Phillip Paulwell | Understanding Jamaica’s political divisiveness | In Focus

On July 28, The Gleaner published a report on statements made by former Prime Minister Bruce Golding under the headline “”We Messed Up”.

He, in essence, pointed the finger at “successive administrations” that failed to fully advance Jamaica’s interests. The arguments of Mr. Golding are controversial and require much more deliberate analysis in light of the roles played by campaign manifestos. Campaign manifestos always proclaimed the primacy of the national interest. However, as proclaimed by these manifestos, the national interest seemed to be overridden by other considerations when the various administrations implemented their mandates.

Perhaps the fact that our political system of majoritarian politics lies on the bed of expected division where there should be a Government and an Opposition, has not been carefully understood by all. In order to retain power, political parties must either use state resources to further their political and policy agendas when in power or seek to undermine and challenge the Government of the day when in opposition as a means of coming to power. Likewise, the premise of the political process is one in which there is a rotation of power, with the pendulum swinging between the People’s National Party (PNP) and the Jamaica Labor Party (JLP).

After 60 years of Independence, this is how our political system works. Therefore, to blame the politicians – who, by the way, must bear “their share of the blame”, as Mr. Golding – also requires further analysis. No opposition party has engaged in the process of blindly supporting a government in the name of national unity and, thanks to this approach, being permanently in opposition. Political parties have different perspectives and political positions and will not agree. Sometimes, within the parties themselves, there can be divisions over different views on how the respective parties should define their positions.

NO THIRD PARTY DAMAGES

Further, there is no place for third parties in our political process and Mr Golding – of all people – should know this as he left the JLP in 1995 to form the National Democratic Movement (NDM). Golding and his party failed to win any seats in the 1997 general election, leaving him with no alternative but to rejoin the JLP in 2002, becoming prime minister in 2007. Michael Williams, NDM general secretary, said Gleaner on December 16, 2009, “We are saddened. We are upset that a person who could speak so eloquently in support of our policies has found himself unable to implement one of those policies now that he is prime minister.” Sticking with your party is a quality that politicians must demonstrate in our political system.

Political division can take many forms. However, internal division is more destructive and could help the other main party remain in power when the prime minister calls a general election. Both the PNP and the JLP have suffered such mishaps. How they go about repairing the damage is the biggest challenge of all. The pendulum swings that brought the PNP and JLP to power over the past 25 years have had their fair share of internal divisions alternating within the ranks of their opponents to facilitate the election process. When these parties heal their internal divisions, they usually become stronger forces for the next time they face a general election.

Our political reality is that division is a requirement in the development of our political process. Therefore, the idea of ​​consensus is foreign since we do not have a consensual government system made up of coalitions that unite different political perspectives and personalities for the good of the country. However, in other CARICOM jurisdictions, the coalition approach has been tried with limited success in Trinidad and Tobago (1995-2010), St Kitts-Nevis (2015 and 2020) and Guyana (1968 and 2015). With the exception of Guyana, which has an electoral system completely different from ours, the coalition experiments in Trinidad and Tobago and StKitts-Nevis ultimately failed. And all have returned to the original Westminster model of one-party governments. Those CARICOM states that flirted with coalition politics did so to build broader electoral bases, and in doing so, created enhanced opportunities for subsequent electoral success. Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana have ethnically mixed societies, while in St Kitts-Nevis, there is a strong regional divide between the two federation islands. We don’t have those political dynamics; however, our parties are capable of internal divisions, which can be electorally damaging. The political party contributes to the division that Golding spoke of, while the issue of internal division is far more damaging to political parties.

NOT COMPROMISED

Our political divide has not compromised the level of Jamaican patriotism over the past 60 years. We are a model on the world stage for athletics, music, culture, cuisine and, yes, our political stability. Despite all the talk of disunity, we have done well after 60 years of Independence.

JLP has held power in the following periods of our history, 1962-1972, 1980-1989, 2007-2011 and from 2016 onwards. Likewise, the PNP held power from 1972-1980, 1989-2007 and 2011-2016. We have both had our turn at the helm of power and the ship of state has remained politically stable. Keeping a politically stable ship of state is an achievement no matter how small it may be to some people. It is truly a credit to those who have gone before us. However, there is still much work to be done as we continue to build a society that addresses our economic, social and political development.

Republicanism seems to be the next stop on our journey of constitutional evolution. We must manage this process in a bipartisan manner that will not fall into the pitfalls articulated by Mr. Golding, because if it does, it will “mess up”, to use his words. The Republic is for all of Jamaica and the government must get this right so that when MPs vote in Parliament, there is a consensus. Likewise, the same consensus will prevail when the general population votes in the referendum as MPs will take a unified position to deliver to our respective supporters – articulating Bob Marley’s message, One Love, for our new republic.

We can come together for these great initiatives and make them work so that we can overcome whatever checks and balances were put in the constitution in 1962 to prevent any abuse of power in making constitutional changes by consensus. and hegemony. Perhaps we should take this opportunity, as we try to forge a national consensus, to also remove from political bickering and games the triple national concerns of crime and violence, education and housing.

– Phillip Paulwell is Member of Parliament for Kingston East and Port Royal and former Minister for Science, Technology, Energy and Mines. Send comments to [email protected].

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *