The Politics of Change - Out with the old?

Gary Spaulding, Contributor

A chronic failure of mid-level politicians to launch in both major political parties has left most Jamaicans pessimistic about the future.  These 'symbols of the future' have perfected the art of politicking to the extent that the populace is dying to see them beyond their political façades.

For them, rising to the top through the inevitable attrition of veterans is more palatable than genuine renewal.

Minus the political diehards, opinion polls constantly highlight significant disaffection of citizens to these so-called bright sparks, who are waiting in the wings while attempting to keep a lid on their ambitions.

For these politicians will speak ad nauseam on general party positions and ministerial/shadow portfolios, and bash political rivals at will.

But as soon as they are questioned about their political ambitions, they become afflicted by a severe case of nerves. They will quietly admit that it is anathema for aspirants to speak on leadership matters for fear of being labelled 'too ambitious', as the 'noble Brutus' and his co-conspirators charged in justifying the assassination of Julius Caesar in the Shakespearean masterpiece.

Any public demonstration of ambition in politics fuels anger and resentment on the part of loyalists of the existing leaders and inspires pariah treatment of the offending aspirant. Such is the nature of the brand of democracy that political leaders so grandly proclaim.

It is of little or no consequence to these mid-level politicians that their failure to showcase their aptitude as potential leaders robs the populace of any meaningful opportunity to assess their attributes and capabilities. Accordingly, the interests of the country are sidelined for narrow political pursuits.

In so doing, the heirs apparent to the gerontocrats who sit on the front seats of Gordon House have demonstrated unbridled contempt for the electorate.

But so what? It is less than 5,000 delegates of the PNP or JLP who will usher an aspirant into a coveted leadership position, hopefully without the presence of other rivals. Such is democracy in these political parties.

Disenchanted electors

The polls invariably demonstrate that electors are disenchanted by the glaring lack of inspirational trust by these so-called rising stars. They see through the political shenanigans of leadership hopefuls with no seeming capacity for independent thought.

That Dr Peter Phillips continues to emerge as the popular force beside PNP President Portia Simpson Miller in that party speaks volumes to the reticence of people like Peter Bunting, Lisa Hanna and Mark Golding to command attention. Hanna, Golding and Bunting seem to be emerging among the party faithful as factors to watch.

At the same time, there is a curious ambivalence towards Bunting.

Some PNP insiders believe Bunting had positioned himself for leadership when he assumed the position of general secretary three years ago, but has not been sufficiently inspiring since.

Basil Waite is a most ambitious young man, but seems to be rapidly losing his political capital at this time. As it is with another ambitious youth, former PNPYO President Damion Crawford, Bunting's relationship with Waite is rocky.

The situation is just as fuzzy in the Jamaica Labour Party.

The polls point to Andrew Holness as the man to beat, as he leads Dr Christopher Tufton. For these two men, it is important that their ministerial prowess is highlighted in the media. It seems they are unwilling to declare any desire for the top job at this time as such a move could prove suicidal. It's too bad that people like Holness and Tufton, as well as Bunting and Hanna in the PNP, seem so deathly afraid to stake their claim.

Interestingly, JLP diehards are demonstrating a level of annoyance that veterans Mike Henry and Pearnel Charles, among others, may still harbour leadership ambitions. Audley Shaw keeps his cards close to his chest, but word out of the party is that he has his eyes set on the lofty position as Golding's prospects become more tenuous.

But more frustrating for Jamaicans is that they will have to continue to speculate on just who is the real deal.

In fairness, Mark Golding told me he has no interest in a seat in the House of Representatives at this time. This disqualifies him from becoming prime minister or finance minister. But many are of the view that Golding is simply biding his time.

None of the perceived aspirants dare speak on any point of principle for fear that their bosses - both Prime Minister Golding and Opposition Leader Portia Simpson Miller - will view this as an affront.

The outspoken Daryl Vaz does not seem to have an interest in the top job; he prefers to be kingmaker.

It's anyone's guess for the vocal Aundré Franklin, who derailed Vaz's efforts to become general secretary of the JLP late last year.

James Robertson was ambitious - and silent - until his recent demise.

The propensity of leadership aspirants between, say, 35 and 55, to nervously shun questions highlights the lack of true democracy afflicting both parties.

JLP's dirty laundry

One of the major blotches against the JLP was the unfortunate brawl in 1992 when members of the so-called Gang of Five were prevented from entering the National Arena to contest the vice-presidential election at the private session of the annual conference that year.

Pearnel Charles and Douglas Vaz, senior ministers in the Seaga administration up to three years earlier, were assaulted by supposedly legitimate security personnel outside the gates of the National Arena. A supporter hit Charles with an empty Heineken bottle in the head, while many including golden-aged women, from the two St Thomas constituencies - dominated by the JLP for years - were openly assaulted by men clad in white T-shirts marked 'Security'.

At the time, Bruce Golding was chairman of the JLP and an apologist of then leader, Edward Seaga.

The incident served as a major scar on the principles of democracy in the JLP.

The atmosphere was just as unwholesome in 2004 - 12 years later - when Dr Horace Chang and Robertson challenged incumbents Edmund Bartlett and Olivia Grange for deputy leadership in Area Councils Two and Four.

Robertson and Chang, who were part of the pro-Golding faction that went after Seaga and his loyalists, defeated Grange and Bartlett. When Grange was defeated, a convention of the party created by Seaga collapsed, as there was no woman at the senior level of the JLP. It was Grange who had replaced the long-serving deputy leader, Enid Bennett, who retired from representational politics in the lead-up to the 1993 general election.

The fragile democratic structure of the JLP threatened to topple in the face of volatile resistance and intolerance born out of the tradition of the unchallengeable, supreme leader - first Alexander Bustamante, and then Edward Seaga.

To be fair, the fascinating Mike Henry challenged Seaga for the leadership in 1978 and survived in politics. But Henry is different.

In the 2004 JLP deputy leadership election, charges flew about tainted money being used to fund the campaign. Seaga later apologised to Robertson. A year later, Seaga, who had served as leader of the JLP for more than three decades, and prime minister 1980-89, was forced out.

When Seaga emerged as JLP leader 31 years earlier, the organisation had to amend the constitution in 1974 to facilitate his election to the top post (Sir Donald Sangster and Hugh Shearer - two former prime ministers - were never elected leaders of the party).

The lack of democracy prevailed with the brilliant attorney Ian Ramsay. Both Seaga and Ramsay, being bright and admirable men, had enormous egos - and two bulls could not reign in the same pen. So Ramsay retreated from the political arena and made a name for himself in the legal field.

But of course, it all started in 1943 when Bustamante broke away from the PNP to form the JLP, thus declaring himself 'Leader for Life'. It was the same approach adopted with the JLP-affiliated Bustamante Industrial Trade Union. The party took on the form of a personality-driven entity.

Subtle compromise

The compromising of democratic principles in the PNP was more subtle.

Historically, the PNP has euphemistically labelled whatever it has in the party as 'guided democracy', which means that it tells supporters who to vote for and what to do, hence the importance of groups in the party structure.

Vivian Blake was a well-respected attorney, aligned to the PNP, who had challenged Michael Manley in 1967 for the position of PNP president following the retirement of Norman Manley.

The intolerance demonstrated in the party in 1992 was highlighted when factions supporting the hugely popular Simpson Miller and party favourites contested the position after Michael Manley retired from politics. From the perspective of many, Simpson Miller should not have exercised her democratic right and challenged P.J. Patterson. Simpson Miller remained a pariah of sorts to many for a long time but, fortunate for her, Patterson was not so vindictive and she was appointed a member of his Cabinet.

History repeated itself in 2006 when Patterson stepped aside. The level of acrimony that emerged during the campaign period threatened to split the PNP. But the antipathy to democracy in the PNP really emerged when Phillips dared to challenge Simpson Miller a second time in 2008.

Many Comrades said their opposition to Phillips was based on his decision to challenge a sitting president of the PNP.

"Where there is no vacancy, there can be no contest," they argued, echoing the words of Michael Manley in 1992, a week before he announced his retirement.

The accusations levelled at Phillips, as well as the substantiating statement, are eloquent testimonies to the positions of members of the PNP on party democracy.

Gary Spaulding is a journalist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and gary.spaulding@gleanerjm.com.