Tweet
on this article (Matter of fact assasin, Ben et al can jump in too):
[B]<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>The lessons of Trafigura</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>Dennis Morrison
Sunday, November 05, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P class=StoryText align=justify>The Trafigura issue brought into sharp relief a number of critical issues relating to how Jamaican political parties raise financing for their normal operations and particularly for election campaigns.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=70 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>Dennis Morrison</SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>For one, we were reminded that there really is a total lack of knowledge about their accounts and no disclosure of their financial affairs. What this means is that the political parties, which are an indispensable part of our democracy and are the largest organisations in the country, operate virtually in the dark when it comes to matters of their financial affairs.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The Trafigura issue turned the spotlight on the ruling PNP in what has been claimed to be an exposure aimed at protecting the national interest by the JLP, but regarded by others as really a political ploy.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The presumed national interest was linked to Trafigura's business relations with the state oil company, PCJ, in the trading of oil. So far, there is no evidence, however, to support any claim that the controversial transaction was related to PCJ's dealing with that company.<P class=StoryText align=justify>What the whole affair brought to light is how little we know about the techniques used by the political parties, and corporate and other donors, in effecting contributions. Except for those directly involved in these matters, people were generally unaware that dummy invoices are an integral part of how money passes from donors to the parties. These dummy invoices are obviously used on all sides, and while the spotlight of the Trafigura issue has been on the PNP, a full system of disclosure would surely expose donations going to the JLP in a similar way.<P class=StoryText align=justify>At the very minimum, some steps must be taken to remove political party financing from this informal system. It allows too much scope for illicit money to influence our politics. Money from legal commercial sources also can, operating outside of the glare of publicity, easily manipulate our parties in ways not very different from the despicable dons that overrun garrison communities. Serious rules of disclosure will not, overnight, cure the deficiencies in the party financing system, but the total veil of secrecy which now exists can be lifted.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In the USA, the campaign financing system is still flawed, despite rules laid down and reforms that have been made. At least, there, people know who the big donors are, what parties they support, and the influence that the big donors are likely to exert. We here in Jamaica can only surmise which big monied players are standing behind the respective parties, and pontificate what favours they may be seeking in return.<P class=StoryText align=justify>I wonder how many people have thought about the following questions: how do corporate donors now account for their political donations to election campaigns, especially in their financial statements? And what about their tax returns? Are the large donations hidden away somewhere as a cost which is offset against revenues, thereby reducing their tax liabilities? How much of the contributions is handed out in brown paper bags as against through cheques drawn to settle dummy invoices?<P class=StoryText align=justify>In the 1980s, accusations
[B]<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>The lessons of Trafigura</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>Dennis Morrison
Sunday, November 05, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P class=StoryText align=justify>The Trafigura issue brought into sharp relief a number of critical issues relating to how Jamaican political parties raise financing for their normal operations and particularly for election campaigns.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=70 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>Dennis Morrison</SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>For one, we were reminded that there really is a total lack of knowledge about their accounts and no disclosure of their financial affairs. What this means is that the political parties, which are an indispensable part of our democracy and are the largest organisations in the country, operate virtually in the dark when it comes to matters of their financial affairs.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The Trafigura issue turned the spotlight on the ruling PNP in what has been claimed to be an exposure aimed at protecting the national interest by the JLP, but regarded by others as really a political ploy.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The presumed national interest was linked to Trafigura's business relations with the state oil company, PCJ, in the trading of oil. So far, there is no evidence, however, to support any claim that the controversial transaction was related to PCJ's dealing with that company.<P class=StoryText align=justify>What the whole affair brought to light is how little we know about the techniques used by the political parties, and corporate and other donors, in effecting contributions. Except for those directly involved in these matters, people were generally unaware that dummy invoices are an integral part of how money passes from donors to the parties. These dummy invoices are obviously used on all sides, and while the spotlight of the Trafigura issue has been on the PNP, a full system of disclosure would surely expose donations going to the JLP in a similar way.<P class=StoryText align=justify>At the very minimum, some steps must be taken to remove political party financing from this informal system. It allows too much scope for illicit money to influence our politics. Money from legal commercial sources also can, operating outside of the glare of publicity, easily manipulate our parties in ways not very different from the despicable dons that overrun garrison communities. Serious rules of disclosure will not, overnight, cure the deficiencies in the party financing system, but the total veil of secrecy which now exists can be lifted.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In the USA, the campaign financing system is still flawed, despite rules laid down and reforms that have been made. At least, there, people know who the big donors are, what parties they support, and the influence that the big donors are likely to exert. We here in Jamaica can only surmise which big monied players are standing behind the respective parties, and pontificate what favours they may be seeking in return.<P class=StoryText align=justify>I wonder how many people have thought about the following questions: how do corporate donors now account for their political donations to election campaigns, especially in their financial statements? And what about their tax returns? Are the large donations hidden away somewhere as a cost which is offset against revenues, thereby reducing their tax liabilities? How much of the contributions is handed out in brown paper bags as against through cheques drawn to settle dummy invoices?<P class=StoryText align=justify>In the 1980s, accusations
Comment