PNP is not the problem

Ian Boyne, Contributor

I told you not to write off Bruce Golding. And that a day was a long time in politics. After being on an incredible roll for months, courtesy of the Bruce Golding administration's handling of the Dudus extradition and Manatt, Phelps and Phillips issues, the People's National Party had an emergency hijack last week which, while not exactly solidifying 'Driva', certainly threw the PNP propaganda train off course.

With the country breathing a massive sigh of relief that the astronomical murder rate had fallen dramatically and that gunmen were on the retreat; with dons fearfully running into police stations, the prime minister went to Parliament to say, in effect, "'Don't stop the progress'. Let's extend the state of emergency for another 30 days so we can bring in more criminals and ferret out more information to put away some of those now detained. The prime minister did not have enough of his own to ensure that the tough fight to the criminals could continue, but that was all good, strategically. A blessing for him - not disguised.

He and the entire crime-weary, murder-fatigued country were waiting on the Opposition PNP to vote against the criminals. Sensing what was about to hit his party when Golding called for the vote, Derrick Kellier nervously pleaded for time to consult to come up with a way to save face. But after 20 minutes of negotiation, the Government rejected their compromise of a 15-day extension and tossed them to the wolves.

The Observer was ferocious in tearing at PNP flesh. "The PNP's underwear is showing and it's not clean," blared the tabloid. It gets worse. "The People's National Party's attempt to kill the state of emergency ... is a cynical political ploy that exposes the true nature of the Opposition." As though that bite were not enough, the editorial continues, "We have no doubt after this that the Opposition has absolutely no interest in the country winning the war against crime. The PNP has chosen... to put party over country."

It was in that same space that Bruce Golding suffered his own butchering in previous months over 'Dudusgate'. But now there was new meat.

The Gleaner hit back at the PNP in a front-page editorial, 'Reckless day in Gordon House,' and while its editorial apportioned the blame, it also slammed into the PNP. The Gleaner said, "a scared Opposition" ran for a 15-day compromise, as "the PNP wanted to eat its cake and have it." The Observer returned with a page-one editorial on Thursday: 'PNP - mere shadow of a once great party'. The PNP, which had been marketing itself as a moral alternative to an alleged morally compromised Bruce Golding, was dismissed by the Observer as "entirely bereft of any moral bearings". Ouch!

In that same edition, the acerbic Mark Wignall was to follow ("For the PNP, it is politics first, country second"). Said he, sarcastically: "To the PNP, I offer my personal congrats of raw politics above all."

The media were joined by the big boys of the private sector. The major umbrella grouping, the Council of the Presidents, plus the heads of the Jamaica, Manufacturers Association, the Jamaica Chamber of Commerce and the Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica were unanimous in condemning the PNP action in blocking the extension of the state of emergency. It was the PNP's week of fire. The vehemence of the opposition to its action in Parliament is sure to take centre stage today when the party meets for its National Executive Council meeting. It will be the party leader's task today to repair the breach and win back hearts and minds after a week in which the party lost considerable ground.

Wrong signals

On Thursday morning, too, an angry Don Robotham was on the Breakfast Club, saying the party had now become the party of the lumpen proletariat (what ordinary people call "riff raff" and thugs). He said the PNP was sending wrong signals to criminals, quoting one Labourite as saying, "me born labourite but now me a support PNP", because the Jamaica Labour Party is now seen as the party fighting criminals while the PNP is cozying up to them. Don, a former firebrand Marxist, was stunningly harsh in lashing the PNP for not voting for the extension of the state of emergency.

The PNP's abstention in the House was the best thing that has happened to the JLP in a long time, far better than the gains in the economy, for the media were not giving them much credit for that, absorbed as they were with Dudusgate.

Many of the criticisms of the PNP now, though, have been grossly unfair, unbalanced and irresponsible. The Observer, which has continued to put out fine editorials, was excessive and, indeed, reckless in saying the Opposition has no interest in winning the war against crime. These kinds of comments must be left to sensationalist columnists. The Government must explain why it did not accept the PNP's compromise offer of 15 days, giving them enough time to come back to the House, within that time, for a further 15-day extension, when their members' excursions would have ended.

Is it that a 15-day extension was deemed unconstitutional and that was the argument advanced to the Opposition, or was the Opposition deliberately set up and booby-trapped? (And, even then, they were not forced into the trap.) Regular readers of my column would know that I would be fully in support of a 30-day extension. I support the Government fully in its anti-crime drive and disagree, totally, and wholeheartedly with the PNP in blocking the state of emergency's extension.

But that does not mean we should be unfair and irresponsible in our criticisms of the parliamentary Opposition, whose commitment to national security and law and order is no less than the Government's.

We should be careful of the facile and fallacious argument that because the PNP voted against the extension, its members are any less committed to rooting out criminals than people like me who fully support tough, hard policing and emergency measures. Why can't we disagree without impugning motives?

This Opposition has been a highly responsible, restrained and rational Opposition, which has eschewed many opportunities to inflame tensions in this society. With the high-tension challenges that this Government has faced, economically and politically, a less-responsible and patriotic Opposition would have exploited its difficulties far more than it has. Indeed, the Portia Simpson Miller-led PNP has been a gift to the Bruce Golding administration, in terms of restraint.

I can think of others who would have given Golding a much greater political fight on the streets. So the criticism of the PNP's strategically supporting criminals, and being captured by lumpen elements, is totally outlandish and misguided.

On the issue of national security, the PNP is not the problem. The problem is a national ambivalence that Bruce Golding himself identified in that excellent budget presentation he delivered earlier this year, in which he incisively described our security dilemmas. After the Opposition leader had made her admirable call for dialogue with the Government on seeking solutions to crime, the prime minister insightfully pointed out that, "we need a much broader front for which that effort can be a catalyst. We need a national consensus on the type of counter-offensive that must be mounted against the criminal forces."

Curry-favours

This is the crux of the issue. The PNP, in its strategic calculation, realises that while citizens are fed up with criminals, there is a considerable resentment and resistance toward the security forces because of alleged abuses and corruption, and it also knows the human-rights lobby is very powerful. The PNP knows that the human-rights lobby commands significant presence and prestige in the Jamaican media, and that they frame the issues. The PNP, as a mass political party, curry-favours with our human-rights lobby, and panders to the underclasses, particularly the youth, who are alienated from the police.

Robotham misses the fact that it is not just the lumpen who motivates the PNP. It is also the middle-class intelligentsia, drunk with human-rights fundamentalism. I also believe the party is genuinely and sincerely convinced by the major arguments of the human-rights lobby, which are given much uncritical play in the media.

Tell me who in the media you can identify, immediately, who is pushing tough-policing tactics and who is openly critical of the human-rights lobby? Your answer says everything. But you can come up with many talk-show and public-affairs hosts, commentators and columnists, who are sympathetic to the human-rights lobby and parlay their words as gospel.

How often do you hear these high-profile lawyers, some of whom have been retained by high-profile criminals, grilled by interviewers on television and radio? They set the agenda and the journalists seem to be mesmerised by their expertise.

Delicate tightrope

The PNP was walking a delicate tightrope last week when they slipped. They were responding to pressures from the ground about security forces excesses, their amplification in the media, as well as the strategic weight of human-rights groups and high-profile members of the Jamaican Bar. The PNP plays good chess. But they made a bad move last week, and they are being punished in the game. But with their dominance in the media, they will reframe the issues in short order and be back on track.

But we must have a larger philosophical and strategic dialogue on national security. We need a nuanced discussion on the state vis-a-vis individual rights and security versus liberty. Golding was dead right in his Budget speech: "Crime fighting strategies must be appropriate to the crime that has to be fought." The state of emergency drove the fear of hell into criminals. It was psychological warfare. Middle-class idealists and human-rights fundamentalists don't understand that criminals only respect superior force.

But nor can we, the tough-policing advocates, continue to ignore the very real issues that human-rights lobbyists pose about the detention of thousands of innocent youth and allegations of abuse by the security forces.

Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist who may be reached at ianboyne1@yahoo.com or columns@gleanerjm.com