Tweet
EDITORIAL - The Trafigura affair
published: Thursday | October 5, 2006 <DIV class=KonaBody>
Not unexpectedly, the ruling People's National Party insists that it has done nothing wrong or illegal, following the Opposition's revelation that the PNP received at least a J$30 million contribution from the Dutch-based company Trafigura Beheer, which trades Nigerian-supplied crude oil on Jamaica's behalf.
Although he might not have said so outright, the clear innuendo by Bruce Golding was that this was some sort of kickback from Trafigura Beheer. Mr. Golding sees slime, sleaze and scandal, which he hopes will provide grist for his Jamaica Labour Party in an election campaign. Indeed, he has called for the resignation of the Government.
Even as we confess our unease at the fact that a foreign firm doing business with Jamaica is helping to fund the ruling party, this newspaper reserves judgement on the legality of the action until we are provided with further and better particulars and have had an opportunity to digest the information. We, nonetheless, believe that the Trafigura affair demands the urgent reopening and conclusion of the debate on political party financingand public declaration of contributions. Indeed, this is a matter that has been on and off the agenda in recent years, without the society arriving at a definitive course of action.
It would be a mistake, though, to assume that Trafigura Beheer is the only firm or special interest group to contribute to Jamaica's political parties, with or without an implicit quid pro quo.
Much of the recent discourse, starting with the claim - which he subsequently withdrew - by former JLP leader Edward Seaga that "tainted" money was involved in an internal party election, has centred largely on the possibility of the emergence of narco-dollars paving the way to power for those with bag loads of the stuff. But as the Abramahoff case in the United States and the cash-for-peerage scandal in the U.K. have shown, there are others only too willing to pay for the best democracy money can buy.
This is not necessarily an easy problem to fix, but the Americans and the British, the latter more recently, have shown us ways to start. Indeed, this newspaper believes that political contributions above a benchmark sum should be listed and available to scrutiny. In other words, the public has a right to know what special interests contribute to which party so that emerging public policy can be judged against perceived private interests.
At the same time, we have to agree to state funding of political parties, using, perhaps, a formula that matches financing from the state to donations from small contributors. This would have the effect of forcing parties to fund-raise more from their regular members and supporters rather than powerful special interests, maybe helping to deepen grass-roots democracy. The reforms should also include a parliamentary register of gifts, contributions and payments to MPs with sanctions for those who fail to comply.
It is not for the PNP, or any party for that matter, to declare that it is not for sale and that it has led the debate on finance reform. It is time for more than talk. Hopefully, the Government will bring concrete proposals when the legislature this week discusses plans for the establishment of an electoral commission. <HR>The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.</DIV>
published: Thursday | October 5, 2006 <DIV class=KonaBody>
Not unexpectedly, the ruling People's National Party insists that it has done nothing wrong or illegal, following the Opposition's revelation that the PNP received at least a J$30 million contribution from the Dutch-based company Trafigura Beheer, which trades Nigerian-supplied crude oil on Jamaica's behalf.
Although he might not have said so outright, the clear innuendo by Bruce Golding was that this was some sort of kickback from Trafigura Beheer. Mr. Golding sees slime, sleaze and scandal, which he hopes will provide grist for his Jamaica Labour Party in an election campaign. Indeed, he has called for the resignation of the Government.
Even as we confess our unease at the fact that a foreign firm doing business with Jamaica is helping to fund the ruling party, this newspaper reserves judgement on the legality of the action until we are provided with further and better particulars and have had an opportunity to digest the information. We, nonetheless, believe that the Trafigura affair demands the urgent reopening and conclusion of the debate on political party financingand public declaration of contributions. Indeed, this is a matter that has been on and off the agenda in recent years, without the society arriving at a definitive course of action.
It would be a mistake, though, to assume that Trafigura Beheer is the only firm or special interest group to contribute to Jamaica's political parties, with or without an implicit quid pro quo.
Much of the recent discourse, starting with the claim - which he subsequently withdrew - by former JLP leader Edward Seaga that "tainted" money was involved in an internal party election, has centred largely on the possibility of the emergence of narco-dollars paving the way to power for those with bag loads of the stuff. But as the Abramahoff case in the United States and the cash-for-peerage scandal in the U.K. have shown, there are others only too willing to pay for the best democracy money can buy.
This is not necessarily an easy problem to fix, but the Americans and the British, the latter more recently, have shown us ways to start. Indeed, this newspaper believes that political contributions above a benchmark sum should be listed and available to scrutiny. In other words, the public has a right to know what special interests contribute to which party so that emerging public policy can be judged against perceived private interests.
At the same time, we have to agree to state funding of political parties, using, perhaps, a formula that matches financing from the state to donations from small contributors. This would have the effect of forcing parties to fund-raise more from their regular members and supporters rather than powerful special interests, maybe helping to deepen grass-roots democracy. The reforms should also include a parliamentary register of gifts, contributions and payments to MPs with sanctions for those who fail to comply.
It is not for the PNP, or any party for that matter, to declare that it is not for sale and that it has led the debate on finance reform. It is time for more than talk. Hopefully, the Government will bring concrete proposals when the legislature this week discusses plans for the establishment of an electoral commission. <HR>The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.</DIV>
ffice
></o
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>Mark Wignall</SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>One year after the end of World War II, Winston Churchill made his famous speech, a part of which reads, "From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent."<P class=StoryText align=justify>In 1946, Soviet ambitions in Eastern Europe were on in earnest, and in expounding on it and the planned machinations of the Soviet dictator Stalin, the former prime minister's speech may have signalled the year the Cold War began. Others believe that the Cold War began in (August) 1949, the year the Soviets detonated their first atom bomb.
Comment