Dear Editor,
On a recent visit to Jamaica I happened to visit an old Fortis brother who lives in Beverly Hills -- an established affluent hillside community that overlooks the city of Kingston offering grand views of the National Stadium, New Kingston, the Kingston Harbour and the outlying Portmore communities. In conversation, the issue of construction came up, which in no time switched to a massive ongoing hillside construction project in the area by my friend's soon-to-be neighbours -- Jamaica's parliamentary Opposition Leader Andrew Holness and his wife Juliet who I have learnt is a real estate developer by profession.
At the end of my visit with my friend I drove by the Holness construction site and I must confess that my friends' description of the project was generously conservative when compared to what I actually saw. Let me be clear that I believe that every man and woman in Jamaica, and elsewhere, deserves to live as comfortably as they are able to afford. This rule equally applies to those who choose to serve as public servants.
Public servants though are answerable to the public, and Andrew Holness as an elected political representative is answerable to Jamaicans generally, and even more so when he undertakes to construct a dwelling house that, at conservative estimates, runs over $300 million (US$2.5 million). If you think that the price tag for this project is frightening, you may want to view the project itself which screams opulence from every angle.
In a country that is faced with the type of economic challenges such as Jamaica, and with its public officials constantly hounded by the spectre of corruption, questions as to the source of funding cannot be off the table. The social and psychological impact of such open display of opulence are clear targets for the JLP's political opponents, not because of bad-mindedness as Holness imputes, but because this construction project stands as a huge and ready target.
I am not surprised, therefore, that those who would normally be asked to fund the JLP's election activities are now expressing their discomfort with pumping funds at a political party where its leader is insensitive to how such a decision that openly demonstrates opulence to the voting public. I cannot fault the party's potential funders for wanting to see how such a massive private building project is being funded and I hope that Holness and the JLP will be able to see that. I hope too that the information is not only immediately forthcoming but that it will also be able to stand up to public scrutiny.
Richard Hugh Blackford
Florida, USA
richardhblackford@gmail.com
Holness, as a public servant, must show source of funds
-->
On a recent visit to Jamaica I happened to visit an old Fortis brother who lives in Beverly Hills -- an established affluent hillside community that overlooks the city of Kingston offering grand views of the National Stadium, New Kingston, the Kingston Harbour and the outlying Portmore communities. In conversation, the issue of construction came up, which in no time switched to a massive ongoing hillside construction project in the area by my friend's soon-to-be neighbours -- Jamaica's parliamentary Opposition Leader Andrew Holness and his wife Juliet who I have learnt is a real estate developer by profession.
At the end of my visit with my friend I drove by the Holness construction site and I must confess that my friends' description of the project was generously conservative when compared to what I actually saw. Let me be clear that I believe that every man and woman in Jamaica, and elsewhere, deserves to live as comfortably as they are able to afford. This rule equally applies to those who choose to serve as public servants.
Public servants though are answerable to the public, and Andrew Holness as an elected political representative is answerable to Jamaicans generally, and even more so when he undertakes to construct a dwelling house that, at conservative estimates, runs over $300 million (US$2.5 million). If you think that the price tag for this project is frightening, you may want to view the project itself which screams opulence from every angle.
In a country that is faced with the type of economic challenges such as Jamaica, and with its public officials constantly hounded by the spectre of corruption, questions as to the source of funding cannot be off the table. The social and psychological impact of such open display of opulence are clear targets for the JLP's political opponents, not because of bad-mindedness as Holness imputes, but because this construction project stands as a huge and ready target.
I am not surprised, therefore, that those who would normally be asked to fund the JLP's election activities are now expressing their discomfort with pumping funds at a political party where its leader is insensitive to how such a decision that openly demonstrates opulence to the voting public. I cannot fault the party's potential funders for wanting to see how such a massive private building project is being funded and I hope that Holness and the JLP will be able to see that. I hope too that the information is not only immediately forthcoming but that it will also be able to stand up to public scrutiny.
Richard Hugh Blackford
Florida, USA
richardhblackford@gmail.com
Holness, as a public servant, must show source of funds
-->