Conflicting Interests

Over the past days (more than nine) the talking point on most talk shows is the issues related to the Member of Parliament Jack Warner’s dual roles re: Government Minister and FIFA Vice President. One side of the divide believes that no conflict exist, the other believes that one does. My view is that the possibility exists for future conflicts – and this is the issue that should be debated, not if he can do the job and do it well, or if he is a super minister or not.

The Integrity in Public Life Act spells out what must be done in relation persons in public life.
24. (1) A person to whom this Part applies shall
ensure that he performs his functions and administers
the public resources for which he is responsible in an
effective and efficient manner and shall—
(c) arrange his private interests whether
pecuniary or otherwise in such a manner as
to maintain public confidence and trust in
his integrity.
29. (1) For the purposes of this Act, a conflict of
interest is deemed to arise if a person in public life or
any person exercising a public function were to make or
participate in the making of a decision in the execution
of his office and at the same time knows or ought
reasonably to have known, that in the making of the
decision, there is an opportunity either directly or
indirectly to further his private interests or that of a
member of his family or of any other person.
29 (2) Where there is a possible or perceived conflict
of interest, a person to whom this Part applies, shall
disclose his interest in accordance with prescribed
procedures and disqualify himself from any decision-making
process.
Clearly from the act, there is no requirement for Warner to give up any of his posts, what he must do however is to declare his interests. There is the argument that because of precedence and convention he should, but there is a problem with this, many have, and rightly so, raised issues of precedence in relation to the Karen/Clico issue for example, and there are many other instances where clear conflicts existed. For this reason I am on the side of caution and had indicated that Warner should in fact decide/choose one.
I am also reminded of the stance the former government took on matters of this nature, they had indicated that the government is finding it difficult to get persons to serve on boards because of the requirements of the Integrity in Public Life Act and had sort to amend it so as to encourage persons to serve, why someone would not want to adhere to the strictest of scrutiny I don’t know, maybe they have motives.
Whilst the ideal situation would be for all to give up private interests I am not sure that even that will prevent possible conflicts (corruption). There were several instances of conflicts in the last Government and even with those who have given up private interests. What is necessary for these conflicts not to turn into corruption is for the proper systems to be implemented to prevent corruption. Instead of demanding that Warner resigns one of his posts, we should be demanding that the systems that govern public business are strengthened to prevent corruption. This has been talked about on the election campaign since 2001, but once in office the former regime did nothing, instead they went ahead and did exactly what the regime before them did, they ignored the recommendation of the Airport enquiry so as to fast track its development drive, which was in reality an exercise in self aggrandisement of a man made god.