Tweet
could you guys lend your thoughts here? Thanks.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>Reveal identity of political donors</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>Dennis Morrison
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<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>After 27 years, the Electoral Advisory Committee (EAC) has been succeeded by the Electoral Commission as the body which will now be responsible for the registration of voters and the supervision of elections. The commission is also to set the rules for election financing and the disclosure requirements relating thereto. From the rocky road of partisan administration of elections plagued by charges and counter-charges of bogus voting, the Jamaican electoral system has matured.<P class=StoryText align=justify>This does not mean that every single problem relating to the voters' list has been solved and that political activists may not try to manipulate the system. But we have in place a body that has proved that it has the competence, will, and credibility to take firm action against the perpetrators and get the support of the populace behind it. In short, it does not take orders from any political party and it has not tolerated interference in its administration.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The commission, though, will now have to take on the contentious issue of electoral funding and the formulation of financial disclosure requirements. The recent Trafigura affair exposed the severe weaknesses existing in these aspects of our political system, and why urgent action is necessary.
Nonetheless, large donors who fund our political parties are not anxious for greater transparency, claiming that they should have the privilege of having their contributions remain secret.<P class=StoryText align=justify>If we are not careful, the fear that donations for election campaigns will dry up, will overtake any initiative to bring transparency to these matters. Already, the commission is being urged to strike a balance between protecting the political system and not taking such actions that would "protect it to death". It is not clear to me what this means, for after the exposé of Trafigura, there can be no half-way house in terms of removing the veil of secrecy that has traditionally surrounded campaign financing in Jamaica. We are either going to protect vested interests by continuing the murky approach where big donors secretly back parties which they would like to win elections, or introduce transparency by fully disclosing their identities. Unless a contribution is a hedge for some future favour, a donor need not fear any embarrassment.<P class=StoryText align=justify>As I indicated some time ago, politicians in the USA raise funds from big and small donors whose identities are disclosed so that the public can judge whether voting patterns in Congress are influenced by these contributions. Jamaicans are denied the possibility of exercising such scrutiny because the big donors are able to hide. We can therefore only speculate about who is bankrolling whom, and the possible motives.<P class=StoryText align=justify>American voters are, for example, in a fairly good position to assess the voting pattern of Senator Christopher J Dodd, a democrat, who received large donations from banks and other financial institutions. When he becomes chairman of the Senate Banking Committee in January 2007, they will be able to judge how well he balances consumer interests and big donors. We in Jamaica will not have the slightest chance of holding our politicians to such account if we heed the call to maintain secrecy, and not "protec
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>Reveal identity of political donors</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>Dennis Morrison
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<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>After 27 years, the Electoral Advisory Committee (EAC) has been succeeded by the Electoral Commission as the body which will now be responsible for the registration of voters and the supervision of elections. The commission is also to set the rules for election financing and the disclosure requirements relating thereto. From the rocky road of partisan administration of elections plagued by charges and counter-charges of bogus voting, the Jamaican electoral system has matured.<P class=StoryText align=justify>This does not mean that every single problem relating to the voters' list has been solved and that political activists may not try to manipulate the system. But we have in place a body that has proved that it has the competence, will, and credibility to take firm action against the perpetrators and get the support of the populace behind it. In short, it does not take orders from any political party and it has not tolerated interference in its administration.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The commission, though, will now have to take on the contentious issue of electoral funding and the formulation of financial disclosure requirements. The recent Trafigura affair exposed the severe weaknesses existing in these aspects of our political system, and why urgent action is necessary. Nonetheless, large donors who fund our political parties are not anxious for greater transparency, claiming that they should have the privilege of having their contributions remain secret.<P class=StoryText align=justify>If we are not careful, the fear that donations for election campaigns will dry up, will overtake any initiative to bring transparency to these matters. Already, the commission is being urged to strike a balance between protecting the political system and not taking such actions that would "protect it to death". It is not clear to me what this means, for after the exposé of Trafigura, there can be no half-way house in terms of removing the veil of secrecy that has traditionally surrounded campaign financing in Jamaica. We are either going to protect vested interests by continuing the murky approach where big donors secretly back parties which they would like to win elections, or introduce transparency by fully disclosing their identities. Unless a contribution is a hedge for some future favour, a donor need not fear any embarrassment.<P class=StoryText align=justify>As I indicated some time ago, politicians in the USA raise funds from big and small donors whose identities are disclosed so that the public can judge whether voting patterns in Congress are influenced by these contributions. Jamaicans are denied the possibility of exercising such scrutiny because the big donors are able to hide. We can therefore only speculate about who is bankrolling whom, and the possible motives.<P class=StoryText align=justify>American voters are, for example, in a fairly good position to assess the voting pattern of Senator Christopher J Dodd, a democrat, who received large donations from banks and other financial institutions. When he becomes chairman of the Senate Banking Committee in January 2007, they will be able to judge how well he balances consumer interests and big donors. We in Jamaica will not have the slightest chance of holding our politicians to such account if we heed the call to maintain secrecy, and not "protec
Comment