disrespect. Go into any rural community today, pick any leader or group of leaders, (including Councillors) ask them about any of the elements in the current reform programme, and then measure the starkness of the wide-eyed stare you get in return. For all practical purposes, the reform programme has been nothing more than a bureaucratically driven non-event. It has been undersold and not understood. Its practical benefits are non-existent, and its positive effects on future development remain non-quantifiable. Its thrust is ceremonial not practical; with everything on autonomy and precious little on economy. In a recent editorial this newspaper has called for "much more consultation and collaboration." To which I say, "Amen."
That's why I, and others, had proposed sometime ago, the sensible use of our existing County system to set up three Local Government County Councils - Cornwall, Middlesex, Surrey - to administer the Councils of the future. The suggestion was unceremoniously backhanded. Now we wake up to find the idea on our parochial doorsteps like an overnight Santa Claus drop-off. Well, I've got news for them. Unless it is fully explained to all the Mayors, Councillors and rural folks whose lives it will ensnare, no good is likely to come from it either.
In addition to cutting waste, County Councils could provide the best training centres for any future Local Government management. They would serve as technical, administrative, economic, marketing and development centres for a new breed of young rural technocrats who would be invited into the system. As graduates of our college systems, they could see a future in rural Jamaica by contributing through the County Councils. They would build the Councils as centres of competitive entrepreneurial excellence. They would enhance and compete with the best in the system. They would retain rural talent. As of now, I can think of only two Councils (Kingston and Mandeville) that are run by trained city managers. The County Councils would become administrative training centres; showpieces of a new rural enterprise.
But even more than that, they would help make the case for revenue-sharing; marketing and investment incentives; greater private/public sector co-operation; housing development; and wider and more creative use of Jamaicans abroad as development investors. It cannot be just an oversight that the managers of the Reform programme have yet to invite the St. Elizabeth Homecoming Foundation to share a sense of where each other's 'head is at' in all of this. Something is fundamentally flawed, and it begins with the lack of information free-flow.
And since we are now looking at administrative amalgamation, why don't we just look also at divisional representation and Mayoral elections. For example, reduce drastically the total numbers of Councillors, and start electing Mayors directly. By so doing, I believe we would greatly increase the likelihood of attracting quality to the Councils. Capital towns could then look at having some form of their own Police management, while large non-capital ones like Santa Cruz, Portmore and Ocho Rios, being granted upgraded administrative and political management perhaps like Wardens.
There are so many other elements that could be discussed, that perhaps the best thing for Minister Bertram to do, is to call a full one-day Local Government open discussion forum at Golf View Conference Centre in Mandeville, inviting thoughtful representational viewpoints from all over Jamaica. That would signal reform, indeed.
The bottom line: Our minds need to be constantly fed, as our bodies.
Desmond Henry is a marketing strategist based in Treasure Beach, St. Elizabeth.
