Tweet
Questionable arrangements in the Attorney-General's Chambers
Wignall's World
Mark Wignall
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Between the periods June 2005 and on towards the end of the year, then into the heart of the time when the PNP's internal race was on, then beyond that and smack dab into the intrigues of the Trafigura affair, the law firm of Palmer & Walters collected from the Universal Access Fund (UAF) nine cheques.
Eight cheques were made out in US dollars (total: US$403,675) and one in Jamaican currency for $1,962,500. The grand total made by the law firm from the UAF in a year-and-a-half was about J$28 million. Not bad going.
And while all of this may be stale news to some, it must be recalled that in 'Palmer' should be read Minett Palmer, at those times an attorney-at-law who was a board member of the very UAF and special adviser to the minister of commerce, science and technology, the ubiquitous Phillip Paulwell, himself a lawyer.
A levy, charged by the UAF, is payable by all licensed telecommunications carriers who terminate international telephone calls in Jamaica. Contributors to the Universal Access Fund pay US3 cents and US2 cents a minute for terminating international calls to the fixed line and mobile networks, respectively. The fund is presently managing over J$1 billion.
At the time that Palmer & Walters were collecting, the chairman of the fund was none other than Colin Campbell, the man who had powers to approve payments.
At that time, CCOC was just a few letters strung together. Colin Campbell was general-secretary of the PNP, minister of information and favoured one of Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller.
It was in the latter part of 2006 that Trafigura exploded on the scene and hell-and-powder-house broke out in the PNP. Faced with a crisis that was beyond her capacity to deal with, Mrs Simpson Miller watched as ex-prime minister P J Patterson stepped in to give advice and direction. In the end, Colin Campbell was 'allowed' to resign, but even as he sneaked away in disgrace, without shame, he hung on to his seat in the Senate.
For two whole weeks while the nation waited on an explanation, the prime minister went into hiding and demonstrated for all to see, her real mettle, especially the very lack of it.
Only those in the PNP saw nothing strange about a board member of a government entity charging fees for work which ought to have been done by attorney/s from the Attorney-General's Department. It led some to believe that the matter was not so much a conflict of interest as much as it was a convergence of interest.
But even if legal assistance was sought from the AG's Department, what guarantee does one have that no charge will be levied?
Let me inform you, reader, that at the AG's Department where attorneys-at-law are employed, there are some who are allowed to charge for work, and at healthy rates.
As I understand it, the Ministry of Finance has approved a loose kind of scheme whereby certain attorneys in the AG's Department can privately bill for legal work done. This is not a new thing which sprang up overnight. In the past, I gather that it was opposed by the Bar Association and other bodies.
The reasoning behind the scheme is that for the AG's Department to retain competent attorneys, a special arrangement has to be made.
Under the Civil Service Staff Orders it is stated that "Officers may engage in private work, only under specified conditions and with prior permission from the appropriate authority/services commissions, based upon an assessment of potential for conflict of interest".
OK, who is an officer? Under the Public Service Regulations, 1961 an officer means 'public officer other than:
(a) member of the Commission, the Judicial Service Commission or the Police Service Commission:
'(b) the Attorney-General.'
From that I take it that no one from the AG's Department can accept a monthly pay packet from taxpayers while still burdening the same taxpayer by charging added and exorbitant rates. It is not quite known if the AG has a GCT number, because in the invoices that I have seen coming from that office to other government departments, no GCT component is attached.
The attorneys are able to make lots of money while using public facilities and staff, all at our expense, to do work for which they bill privately.
One invoice, obtained through the Access to Information Act (ATI) is dated January 26, 2007 and is directed to the Bauxite and Alumina Trading Company (BATCo):
'RE: Advice on whether or not Bauxite and Alumina Trading Co Ltd and the Jamaica Bauxite Mining can. Alumina and supply Agreements and Prepayment Agreements.
'To professional services rendered December 2006 and January 2007:
'Nicole Lambert: 22 hours @ $12,000 per hour $264,000
'Michael Hylton: 4.5 hours @ $16,000 per hour $72,000
$336,000
'Less 10% discount ($33,600)
'TOTAL DUE ($302,400)'
Readers should note that under the ATI, the power is reserved to delete or blank out specific sections/names as is done where there is a 'white out' between the words 'can' and 'Alumina'.
I also have a copy of the cheque from Batco for $302,400 drawn on NCB.
Another more recent one (March 5, 2007) in which Michael Hylton, the solicitor-general, is involved is directed to the UDC over the dinosaur known as the Forum Hotel:
'Re: Forum Hotel - Professional services rendered to February 2007:
'Michael Hylton: 6.55 hours @$18,000 per hour $117,900
'Less 10% discount 11,790
TOTAL DUE $106,110'
Note is made that in January 2007 he charged BATCo at the rate of $16,000 per hour but in March 2007 his rates to the UDC were $18,000 per hour.
Another from the AG's chambers again to Jampro dated way back to July 20, 2004 gives an idea of how the rates charged increase, as other mere mortals in the working world have to be satisfied with increases which fall within the finance's ministry's targets on inflation:
'Re: Taxation of Gratuity paid to contract employees
'To Professional services rendered
'Nicole Lambert: 3.0 hours @ $10,000 per hour $30,000
'Less 10% discount 3,000
'TOTAL DUE $27,000'
The increase in rates for Lambert between 2004 and 2007 is 20% while the rate increase for Michael Hylton from January 2007 to March 2007 is about 13%.
In response to my search for certain information on the Police Service Commission, the Office of the Services Commission gave a response which indicated that as far as it was concerned, the Attorney General's Chambers do not bill other government departments for work done. The letter, dated June 20, 2007 reads:
"As stated in our letter of the 29th May, 2007, the Attorney General's Chambers handles all legal matters on behalf of the Government. As such we would not have in our possession any "receipts, invoices, fee notes or returned cheques" for any "legal services of whatever kind provided to the Police Service Commission between January 1, 2002 to April 30, 2007."
The big question is, how is it that the Office of the Services Commissions has a clear understanding that the AG's office does not bill other government departments for legal work done, yet, right under the nose of the same Office of the Services Commissions, exorbitant rates are being charged by those who are already being paid a salary by the government?
In the case of Minnett Palmer and the work she did for the UAF while being a member of the board of the very body she sits on, she circumvented the process of rate increases and inflation by charging in US dollars. Her rate? US$275 per hour.
There is much in this which needs further investigation.
Hang in there, Sally Porteous
Although I am no mere tyro in this business of watching our politics, cruising through its shenanigans and trying to fathom the tinderbox always attached to its slimy underbelly, I must confess that one of the last places I expected political 'war' to break out is in the constituency of Central Manchester.
As we know, all politicking in its main town Mandeville has been cancelled because of a recent violent clash between PNP and JLP supporters. The sad irony is that Sally Porteous, the JLP caretaker, has been building herself in the constituency for the last two years and during that time, privately commissioned polls and some not so private have all indicated that she has transformed the political picture in favour of the JLP.
I met Ms Porteous in 1996 and I cannot say with all honesty that she is the type of politician to push 'war'. In saying that, it is useful to remember that in the recent months since her political rival Peter Bunting of the PNP arrived, he promised loudly to 'lock down Mandeville'.
Now let us examine that. It may have been empty talk then, but based on what has taken place recently, has he not succeeded? The more glaring fact is, the PNP is poised to lose what is traditionally a PNP seat.
No one denies reality like a politician, and it has been hard on the PNP which, from constituency to constituency, is seeing the next elections slipping away as the JLP consolidates its strength and gathers momentum for the big race. Indeed, I know that the JLP has been ahead in the polls since at least April of this year, so all of the 'new' findings are surprising everyone else but me.
After Peter Bunting entered politics with a successful first time out in South East Clarendon in 1993, he left in disgust and did not face re-elections. For some reason now, he has found the political landscape more to his 'liking' and he has given a lot of the usual high-sounding, profound reasons for throwing in his hat again.
The people in Central Manchester know who they will be voting for. My research indicates that this time around, the JLP will triumph. And, of course, that comes hard to the PNP.
Let me say that I also know Peter Bunting. He is another of those 'nice guys' who is able to show a good face to the public.
He must, however, ask himself how is it that in the two years that Sally Porteous has been walking among 'labourites' and 'comrades' there has never been one report of someone bruising his or her ankle on a sidewalk.
All must cool their tempers and accept what cannot be turned back. It is the JLP's time to win now.
JLP outstripping the PNP in every quarter
So, we are not that naive to believe that some people have not been playing politics with polls. In what is not necessarily a late surge of support for the JLP (it was there all along) the PNP has been caught with its pants down. Its television ads are laughable at best and as one person told me, the PNP cannot even script a good cartoon.
It is obvious that the funds to run a successful ad campaign have not materialised. The leader of a political party has to be able to have the clout to attract funding and, I am afraid that the lady does not have it.
In one of the JLP ads where Portia is seen shouting and acting as if she is about to blow a gasket or a blood vessel, she shouts, "I don't fraid a no man, no gal!'
Is that not the same person as prime minister who has accused many of denigrating her 'efforts' because she is a woman? And yet, there she is, in all of her fallen glory, shouting and, in making reference to her not being afraid of 'No gal' is she not herself denigrating women by that sort of reference to them?
Any political party that can retain a general secretary like the PNP's Danny Buchanan, a man who easily epitomises 'dinosaur' in politics, must be a party that is hopelessly out of touch and is on the way out.
Any party which has one of its legal luminaries, AJ 'Hanky Panky' Nicholson telling supporters that if they do not support one of its candidates, the community will not get water supplies, deserves to be placed in the 'recent history' side of political power. People like that are beyond feeling any shame.
Any party which has an ex-prime minister (P J Patterson) returning to the fold to assist the failing fortunes of an incapable leader deserves, in the first place, special mention in the 'foolish' category of our history books. Add to that him telling supporters in the west that they must 'do penance' and vote for his party because in voting for the JLP the last time, they had sinned.
It was the same prime minister who told the country that he would not live in Jamaica under a JLP government!
No close elections in the making
Although my most recent national poll was delayed by rain, which fell last weekend, it was eventually completed. Early numbers are indicating that what others had been calling a close elections will likely end in a conclusive and sound victory by the JLP.
I saw from as early as April, and then, very few believed me. Indeed, so sure am I of a JLP victory that last week I sent to the JLP website an early congratulatory note to Bruce Golding who will be the next prime minister of Jamaica.
Many seats which had needed little campaigning from the PNP MPs in the past are now in serious trouble for the PNP. Some of those seats, along with others, include South East St Andrew, Central Westmoreland, South East St Elizabeth, Central Manchester, North West Clarendon, North West St Ann, Northern Clarendon, North West St Catherine, East Central St Catherine, Southern St James, Southern Trelawny and believe it or not, South East St Ann. In my next column I will give more details along with some key findings from my August poll.
It appears that the PNP's ad campaign is a reflection of the implosion that has set in inside the party since being informed by privately commissioned polls of a JLP lead. And because the party has no coherent leadership, no consensus on the content of the campaign and a subtle but effective factionalism, at the closing minutes when it is expected that it should be able to be reaping the benefits of being out there facing the electorate, it is instead falling apart.
The harsh reality is, it is not that the PNP has failed to reach sufficient numbers of people to take it over the top on August 27. The people have decided that enough is enough and the PNP must be sent into retirement.
At this stage, there can be no 'haul and pull up'. More likely it is going to be, 'haul and pull out'.
Wignall's World
Mark Wignall
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Between the periods June 2005 and on towards the end of the year, then into the heart of the time when the PNP's internal race was on, then beyond that and smack dab into the intrigues of the Trafigura affair, the law firm of Palmer & Walters collected from the Universal Access Fund (UAF) nine cheques.
Eight cheques were made out in US dollars (total: US$403,675) and one in Jamaican currency for $1,962,500. The grand total made by the law firm from the UAF in a year-and-a-half was about J$28 million. Not bad going.
And while all of this may be stale news to some, it must be recalled that in 'Palmer' should be read Minett Palmer, at those times an attorney-at-law who was a board member of the very UAF and special adviser to the minister of commerce, science and technology, the ubiquitous Phillip Paulwell, himself a lawyer.
A levy, charged by the UAF, is payable by all licensed telecommunications carriers who terminate international telephone calls in Jamaica. Contributors to the Universal Access Fund pay US3 cents and US2 cents a minute for terminating international calls to the fixed line and mobile networks, respectively. The fund is presently managing over J$1 billion.
At the time that Palmer & Walters were collecting, the chairman of the fund was none other than Colin Campbell, the man who had powers to approve payments.
At that time, CCOC was just a few letters strung together. Colin Campbell was general-secretary of the PNP, minister of information and favoured one of Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller.
It was in the latter part of 2006 that Trafigura exploded on the scene and hell-and-powder-house broke out in the PNP. Faced with a crisis that was beyond her capacity to deal with, Mrs Simpson Miller watched as ex-prime minister P J Patterson stepped in to give advice and direction. In the end, Colin Campbell was 'allowed' to resign, but even as he sneaked away in disgrace, without shame, he hung on to his seat in the Senate.
For two whole weeks while the nation waited on an explanation, the prime minister went into hiding and demonstrated for all to see, her real mettle, especially the very lack of it.
Only those in the PNP saw nothing strange about a board member of a government entity charging fees for work which ought to have been done by attorney/s from the Attorney-General's Department. It led some to believe that the matter was not so much a conflict of interest as much as it was a convergence of interest.
But even if legal assistance was sought from the AG's Department, what guarantee does one have that no charge will be levied?
Let me inform you, reader, that at the AG's Department where attorneys-at-law are employed, there are some who are allowed to charge for work, and at healthy rates.
As I understand it, the Ministry of Finance has approved a loose kind of scheme whereby certain attorneys in the AG's Department can privately bill for legal work done. This is not a new thing which sprang up overnight. In the past, I gather that it was opposed by the Bar Association and other bodies.
The reasoning behind the scheme is that for the AG's Department to retain competent attorneys, a special arrangement has to be made.
Under the Civil Service Staff Orders it is stated that "Officers may engage in private work, only under specified conditions and with prior permission from the appropriate authority/services commissions, based upon an assessment of potential for conflict of interest".
OK, who is an officer? Under the Public Service Regulations, 1961 an officer means 'public officer other than:
(a) member of the Commission, the Judicial Service Commission or the Police Service Commission:
'(b) the Attorney-General.'
From that I take it that no one from the AG's Department can accept a monthly pay packet from taxpayers while still burdening the same taxpayer by charging added and exorbitant rates. It is not quite known if the AG has a GCT number, because in the invoices that I have seen coming from that office to other government departments, no GCT component is attached.
The attorneys are able to make lots of money while using public facilities and staff, all at our expense, to do work for which they bill privately.
One invoice, obtained through the Access to Information Act (ATI) is dated January 26, 2007 and is directed to the Bauxite and Alumina Trading Company (BATCo):
'RE: Advice on whether or not Bauxite and Alumina Trading Co Ltd and the Jamaica Bauxite Mining can. Alumina and supply Agreements and Prepayment Agreements.
'To professional services rendered December 2006 and January 2007:
'Nicole Lambert: 22 hours @ $12,000 per hour $264,000
'Michael Hylton: 4.5 hours @ $16,000 per hour $72,000
$336,000
'Less 10% discount ($33,600)
'TOTAL DUE ($302,400)'
Readers should note that under the ATI, the power is reserved to delete or blank out specific sections/names as is done where there is a 'white out' between the words 'can' and 'Alumina'.
I also have a copy of the cheque from Batco for $302,400 drawn on NCB.
Another more recent one (March 5, 2007) in which Michael Hylton, the solicitor-general, is involved is directed to the UDC over the dinosaur known as the Forum Hotel:
'Re: Forum Hotel - Professional services rendered to February 2007:
'Michael Hylton: 6.55 hours @$18,000 per hour $117,900
'Less 10% discount 11,790
TOTAL DUE $106,110'
Note is made that in January 2007 he charged BATCo at the rate of $16,000 per hour but in March 2007 his rates to the UDC were $18,000 per hour.
Another from the AG's chambers again to Jampro dated way back to July 20, 2004 gives an idea of how the rates charged increase, as other mere mortals in the working world have to be satisfied with increases which fall within the finance's ministry's targets on inflation:
'Re: Taxation of Gratuity paid to contract employees
'To Professional services rendered
'Nicole Lambert: 3.0 hours @ $10,000 per hour $30,000
'Less 10% discount 3,000
'TOTAL DUE $27,000'
The increase in rates for Lambert between 2004 and 2007 is 20% while the rate increase for Michael Hylton from January 2007 to March 2007 is about 13%.
In response to my search for certain information on the Police Service Commission, the Office of the Services Commission gave a response which indicated that as far as it was concerned, the Attorney General's Chambers do not bill other government departments for work done. The letter, dated June 20, 2007 reads:
"As stated in our letter of the 29th May, 2007, the Attorney General's Chambers handles all legal matters on behalf of the Government. As such we would not have in our possession any "receipts, invoices, fee notes or returned cheques" for any "legal services of whatever kind provided to the Police Service Commission between January 1, 2002 to April 30, 2007."
The big question is, how is it that the Office of the Services Commissions has a clear understanding that the AG's office does not bill other government departments for legal work done, yet, right under the nose of the same Office of the Services Commissions, exorbitant rates are being charged by those who are already being paid a salary by the government?
In the case of Minnett Palmer and the work she did for the UAF while being a member of the board of the very body she sits on, she circumvented the process of rate increases and inflation by charging in US dollars. Her rate? US$275 per hour.
There is much in this which needs further investigation.
Hang in there, Sally Porteous
Although I am no mere tyro in this business of watching our politics, cruising through its shenanigans and trying to fathom the tinderbox always attached to its slimy underbelly, I must confess that one of the last places I expected political 'war' to break out is in the constituency of Central Manchester.
As we know, all politicking in its main town Mandeville has been cancelled because of a recent violent clash between PNP and JLP supporters. The sad irony is that Sally Porteous, the JLP caretaker, has been building herself in the constituency for the last two years and during that time, privately commissioned polls and some not so private have all indicated that she has transformed the political picture in favour of the JLP.
I met Ms Porteous in 1996 and I cannot say with all honesty that she is the type of politician to push 'war'. In saying that, it is useful to remember that in the recent months since her political rival Peter Bunting of the PNP arrived, he promised loudly to 'lock down Mandeville'.
Now let us examine that. It may have been empty talk then, but based on what has taken place recently, has he not succeeded? The more glaring fact is, the PNP is poised to lose what is traditionally a PNP seat.
No one denies reality like a politician, and it has been hard on the PNP which, from constituency to constituency, is seeing the next elections slipping away as the JLP consolidates its strength and gathers momentum for the big race. Indeed, I know that the JLP has been ahead in the polls since at least April of this year, so all of the 'new' findings are surprising everyone else but me.
After Peter Bunting entered politics with a successful first time out in South East Clarendon in 1993, he left in disgust and did not face re-elections. For some reason now, he has found the political landscape more to his 'liking' and he has given a lot of the usual high-sounding, profound reasons for throwing in his hat again.
The people in Central Manchester know who they will be voting for. My research indicates that this time around, the JLP will triumph. And, of course, that comes hard to the PNP.
Let me say that I also know Peter Bunting. He is another of those 'nice guys' who is able to show a good face to the public.
He must, however, ask himself how is it that in the two years that Sally Porteous has been walking among 'labourites' and 'comrades' there has never been one report of someone bruising his or her ankle on a sidewalk.
All must cool their tempers and accept what cannot be turned back. It is the JLP's time to win now.
JLP outstripping the PNP in every quarter
So, we are not that naive to believe that some people have not been playing politics with polls. In what is not necessarily a late surge of support for the JLP (it was there all along) the PNP has been caught with its pants down. Its television ads are laughable at best and as one person told me, the PNP cannot even script a good cartoon.
It is obvious that the funds to run a successful ad campaign have not materialised. The leader of a political party has to be able to have the clout to attract funding and, I am afraid that the lady does not have it.
In one of the JLP ads where Portia is seen shouting and acting as if she is about to blow a gasket or a blood vessel, she shouts, "I don't fraid a no man, no gal!'
Is that not the same person as prime minister who has accused many of denigrating her 'efforts' because she is a woman? And yet, there she is, in all of her fallen glory, shouting and, in making reference to her not being afraid of 'No gal' is she not herself denigrating women by that sort of reference to them?
Any political party that can retain a general secretary like the PNP's Danny Buchanan, a man who easily epitomises 'dinosaur' in politics, must be a party that is hopelessly out of touch and is on the way out.
Any party which has one of its legal luminaries, AJ 'Hanky Panky' Nicholson telling supporters that if they do not support one of its candidates, the community will not get water supplies, deserves to be placed in the 'recent history' side of political power. People like that are beyond feeling any shame.
Any party which has an ex-prime minister (P J Patterson) returning to the fold to assist the failing fortunes of an incapable leader deserves, in the first place, special mention in the 'foolish' category of our history books. Add to that him telling supporters in the west that they must 'do penance' and vote for his party because in voting for the JLP the last time, they had sinned.
It was the same prime minister who told the country that he would not live in Jamaica under a JLP government!
No close elections in the making
Although my most recent national poll was delayed by rain, which fell last weekend, it was eventually completed. Early numbers are indicating that what others had been calling a close elections will likely end in a conclusive and sound victory by the JLP.
I saw from as early as April, and then, very few believed me. Indeed, so sure am I of a JLP victory that last week I sent to the JLP website an early congratulatory note to Bruce Golding who will be the next prime minister of Jamaica.
Many seats which had needed little campaigning from the PNP MPs in the past are now in serious trouble for the PNP. Some of those seats, along with others, include South East St Andrew, Central Westmoreland, South East St Elizabeth, Central Manchester, North West Clarendon, North West St Ann, Northern Clarendon, North West St Catherine, East Central St Catherine, Southern St James, Southern Trelawny and believe it or not, South East St Ann. In my next column I will give more details along with some key findings from my August poll.
It appears that the PNP's ad campaign is a reflection of the implosion that has set in inside the party since being informed by privately commissioned polls of a JLP lead. And because the party has no coherent leadership, no consensus on the content of the campaign and a subtle but effective factionalism, at the closing minutes when it is expected that it should be able to be reaping the benefits of being out there facing the electorate, it is instead falling apart.
The harsh reality is, it is not that the PNP has failed to reach sufficient numbers of people to take it over the top on August 27. The people have decided that enough is enough and the PNP must be sent into retirement.
At this stage, there can be no 'haul and pull up'. More likely it is going to be, 'haul and pull out'.
Comment