Rebuilding Jamaica shouldn’t begin with expensive office space

THE EDITOR, Madam:

Jamaica’s recovery from Hurricane Melissa must prioritise affected families, damaged homes, hospitals, and livelihoods. Against that urgent need, the reported decision by the National Reconstruction and Resilience Authority (NaRRA) to rent space in the Digicel building deserves public scrutiny.

Why should reconstruction depend on how many floors a government agency occupies?

Reconstruction should be measured by homes repaired, communities restored, infrastructure rebuilt, and families assisted, not by office space.

The Government should explain why a private high-rise is necessary when public facilities may be available. Were government-owned offices, underused ministries, and public-sector complexes assessed? If they were rejected, why, and where is the cost comparison showing that the Digicel building offers the best value?

The public also deserves a full account of NaRRA’s administrative costs. Reports suggest the authority could employ 100 to 120 people, in addition to engineers and consultants. Its chief executive’s reported annual salary of J$40 million, vehicle, and possible gratuity should be justified against the authority’s responsibilities and expected results.

What will NaRRA cost taxpayers over five years, and how much funding will remain for actual reconstruction?

Before creating a costly parallel structure, the Government should assess the capacity already available within municipal corporations and other public institutions, which employ planners, engineers, building professionals, and infrastructure specialists. Where additional expertise is needed, secondments, targeted recruitment, and specialist contracts should be considered. NaRRA may have a useful coordinating role, but it must not duplicate existing functions or unnecessarily expand the public payroll.

The Government should publish the relevant lease terms, cost-benefit analysis, alternatives considered, projected operating budget, and staffing justification. It should also clarify NaRRA’s oversight arrangements, including whether major commitments are reviewed before approval.

Reducing the rental commitment from two floors to one may be welcome, but it does not prove that the remaining expenditure is justified.

NaRRA’s success should be judged by projects completed and reconstruction delivered transparently and efficiently. If one floor and existing public facilities are sufficient, they should be used. If more space and staff are genuinely necessary, the Government must provide evidence.

People are looking for safe homes, functioning hospitals, restored livelihoods, and reliable infrastructure. Before committing more public money to offices, salaries, vehicles, and consultants, the Government must demonstrate that every reasonable alternative has been considered and that the chosen model will deliver better results for less money.

MARLON RICHARDS