Dear Editor,
A democracy requires a vibrant civil society to advocate for policies that are in the country's best interest. Therefore, it is appropriate for local civil society groups to lobby for the strengthening of anti-corruption laws and transparency in the provision of government services.
Well thinking Jamaicans have a vested interest in the proliferation of organised, solution-oriented groups. However, loose organisations with no clear objectives should not solicit the support of informed citizens.
In America, civil society groups tend to be quite ideological, for example groups like the Club For Growth and American for Prosperity are conservative, while the New American Foundation is more liberal in its outlook. In Jamaica, though, we appear to lack diversity, with most groups declaring themselves to be anti-corruption watchdogs.
To many onlookers, these groups seem to care more about gaining public traction than actually identifying an act of corruption. The fact that such organisations pay great attention to issues depending on their importance to the public suggests that they are not really serious about eliminating corruption.
For example, the NHT's Outameni saga pales in comparison to deplorable state of the Housing Agency of Jamaica. Furthermore, the Capital Development Fund is nearly bankrupt and there has been no audit to examine the reasons for its present condition.
It must also be noted that there is a difference between corruption and inefficiency, and civil society should not conflate these separate issues. Most of our government agencies are losing large sums because of lacklustre leadership that creates a conduit for corruption.
The government and civil society will have competing interests and democratically elected administrations should not succumb to the demands of unelected groups that are not accountable to anyone. It is foolhardy to expect that any administration and civil society can be partners without compromise.
Civil society groups can only advocate, they cannot dictate policy, and this is why a social partnership can never make sense, because Government and civil society are not equals. It would be appropriate for civil society to ensure that the Government implements policies that will make the country more efficient. Civil society organisations will gain nothing by sensationalising corruption. They will only lose their credibility
Lipton Matthews
lo_matthews@yahoo.com
Civil society groups and Gov't not equals
-->
A democracy requires a vibrant civil society to advocate for policies that are in the country's best interest. Therefore, it is appropriate for local civil society groups to lobby for the strengthening of anti-corruption laws and transparency in the provision of government services.
Well thinking Jamaicans have a vested interest in the proliferation of organised, solution-oriented groups. However, loose organisations with no clear objectives should not solicit the support of informed citizens.
In America, civil society groups tend to be quite ideological, for example groups like the Club For Growth and American for Prosperity are conservative, while the New American Foundation is more liberal in its outlook. In Jamaica, though, we appear to lack diversity, with most groups declaring themselves to be anti-corruption watchdogs.
To many onlookers, these groups seem to care more about gaining public traction than actually identifying an act of corruption. The fact that such organisations pay great attention to issues depending on their importance to the public suggests that they are not really serious about eliminating corruption.
For example, the NHT's Outameni saga pales in comparison to deplorable state of the Housing Agency of Jamaica. Furthermore, the Capital Development Fund is nearly bankrupt and there has been no audit to examine the reasons for its present condition.
It must also be noted that there is a difference between corruption and inefficiency, and civil society should not conflate these separate issues. Most of our government agencies are losing large sums because of lacklustre leadership that creates a conduit for corruption.
The government and civil society will have competing interests and democratically elected administrations should not succumb to the demands of unelected groups that are not accountable to anyone. It is foolhardy to expect that any administration and civil society can be partners without compromise.
Civil society groups can only advocate, they cannot dictate policy, and this is why a social partnership can never make sense, because Government and civil society are not equals. It would be appropriate for civil society to ensure that the Government implements policies that will make the country more efficient. Civil society organisations will gain nothing by sensationalising corruption. They will only lose their credibility
Lipton Matthews
lo_matthews@yahoo.com
Civil society groups and Gov't not equals
-->