5 months ago
63
Transparency is a word that policymakers, bureaucrats, and others, here and abroad, often use. In some cases where the word is not mentioned, openness is implied or is expected to be the norm.
These and other thoughts occupied my mind as I read this newspaper’s report about the government’s plan to spend $832 million on ‘critical mitigation work’ during the 2025 hurricane season, which begins today, June 1.
The article summarised a recent statement by a Ministry of Economic Growth, Job Creation and Works official to Parliament. In most parliamentary democracies like ours, when ministers address parliament, they are expected to present accurate, complete, and truthful information, and must explain the rationale behind their policies, funding decisions, and legislative proposals. More simply, those statements must be transparent.
While The Gleaner article was not a verbatim report of what the minister said, it was my impression that his main goal was to share information about how much money the government had allocated to critical mitigation work this year, without getting ‘into the weeds’.
His Local Government and Community Development colleague, with responsibility for the Office of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management, who reported to Parliament a few days later, did little to fill the huge information gaps that were created earlier. The two ministers, it appeared, had clearly not collaborated on how to discharge their respective communication functions to Parliament and to the public on the important topic of preparations for the 2025 hurricane season.
My May 18 article, ‘A Template for Enhanced Disaster Preparedness’, Barbados-based Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency’s statement to Caribbean countries about hurricane readiness last Wednesday, and the United States government’s recent actions gutting the Federal Emergency Management Administration and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, before the June 1 start of the current season, create the context for the preceding comments.
To paraphrase CDEMA Executive Director Elizabeth Riley, countries must take the necessary actions to make sure the national systems are ready, and put political support behind the need to have the systems ready, as well.
The Gordon House statements did not comply with the transparency in decision-making in public sector best practices. The Yuh Ready? digital pamphlet that power utility JPS circulated to customers offered relevant, practical, and timely information and advice to persons and businesses.
Similar advice was missing from the Gordon House presentations.
Here are two examples why the two presentations fell below the required standards:
Lack of clarity about process: Hurricane preparedness should be a national effort led by the government. Public education and community engagement are essential. This is especially because of the recurring and increased threats posed by climate change and the predicted increases in frequency and intensity of hurricane, storm, and flood events.
The statements to Parliament, unlike the JPS leaflet, did not discuss: the lessons learned from Hurricane Beryl and Tropical Storm Rafael; the factors that influenced the decision to spend $832 million; which agencies were consulted; how the current year’s proposed spending compares with the actual spending for FY 2024/25; and the reasons for the 68.6 per cent per capita rise in the amount allocated to members of parliament this year, as compared to last year.
Lack of timeliness: Information was shared with Parliament and citizens a few days before the start of the season. The CDEMA head, according to The Gleaner, told reporters that “in some countries, a political direction had been given to complete those preparedness actions as early as the end of April”.
Transparency in public sector decision-making promotes public trust, reduces corruption, ensures better service delivery, improves accountability, and facilitates the efficient use of resources. Disasters do not discriminate. This is a topic for which bipartisan support should be required.
Finally, why are the voices of the country’s property insurers and the insurance regulators muted? Is it not of national importance that they have plans in place to effectively manage an influx in claims and pay them quickly in the event of a direct hit from a Category 4 hurricane?
Cedric E. Stephens provides independent information and advice about the management of risks and insurance. For free information or counsel, write to: aegis@flowja.com or business@gleanerjm.com
English (US) ·