Tweet
If we are right, Mr Christie is wrong
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
In a previous editorial, we asked 'what did Mr (Greg) Christie know that others don't?' in the matter of the awarding of the government health care contract. It seems that the contractor-general himself has now provided the answer to that question.
If we are right, then we believe that in this instance, Mr Christie is wrong on a fundamental point.
Mr Christie is apparently quite peeved over the way things are moving. On Monday, he criticised the role being played by the Government Employees Administrative Services Only (GEASO) health scheme, which has led to the review of the scheme now underway.
The contractor-general is insisting that the GEASO has no basis in law, and that it is his office that acts on behalf of the Parliament in respect of government contracts.
Furthermore, Mr Christie argues that there is no provision in the Government procurement procedures handbook, the National Contracts Commission (NCC), or the Contractor-General Act, which would qualify the GEASO to lawfully play a substantive or participatory role in the decision-making for the procurement of the GEASO award.
"...nor is there any provision for it to otherwise gain ascendancy over the (finance) ministry's, the NCC's or the Cabinet's lawful authority to so act in the matter," Mr Christie is reported as saying in yesterday's edition of
the Observer.
The contractor-general had earlier cautioned the finance ministry about backing down in its decision to take the award from Blue Cross and give it to Life of Jamaica. His position ran counter to that of the over 50,000 government employees who benefit from the GEASO.
It seems to us therefore that the contractor-general's beef is about what he perceives as a need for the GEASO award to be made strictly according to the letter of the law. This is where we think his position is fundamentally flawed.
We have to believe that the people for whom a scheme is designed and exists must have a say in its operation and everything else which governs that operation. That is the essence of our democracy, the right to participate in matters that affect us directly.
We won't say, like Mr P J Patterson, that the law should not be a shackle. But we don't believe that it is sensible to take the position that the spirit of the law is not important.
So even if the GEASO is not "in law", we cannot exclude the wishes of the over 50,000 persons who rely on the GEASO scheme to help keep them healthy and, equally important, contribute by means of monthly fees to its continued existence.
What we expect Mr Christie to tell us is whether there was any hanky-panky in the award of the scheme to Life of Jamaica. Because while 50,000-strong can be wrong, it needs to be so demonstrated.
Of course, we support the doggedness of Mr Christie in watching over the award of government contracts against the well-known historical reality of corruption. We just think that in this case he has been somewhat blinkered, causing him to miss the important point - that at the heart of the GEASO is the people for whom it exists.
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
In a previous editorial, we asked 'what did Mr (Greg) Christie know that others don't?' in the matter of the awarding of the government health care contract. It seems that the contractor-general himself has now provided the answer to that question.
If we are right, then we believe that in this instance, Mr Christie is wrong on a fundamental point.
Mr Christie is apparently quite peeved over the way things are moving. On Monday, he criticised the role being played by the Government Employees Administrative Services Only (GEASO) health scheme, which has led to the review of the scheme now underway.
The contractor-general is insisting that the GEASO has no basis in law, and that it is his office that acts on behalf of the Parliament in respect of government contracts.
Furthermore, Mr Christie argues that there is no provision in the Government procurement procedures handbook, the National Contracts Commission (NCC), or the Contractor-General Act, which would qualify the GEASO to lawfully play a substantive or participatory role in the decision-making for the procurement of the GEASO award.
"...nor is there any provision for it to otherwise gain ascendancy over the (finance) ministry's, the NCC's or the Cabinet's lawful authority to so act in the matter," Mr Christie is reported as saying in yesterday's edition of
the Observer.
The contractor-general had earlier cautioned the finance ministry about backing down in its decision to take the award from Blue Cross and give it to Life of Jamaica. His position ran counter to that of the over 50,000 government employees who benefit from the GEASO.
It seems to us therefore that the contractor-general's beef is about what he perceives as a need for the GEASO award to be made strictly according to the letter of the law. This is where we think his position is fundamentally flawed.
We have to believe that the people for whom a scheme is designed and exists must have a say in its operation and everything else which governs that operation. That is the essence of our democracy, the right to participate in matters that affect us directly.
We won't say, like Mr P J Patterson, that the law should not be a shackle. But we don't believe that it is sensible to take the position that the spirit of the law is not important.
So even if the GEASO is not "in law", we cannot exclude the wishes of the over 50,000 persons who rely on the GEASO scheme to help keep them healthy and, equally important, contribute by means of monthly fees to its continued existence.
What we expect Mr Christie to tell us is whether there was any hanky-panky in the award of the scheme to Life of Jamaica. Because while 50,000-strong can be wrong, it needs to be so demonstrated.
Of course, we support the doggedness of Mr Christie in watching over the award of government contracts against the well-known historical reality of corruption. We just think that in this case he has been somewhat blinkered, causing him to miss the important point - that at the heart of the GEASO is the people for whom it exists.