Arnold Bertram, Contributor
Jamaica's Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller kisses a child after voting in Kingston on September 3, 2007. Jamaicans cast their votes for a new government in what was expected to be a close election held under a tropical storm alert for Hurricane Felix to the south and concerns about recent political violence. Simpson Miller's People's National Party lost to the Bruce Golding-led Jamaica Labour Party, 27 to 33 seats. - REUTERS
In the wake of its traumatic defeat at the polls, the leadership of the People's National Party (PNP) has summoned party delegates to a meetingto be held today. However, the status of this meeting is yet to be defined. Will the election of officers of the party, as is required by the party constitution, take place, or will the leadership simply seek to have its term extended?
It is understood that an appraisal committee is to be named to enquire into the present state of the party and more specifically, the reasons for the defeat. Will the delegates insist on the kind of composition, terms of reference and reporting timeline to ensure that the report contributes effectively to the rebuilding process? The last thing the party needs is window dressing.
Is the leadership aware of the extent of the demoralisation among comrades who were led to believe that Portia Simpson Miller, with a 78 per cent approval rating in March last year, was virtually unassailable? How could Bruce Golding, lacking in charisma and denounced as a flip-flop, unite the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and persuade a majority of the voters that their interests would be better served by a government of the JLP, under his leadership?
What are the factors that contributed to Jamaica's most popular politician being relegated to the shortest incumbency by any Prime Minister, with the exception of Donald Sangster, who died within three months of taking office.
For those genuinely interested in the rebuilding process and the future of the party, the results of the last general election provide the most profound insights into the pragmatism with which the Jamaican electorate assesses political leadership and interprets its fundamental interests.
Performance and Unity - Key Factors
Since 1944, the Jamaican electorate has been consistently pragmatic in rewarding performance and punishing disunity. In 1938 the masses idolised Bustamante for his fearless leadership in the rebellion and his genuine concern for their welfare. In the general elections of 1944, the voters of Western Kingston gave Bustamante 67.8 per cent of the votes, and the JLP won 22 of the 32 seats.
However, his failureto make good on his campaign promises brought the love affair between Bustamante and the urban masses to an end. They ran him out of town in 1949 and swept himself and the JLP from office in 1955.
It is significant that despite Bustamante's failures, the electorate only turned to the PNP in 1955 after it had brought an end to the ideological division within the party and united around Norman Manley's economic programme. The PNP then proceeded to implement a range of economic and social programmes for which the electorate rewarded them with an increased majority in 1959. When the party divided on the issue of Federation, they voted them out of office in 1962, and as the divisions deepened, the electorate ensured that they were defeated by an even larger margin in 1967.
PNP reunited
Michael Manley won the presidency in 1969, reunited the PNP and built a national alliance for social justice, while the JLP split into three factions. The response of the electorate was to give the PNP a comprehensive victory in the election of 1972. Between 1972 and 1976, Michael Manley transformed the Jamaican society and raised the living standards of the masses. The verdict of the electorate was expressed in the overwhelming PNP victory in the 1976 election.
Between 1977 and 1980, irreconcilable divisions surfaced in the PNP and the economic and social life of the country deteriorated to its lowest level in three decades. The pragmatic Jamaican electorate handed the PNP a humiliating defeat and installed Seaga.
Seaga never endeared himself to the Jamaican electorate and they in turn were never comfortable with his concept of governance based on the notion that "one man makes fewer mistakes than 60". Seaga's problems were also compounded by his failure to achieve the results promised in the economy. The internal party divisions which his leadership style created crippled the party. The electorate was ready
to vote him out in 1983 when the PNP lost its confidence and refused to contest the polls. They servednotice in the Local Government elections of 1986 and by 1989 Seaga was out, never to return.
Manley returned to lead the PNP to victory in 1989 and was succeeded by P.J. Patterson in 1992. Patterson invested considerable time and energy to the building of unity and cohesion in the PNP, brought a refreshing non-confrontational style to politics, skillfully orchestrated the levers of power, brought a new dimension to the modernisation of the country's infrastructure and led the PNP to three consecutive electoral victories.
Portia's Political Capital
No aspirant for the position of Prime Minister started with more political capital than Portia Simpson Miller. She combined the emotional factors of gender, class and race in such a manner as to provide for the Jamaican masses a stirring symbol of their own possibilities, and mastery over the fate assigned to them by centuries of racial and economic oppression.
Not to be outdone by the masses, the intelligentsia acclaimed her as the most outstanding and best performing Cabinet Minister year after year, without establishing any criteria as to how these decisions were arrived at.
With a favourable opinion rating of some 78 per cent, Portia had clearly emerged as Jamaica's most popular politician.
The Assessment of the Party
If in the wider society the acclaim for Portia Simpson Miller was unreserved and enthusiastic, within the Party there were reservations as to her readiness to manage the biggest business enterprise in the country.
These reservations showed up in the PNP Presidential campaign among the majority of her Cabinet and Parliamentary colleagues, who were of the view that she lacked the preparation and experience of her predecessors, as well as the capacity to unite the Party. Significantly, less than 50 per cent of the delegates voted for her in the Presidential elections as she finished a mere 200 delegate votes ahead of Peter Phillips.
If the Centre cannot hold
While Prime Minister Simpson Miller after seventeen months in office could hardly have been expected to equal Manley's record of achievement between 1972 and 1976, she must however take full responsibility for the extremely low levels of supportive administrative and managerial capacity with which she has surrounded herself.
The new palace guard had just too many sycophants, loose cannons and opportunists. The intelligentsia traditionally associated with the Party seemed isolated as the cult of the personality substituted for the Party as an institution. One formed the impression that the PNP had been overrun by elements which were for the most part ignorant of its traditions and disinterested in its historical role in nation building.
Analysing the 'Portia Factor'
There has been considerable speculation as to the role of the 'Portia factor' in the performance of PNP candidates on Election Day. The data suggests that by the time the elections came candidates who thought that the endorsement of Portia Simpson Miller was enough to ensure them victory, found that the Portia factor had been considerably overrated.
As the polls showed, in the middle and upper classes, the Portia factor could only have negatively affected the PNP vote. In the hills of St. Catherine, Manchester, Clarendon, St. Elizabeth and Trelawny, where the peasantry is the dominant social class, the PNP did worse than in 2002. The Portia factor in both form and substance was clearly not attractive to the small farming community characterised by their spirit of self-reliance and their pride in living by the sweat of their brows. Had the 'Portia factor' operated, as some contend, it is difficult to understand why it did not help Azan in the hills of Clarendon.
In the case of the urban poor, which include the social stratum described as 'lumpen', the polls suggest that they were evenly distributed between both parties. As to whether or not they were influenced on Election day by the 'Portia factor', there is just not enough data to speculate.
What then made the PNP do better than most expected? In the absence of scientific data, I am guided by my own experience on Election day. At the polling division located on Hillcrest, where I voted and took an interest on behalf of Maxine Henry-Wilson, I saw comrades wait three hours in the line to vote for the PNP. They were disenchanted, but felt they owed the Party their support in the face of what seemed like imminent political disaster.
The view that Portia Simpson Miller was not only the best but the only leader available to the People's National Party was not only inimical to the building of Party unity, but untrue. A poll done by Bill Johnson and published in the Sunday Gleaner of January 29, 2006, showed that both Portia Simpson Miller and Peter Phillips could lead the PNP to victory in the general elections.
Looking Ahead
The longer it takes the PNP to initiate the rebuilding process, the further they will find themselves behind. Their new political opponent is no longer the JLP of Edward Seaga, but an electoral machine which has been transformed along the lines of the PNP.
The PNP delegates however can feel confident that their party which "built the national movement; took Jamaica out of the colonial matrix; redeemed the soul of our people from dead hand of our bondage; liberated the energy and the will and the spirit of our people" is more than capable of renewing itself. As the PNP prepares for the future, the reminder of C.L.R James is timely:
"Political leadership is a matter of programme, strategy and tactics, and not the colour of those who lead it, their oneness of origin with their people, nor the services they have rendered".
