Davies - File

IN AN address to Parliament on November 3 on the dismissal of then Bank of Jamaica's (BOJ) governor Derick Latibeaudiere and the resignation of Commissioner of Police Hardley Lewin, Prime Minister Bruce Golding, referring to the overly generous contract that was awarded to Mr Latibeaudiere, stated: "The former governor is not to be blamed for the absurdly generous and open-ended con-tractual terms that he enjoyed. He was the beneficiary. That blame must be laid squarely at the feet of the former government and the former minister of finance, in particular, who authorised and signed the contract."

Some might argue that the prime minister is being overly generous in his removal of blame from Mr Latibeaudiere, especially given the public perception that he refused to move into the residence provided for him by the central bank, opting instead to remain in his own house - a seemingly more expensive option. What is more, is the report that the former governor allegedly refused to have the terms of his contract renegotiated to reflect a more reasonable payment package.

Golding is correct

In hindsight, Mr Golding is correct not to blame the former governor for the contract he received.

After all, Mr Latibeaudiere did not hold a gun to the head of Dr Omar Davies and demand what was a $38 million contract as at September 2009. Indeed, it is the former government and its so-called world-class finance minister who are primarily to be blamed for that 'sweetheart' contract that was presented to Mr Latibeaudiere.

Although Mr Latibeaudiere, as far as I know, did not coerce Dr Davies into signing such a generous contractual agreement, the former BOJ governor's acceptance of some of the terms of the contract has been perceived by taxpayers as being unconscionable and unethical.

What makes the situation even more offensive to taxpayers is the notion that Mr Latibeaudiere allegedly refused a cost-cutting initiative in relation to his contractual terms, particularly in light of the harsh economic challenges that the country has been facing since the 1990s, and which have been made even worse as a result of the global economic crisis.

Ironically, public opinion is that Mr Latibeaudiere's monetary policies, as head of the central bank, have contributed significantly to the economic quandary in which we now find ourselves.

There is no doubt about the negative impact that the current economic crisis has had on the country. In effect, it has put a severe financial strain on the Government's ability to honour existing wage agreements and to finance much-needed capital-expenditure projects.

We are all aware of the Govern-ment's inability to pay the agreed seven per cent increase to public-sector workers and the difficulties being experienced in meeting the demand for the anticipated reclassification exercise for the island's nurses.

As a result of these harsh economic realities, the Government has made attempts to implement cost-cutting initiatives that will result in the reduction of public expenditure. The finance minister's alleged attempt, therefore, to renegotiate the housing provisions of Mr Latibeaudiere's contract, to arrive at a package that was more reasonable, can be interpreted as being something in the best interest of the country.

Cost-cutting initiatives of this nature are not new and are not confined to public-sector employees. The prime minister and other members of parliament (MPs) on the Government side, as well as the Speaker of the House, in a show of solidarity with the people of Jamaica, have all taken percentage reductions in their salaries.

Recently, the Ministry of Health entered into a two-year contract with telecoms provider Digicel for the provision of mobile and fixed-line services, which will cost the Government approximately J$10 million less than the former fragmented system that was being utilised.

Dr Davies' column

Another pill that the public has been finding hard to swallow is Dr Davies' column, published in The Sunday Gleaner on November 15. His report that Mr Latibeaudiere had confirmed his willingness to negotiate a mutually acceptable figure seems to conflict with statements made in Parliament by the prime minister.

The public is in desperate need of clarification on this matter and is deserving of such. Did the former governor of the BOJ refuse to have some aspects of his contract renegotiated? And if so, what is Dr Davies alluding to in his column?

I strongly urge Mr Latibeaudiere to provide us with some explanation on the matter, as I don't think Dr Davies is doing a good job!

Aldrane E. Genius is a member of Generation 2000 (G2k) Email: aldrane.genius@gmail.com.

Golding

Latibeaudiere