Cash strapped Gov’t paying consultant Aubyn Hill millions

[evanovitch]

VALUE FOR MONEY

VALUE FOR MONEY
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Much furore has been created by the recent revelation about the $27-million that the Government has so far paid to Mr Aubyn Hill's firm Corporate Strategies Limited for overseeing the divestment of the Sugar Company of Jamaica (SCJ).
Naturally, in a country where standards of living range from squalor to royalty, there'll be no consensus as to whether the payments are justified or not.
So we won't bother to weigh in on this aspect of the controversy.
However, we believe that there is much to be said about the concept of value for money, especially given the current economic recession which is supposed to be forcing all of us to adjust our modus operandi in order to cope.
According to Mr Christopher Tufton, the minister of agriculture, the payments to Mr Hill's firm represent value for money.
"It cannot be viewed just that we have spent $27 million... It has to be viewed in the context of what are the returns on the expenditure," our sister title the Observer on Saturday quotes him yesterday.
As a matter of economic logic, this must be right.
And Mr Tufton's attribution of several benefits - including over 2,000 jobs saved - from the sale so far of two of the five factories involved, to Mr Hill's firm, is definitely something to be taken into consideration before rushing to judgement.
But the story cannot end there.
For Mr Tufton has not given us enough comparative information with which we could test the veracity of his argument in relation to the expenditure to Mr Hill's company.
How much higher or lower is this particular spend on consultancy services in relation to comparable state divestment processes?
Are we paying precious tax dollars to state officials who should, but can't, bring what Mr Hill's firm allegedly brings to the table?
If so, shouldn't they be among the first to go in the structural adjustment exercise that Mr Audley Shaw, the minister of finance and the public service, warned us to brace for at last week's Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica Chairman's Club forum in Montego Bay?
This is the background against which we welcome the probe that Mr Greg Christie, the contractor general, will make into the matter.
We are looking to that probe for answers to these and several other troubling questions which fully justify the public's scepticism and indeed outrage over this seemingly exorbitant spend.
We think the public is entitled to an explanation with regard to the seeming conflict of interest that Mr Hill's position as chairman of the board of directors of SCJ Holdings, which holds the assets of the SCJ, presents in relation to this particular divestment consultancy.
For, on the face of it, this looks like more of the same brazen cronyism and executive slackness to which we have been subjected by successive governments.
And this, more than anything else, is something we can ill afford.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: VALUE FOR MONEY

Why would he even think that the government have in their employ skills that could achieve the task they have contracted out?

If they had the capability, would they be in government employ??

Does the writer understand that finance is a serious subject of study and it is acquired by merely working in government or as an elective in a speciality course in college?
In this the cradle of the market and example of these authors.

I had an neighbor, who was the head of the department of finance in the leading university, the vice president of finance in the 2nd largest bank in the country and the vice president of finance of one of the largest aerospace and military contractors,in the world.
If a lot of people who are ignorant of the importance if thew knowledge of finance, knew this they would be make a big hash too. But that is the limit to what they are able to do.
write ash, while others do the heavy lifting.

[evanovitch]

Re: VALUE FOR MONEY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why would he even think that the government have in their employ skills that could achieve the task they have contracted out?

If they had the capability, would they be in government employ??

Does the writer understand that finance is a serious subject of study and it is acquired by merely working in government or as an elective in a speciality course in college?
In this the cradle of the market and example of these authors.

I had an neighbor, who was the head of the department of finance in the leading university, the vice president of finance in the 2nd largest bank in the country and the vice president of finance of one of the largest aerospace and military contractors,in the world.
If a lot of people who are ignorant of the importance if thew knowledge of finance, knew this they would be make a big hash too. But that is the limit to what they are able to do.
write ash, while others do the heavy lifting. </div></div>

u know Doc, mi did tink mi contrary but u ha mi beat by miles so u now saying dat civil servants etc r juss total ignorami ..

n correk mi if i am wrong but have u not stated dat U have been in the employ of yaad govament...so wat dat mek ur qualifications dat u use fi get di job and wat dat seh bout u contribution?

u a gwane like nobody a yaad no ha no credible degree r qualifications sans who go weh an come bak as consultatnts not to mention di expat whe wuk as consultatants...

u know wich University say,Anne Shirley graduate from...u know how many A level she did get, har SAT score wich had said prestigious university a farrin offah har scholarship....n yes, she was adviser to di lady PM, n i can vouch fi har brilliance from teenager come up , not to mention har wellroundedness n mi naw tawk har figga..she is an accomplished pianist to boot

soemtime u fi tink before u run in an mek statement..mi wi do some fi juss advance a discussion n mi gi u di said bly most time, but dang man, u can come wid some beaut indeed

[RichD]

Re: VALUE FOR MONEY

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dr.Dudd</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why would he even think that the government have in their employ skills that could achieve the task they have contracted out?

If they had the capability, would they be in government employ??

</div></div>
this is the attitude i see in govt here too....politicians (many who style themselves as titans of the economy) come and rather than using the in house expertise( or even assessing what expertise they have) take the same position - if they had any skill they would not be in government - so they go ahead and spend millions on outside contractors and in the end its the civil service that is left with the mess and the label of incompetence.

[evanovitch]

Finance Ministry to disclose all consultancy fees

Finance Ministry to disclose all consultancy fees
Wednesday, 21 October 2009

Finance Minister Audley Shaw.As controversy deepens over the disbursement of millions of dollars in consultancy fees by one Government Ministry, the Bruce Golding administration is being forced to make a full disclosure on the amounts being paid to all of its consultants.

The Ministry of Finance has 14 days to reveal the information.

This follows the tabling of questions by Member of Parliament for Central Kingston Ronnie Thwaites in the House of Representatives Tuesday.

In addition, to consultants' fees, Mr. Thwaites has asked Finance Minister Audley Shaw to provide a report on emoluments paid to all Government advisors.

&quot;I have asked for a disclosure of all government consultants and advisors for their terms of engagement, their emoluments and perquisites for which they are entitled and also a statement of what their tasks and responsibilities are,&quot;

&quot;The normal rule is that it should be done after 14 days but there is nothing to prevent the Ministry of Finance from responding beforehand and I am sure he must be ready for this,&quot; Mr. Thwaites said.

Speaking with RJR News Tuesday night Mr. Thwaites said he expects a comprehensive report from the Finance Minister.

&quot;It is no point talking about central government anymore because the local authorities as well as the statutory corporations all have tremendous impact upon the budget, upon Central Government in all of its aspects. So we need to bring it all together and secure the answer in respect of all those agencies,&quot; he said.

There has been public outcry since RJR News broke the story last week that nearly two million dollars is being paid monthly in consultancy fees to the Aubyn Hill led Corporate Strategies Limited.

The firm is assisting the cash strapped Government with the divestment of state-owned sugar assets.

The Office of the Contractor General has since commenced a probe into the contract award process.

[RichD]

Re: Finance Ministry to disclose all consultancy fees

Editorials

Getting value for money from Aubyn Hill, et al

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

The issue of value for money for services provided by usually well-paid individuals and institutions has become topical, following the disclosure that almost $30 million had been paid to Mr Aubyn Hill's firm to handle the sale of the state-owned sugar companies.

The fee, which we regard as exorbitant, was so strongly defended by the minister of agriculture that the public was given the impression that it was out of order to question why so much.

We regard it as the constitutional right of the public and the duty of this newspaper to know how money from the public purse is being spent at any and at all times. On this matter, there is absolutely no equivocation.

Let us get one thing straight: If a job requires a world-class professional, then whatever the location of residence, nationality or gender, the cost of these services must be related to the going rate in the global marketplace. We never envy any professional the remuneration they deserve and can command. But we maintain that paying global market rates must be based on sound judgement about the type and quality of skills and their availability, especially given the state of our economy.

In the case of the divestment of the sugar companies, we are not convinced that other suitably qualified locally resident Jamaicans who are available at local rates could not be identified and engaged. This was the case in numerous, far more complicated negotiations in bauxite, energy, finance, utilities and infrastructure. Of course, if Dr Christopher Tufton, the agriculture minister, can show otherwise, we would be happy to eat our words.

Value for money, we insist, must be related to the accomplishment of agreed goals on agreed timelines. Usually the fees are related in some way to the final outcome. If not, there is no incentive to complete the deal. Negotiations and deal-making are task work, not hourly paid work. To date, the sugar divestment deliverables have been late and incomplete. Meanwhile, there is an open chequebook.

<span style="font-weight: bold">And let us also be clear, the value for money question cannot be dismissed by citing academic qualifications and previous work experience. It is deliverables and results that are the real test of value for money.</span>

The prolonging of the negotiation process has not enhanced Jamaica's position, nor is it strengthening the Government of Jamaica's leverage in the negotiations with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Delay can be a viable negotiating strategy, but its use must be weighed against weakening one's position as the circumstances deteriorate.

Here is another case in which we ask about the value for money. The negotiations with the IMF are being led by another high-priced &quot;banker&quot; whose remuneration, we are assured, is reputed to be more than his counterparts in the rich industrial countries.

The issue of value relates to institutions as well as individuals. For example, the People's National Party forum on crime boasts a former prime minister with a garrison constituency, a former finance minister and a former investment banker as spokespersons on national security.

Is the banker value for money when neither of the former national security ministers, K D Knight and Dr Peter Phillips, will be speaking?