Anti-Corruption a Worthwhile Investment
Recent revelations from the Auditor General’s report and the continued delay in the passage of the Integrity in Public Life bill have again brought matters of corruption into the spotlight. With regards to integrity legislation, the Attorney General indicated that the failure to pass the bill was in part due to the ongoing financial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. This admission is noteworthy as it suggests that a cost analysis for financing the Integrity Commission occurred. If this is the case, it would be useful to provide the public with a sense of the cost that the Commission would incur.
In any event, government must be mindful that according to the OECD, the cost of corruption to developing countries is approximately 5% of GDP; roughly 1/2 a Billion BBD per annum in Barbados’ case. Furthermore, given the $1.49 billion worth of contracts that were carried out by the Barbados Water Authority (BWA) that breached the Financial Management and Audit Act, cost concerns are marginal compared with the Commission’s potential benefits.
Financing the Commission
Nevertheless, if financing concerns are impeding the establishment of the Commission then creative and progressive funding options ought to be explored. The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ), which is financed through a trust fund is one financing option that the government has at its disposal. This trust fund is financed by money that was raised by the Caribbean Development Bank, and government should explore similar options with its developmental partners and financiers.
Moreover, the establishment of a public interest fund to bolster the Commission’s funding regime is an alternative approach. This fund would allow contributions to be made by philanthropic foundations, civil society, the private sector, government, and the public alike. Additionally, the government can also consider how its tax regime, possibly through deductions, can be used to incentivize contributions. Funding for the Commission can also be attained through a penalty system where monies can be raised by the repatriation of proceeds from corrupt activities. If properly executed, combined, these approaches can reduce the need for central government’s financing for the operations of the Commission.
Promoting financial independence
These alternative financing options can also provide the Commission with the necessary insolation as governmental financing is, in essence, a political declaration subjected to political will and interference. The importance of financial independence was recently highlighted in Guyana where due to insufficient funds, its Integrity Commission was unable to publish the names of public officers who were delinquent in filing their declarations. Even after a request by the Commission’s Chair, the Guyanese government indicated that no additional funds would be provided. This circumstance emphasizes the importance of sustainably financed Integrity Commissions as it would allow them to do meaningful work in a timely fashion and fulfil their mandates.
Ultimately, corruption continues to be of concern as it threatens Barbadian’s quality of life. Therefore, much like investments in public healthcare and education, financing an anti-corruption regime is a worthy endeavour that can ensure the public good is maintained.