THE SPIRIT of compromise and deal making is fundamental to the effective operation of a parliamentary democracy. Unfortunately, in Jamaica, we have made intransigence and confrontation common place in the Jamaican political culture and we are paying a heavy price in development for it.The almost simultaneous passing of the old leadership order in the political parties and in Government and Opposition provides a fresh opportunity to break with history and to forge a political culture of compromise in the national interest. The Opposition must not continue to define its role principally as 'to oppose! oppose! as Edward Seaga once threatened to do. Neither should the Government continue to rely on its majority to defeat opposition to its propositions and policies, often with mighty arrogance.
In this context we dare to hope that Attorney-General and Minister of Justice A.J. Nicholson's meeting sometime this week with Opposition spokesman on Justice Delroy Chuck to set up bipartisan talks on the thorny issue of the Caribbean Court of Justice as the country's final appeals court, will be fruitful. Speaking on the CCJ issue in Parliament last week, Prime Minister P.J. Patterson essentially accused the Opposition of being responsible for the failure to reach consensus on the CCJ and on other constitutional matters at an earlier stage.
The Prime Minister, who had advised all those seeking a referendum as the basis for decision on the establishment of the CCJ to 'forget it', is now saying "lest we forget, I have made several efforts to have discussions on this and several other issues." Among the stalemated issues which have not been resolved over years because of the failure of the Opposition to work with the Government in Mr. Patterson's view, are the Charter of Rights and the death penalty.
The Prime Minister, who may be retiring from politics before the end of this year, is very likely to leave behind these issues still unresolved. Mr Seaga has already resigned from 45 years of political engagement, 22 of those years as Leader of the Opposition and eight as Prime Minister, expressing his disappointment in goals not achieved. Most of those goals would have required active collaboration between Government and Opposition in the Parliament.
One way forward on these major issues is to release members of Parliament from the party whips and to allow free discussions and votes along with consultations with civil society.
It would be a tragedy of major proportions if we throw away this golden opportunity to change substantially the politics of confrontation into a politics of collaborative compromise and simply perpetuate the old counter-productive order with new leaders. An approach to legislative changes and governance built on compromise will in the long run save a lot of time and needless haggling over minutiae.
