Arnold Bertram, Contributor
A WEEK in politics is indeed a long time. On Sunday last, PNP presidential candidate, Peter Phillips, consolidated his claim for the leadership of the party and the state, with an impressive showing at his East Central constituency conference.
With the endorsement of colleague Members of Parliament and councillors as well as the enthusiastic solidarity of delegates, he has now established himself as the leading contender in the PNP's presidential race. By Monday, however, the entire People's National Party was watching with concern the reaction of the public to the hike in bus fares and electricity bills, against the background of the increasing costs associated with the back to school exercise. At the end of the day, the JLP were hoping for a political disaffection that could resurrect their political fortunes.
The Omar Davies camp, in the meantime, could hardly have been happy for the fact that, even as Phillips and Simpson Miller confirm themselves as the real contenders for the national title, their candidate is fighting an elimination bout with a relative unknown for a regional chairmanship. Their dilemma is further compounded by the fact that Davies' victory in this regional race can only be assured with the support of either Phillips or Simpson Miller. A brand new political ball game is clearly emerging, and as is the case with every new political situation "old friends become new enemies and old enemies become new friends."
THE ROLE OF THE PARLIAMENTARY GROUP
As I have stated previously, while it is the delegates who decide, no leader of the PNP can emerge in opposition to its National Executive Council and its parliamentary group, and the party can only have one such body at a time. Within this centre, the parliamentary group plays a critical role because the prime minister can neither be constitutionally appointed without its support nor continue in office without its confidence. Any strategy which minimises the role of either the parliamentarians or the delegates is doomed to failure.
The role of the parliamentary group assumes an even greater importance when the leadership change takes place while the party is in power. In 1969 Michael Manley did win the presidency of the party with only partial support from his parliamentary colleagues. However, the PNP was then in opposition and the question of being prime minister was not immediate. However, P. J. Patterson made sure that by the general elections of 1972 the renewed parliamentary group had become a bastion of support for Michael Manley's leadership.
TIMELY REMINDER
Hartley Neita, in his recently published biography of Hugh Shearer, provides a timely reminder of the events which took place in the JLP when Shearer emerged as party leader and prime minister in 1967. Sangster, during his illness, had appointed his senior deputy leader, Clem Tavares, to act as prime minister.
However, when the Governor-General consulted the parliamentary group, as he was constitutionally obliged to do, they voted for Shearer. The PNP would do well to note that the JLP never recovered from that split.
During Shearer's administration the Cabinet split into three factions around the personalities of Seaga, Wilton Hill and Lightbourne, each with their support within the party. Shearer lost the elections in 1972 and within two years was hounded out of the leadership.
The JLP has only won one contested general election since, and that was in 1980 when the PNP had to face an international crusade as well as a local opposition.
A RUSH TO JUDGEMENT
Even before the transfer of political power within the PNP has been effected, one detects an unmistakable rush to bring Prime Minister P.J. Paterson's tenure to an end and pass a one-sided judgement on his stewardship and legacy. This is taking place against the background of deep divisions within the national community created by more than six decades of party political strife which seems to have impaired our capacity for objective assessment. In the absence of this capacity for informed debate, we subject our leaders to partisan acclaim, partisan abuse as well as the prejudices of class and race.
This impatience seems specially reserved for Patterson, given the political tradition and culture which has been established since 1944. Norman Manley and Alexander Bustamante remained for more than 30 years as party leaders. Edward Seaga, despite losing five general elections, stayed on for 31 years. When Michael Manley's health forced him to retire, he had already served for 20 years.
In 13 years Patterson has not lost a general election and has already indicated his decision to retire. He must now be considering the wisdom of announcing his departure so far in advance of a timetable to give it effect.
No one can deny the need for thorough debate on term limits, but this should not be used as a pretext for denying Patterson's contribution to national development.
RESTORATION OF CIVILITY
This contribution certainly includes the restoration of civility to party political relations, the transformation of Jamaica's physical landscape and the removal of all barriers which hitherto excluded rural Jamaica from access to all the amenities of modern life, beginning with potable water and decent housing.
It is also ironic that while Patterson's stewardship is being subjected to a ruthless and merciless critique, he is never given credit for the fact that he, more so than any other prime minister, expanded opportunities for public criticism. For it was during his tenure that the state-owned media was privatised, unlimited expansion of private media houses facilitated, and the Freedom of Information Act legislated.
The next generation of leaders will undoubtedly be challenged by a society which still combines the elements of an impending crisis with all of the possibilities associated with a land of opportunity. Despite their considerable gains since representative government in 1944, the aspirations of the majority for a better life have run far ahead of social and economic opportunities, leading to increased political and social disaffection.
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
The gap between a very wealthy elite and those aspiring to raise their living standards can only be narrowed by the
creation of much more wealth than we have managed to do since 1973, and by a deliberate programme to broaden the opportunities for this wealth creation by facilitating entrepreneurship at every level.
All programmes for national development must compete for the limited human and financial resources available. Over the last decade, the privatised Air Jamaica has been allocated more capital than the combined portfolios of National Security, Education, and Local Government.
When one considers that the range of services provided by these ministries determine the management of crime, the state of public order, social cohesion, the productivity of labour and the delivery of local services, which are a critical source of employment and community development, a radical change in the order of priorities must be the first item on the new agenda.
Arnold Bertram is a former Member of Parliament. You can send your comments to infocus@gleanerjm.com
