NLA’s spin doctors

IF THEY are capable of shame, the spin doctors and enablers at the National Land Agency (NLA) are probably parading Jamaica in sackcloth and ashes, seeking penance.

This newspaper, however, does not really expect that the honchos of the NLA will be about seeking forgiveness for what, on its face, was another brazen attempt by a government agency to mislead the public about how they conduct citizens’ business, including how they spend taxpayers’ money.

What we hope, though, is that the Government, and especially its information minister, Robert Morgan, is sufficiently embarrassed by the latest episodes of information malfeasance to aggressively restart the long-stalled overhaul of the Access to Information Act. Or more importantly, Mr Morgan, backed by Prime Minister Andrew Holness, should be attempting to build an ethos of openness and accountability in government. In that context, the idea must evolve conceptually from a citizen’s right to access information to the public’s freedom thereto – as was proposed by a joint parliamentary committee in 2011.

HOODWINK THE PUBLIC

Regarding the NLA, the issue is how it got around hiring a senior official, who did not have a critical qualification for the job, and then attempted to hoodwink the public, including this newspaper, about the process.

At this point, the matter transcends the personalities involved and to whom it may, or may not, be connected. It turns on trust and on whether Jamaicans can have confidence in information provided by public officials.

In September 2022, obviously contemplating openings on the horizon for senior posts at the agency (including one that would become especially contentious), the NLA asked the public service division of the finance ministry – which regulates publicsector hirings – to remove one of the qualifications for the posts.

In mid-December of that year, according to correspondence reported on by The Sunday Gleaner, the finance ministry told the NLA that it had no objection to the recommended qualification change.

But it had a proviso. The finance ministry wanted “validated revised job descriptions” signed by the land agency’s human resources head as well as the incumbents of the posts.

Months later, in May 2023, the finance ministry advised the NLA that having not received the validated new job descriptions “there has been no approval granted”.

Yet in August, the NLA hired someone for the job that proved problematic. He started in September.

DISCONTENT

There was discontent in the agency, including, apparently, claims of cronyism. One of the contenders for the job, who had the requisite qualification, appealed the decision.

In March, in the heat of the internal contretemps, the NLA transferred its new hire to lead another department.

Earlier this month, ahead of it reporting the controversy, this newspaper asked the NLA for comments on the matter. Tersely, it said it would not respond. It ignored follow-up emailed questions.

Last weekend, the NLA, in a widely distributed statement, ostensibly refuted The Gleaner’s reporting.

It claimed that it had received the finance ministry’s approval to adjust qualification requirements in the December 2022 letter but that permission, the NLA claimed, was rescinded last October.

The intended spin: mischief-making by the press and, in particular, The Gleaner. Except that the NLA did not disclose the finance ministry’s initial proviso. Neither did it mention the follow-up letter of a year ago making it clear that no approval was granted.

Neither did the NLA release the October 2023 letter that supposedly rescinded the “approval” of December 2022.

CHANGED NOTHING

However, if it is the same letter as the one that The Gleaner has sighted and on which it reported, the finance ministry, by our reading, changed nothing. Rather, it reiterated that the requirement for the old qualification remained mandatory.

Rather than coming clean, what the NLA has done is obfuscate and prevaricate. The clear impression is that it has something to hide.

Coming so soon after the attempt by Tax Administration Jamaica to hide behind the Data Protection Act to keep secret the names of lessors to whom it paid millions while the buildings remained unoccupied is to further erode confidence in the Government.

In 2022, Mr Morgan, the information minister, dangled the possibility of returning to the Access to Information Act in 2023. More than a year has passed – 2024 is well under way.

Mr Morgan should act now. It would be one step towards rebuilding citizens’ trust.