EDITORIAL - The wits and the Portmore council

We take Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller at her word that her administration will be honest, transparent and impartial in its dealings. That she intends to govern on behalf of all the Jamaican people, not only those who voted for the People's National Party (PNP) in last December's general election.

We, however, need reassurance about those who act on the prime minister's word, especially with regard to developments in the Portmore municipality from which we are beginning to discern a whiff of partisan odour.

Mrs Simpson Miller installed Noel Arscott as minister of local government and, apparently, thought he would be so burdened by the job that she named Colin Fagan as his deputy. Days after the duo took office, Mr Arscott demanded a halt to the expenditure of $14 million that the previous administration had allocated for clean-up work in three local government divisions.

It may have been mere coincidence that the work was being done in municipal divisions controlled by the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), which lost the general election but has the majority in the Portmore council.

It is possible, too, that there is no significance to the fact that the Arscott-Fagan duo had no query about how money allocated by the central government had been, or was being, spent in divisions controlled by the PNP.

We note, too, that local government elections are around the corner, even as we hear the explanation that the minister just wanted to ensure that the money was being properly spent, for which he has commissioned an audit.

The public, unfortunately, is not privy to the terms of reference of that audit, and doesn't know who is undertaking it. Nor has it been disclosed if, or when, it will be completed.

Perhaps Messrs Arscott and Fagan constitute a great wit. But what they have conjured is not clever enough by half. Few are laughing, and not, we believe, PM Simpson Miller.

If the Arscott-Fagan team has a real basis for believing that funding to JLP councillors was corruptly allocated and was being corruptly spent, that information should be shared with the public. Innuendo won't do.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.