Only Audley can tek it to Portia

Ian Boyne, Contributor

The transformational opposition leader could not have had a more traditional start to his pushback campaign against the challenge to his leadership of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP). Last Sunday night, seasoned 'tracers' and firebrands like Everald Warmington, 'Babsy' Grange and Pearnel Charles were joined by newbie lightning rod, Andrew Wheatley, in 'bunning fire' on would-be challenge to Prince Andrew's throne, Audley Shaw.

It could hardly have been a worse start for
Andrew Holness' campaign to retain his leadership of the party. All
week, much of the discussion in media and on the street has focused on
the wrong tone set by Andrew's camp on Sunday night. Round One to Audley
Shaw in this JLP rumble.

What the disturbing comments
on Sunday night have revealed are the deep-rooted antagonism and
hostility to democracy that exist in our political culture. Don't
believe it is just in the JLP. Our political parties are personality
cults. But I go further. This ex-plantation society has a deep cultural
aversion to democracy.

Don't mistake our pervasive
individualism, love of debate, and raucous addiction to argumentation
for a love of democratic ideals. We hate diversity - except our own. We
all believe in freedom of expression - as long as that expression is
similar to ours. We are all for a challenge - except to
us.

The JLP constitution says every year its leader
can be challenged and how many years has anyone dared to test that? And
what happened to those who have tried? Remember what happened to Pearnel
Charles himself outside the National Arena?

I don't
believe Andrew Holness himself suffers from the kinds of insecurities
and paranoia which afflict many politicians. I truly believe he wants to
be transformational and I believe he has genuine democratic
proclivities. I believe him when he says he is not hostile to a
challenge. But some of his key backers make no bones that they don't
share his view.

They see a challenge as treachery,
treason, betrayal, anathema and despicable. How dare you challenge our
leader? How dare you want to upset the apple cart? How dare you try to
follow our party constitution and exercise your right to challenge our
man, who was anointed?

Civil society must condemn, in
the clearest terms, this manifestation of autocracy and demagoguery
which was on full display on Sunday night. And Andrew would do well to
publicly dissociate himself from it - even for his own expediency;
though I believe he can do so sincerely.

Daryl Vaz has
been taking the right line: Guys, tone it down, people are watching,
you all have to work together after the November elections, and now is
your chance to show the country you truly believe in democracy. The JLP
has two candidates - assuming Audley does not back out - who are
eminently qualified to lead the party.

We must put
Shaw's challenge into context and state first of all that no one in the
Labour Party has a greater legitimacy to the leadership than Shaw. And
there is no one in the JLP with a greater combination of platform
mastery and genius, charismatic pull, passion, technocratic skill, grasp
of financial issues, acceptability to the power elite, and grass-roots
appeal.

While both pro-Andrew supporters and Audley's
fans equally appeal to his stridency, his ability to light fire under
the Portia Simpson Miller administration and his 'ray-ray' skills, not
enough is being made of his hard work as an opposition spokesman in the
previous wilderness experience of the JLP. Audley was a thorn in the
side of the Patterson administration, as he proved under Portia's first
administration; known for uncovering scandals, whether real or imagined.
Those who worked with him speak of his diligence in preparing his
presentations.

'SALT' SHAW

Audley
Shaw is a most unfortunate man - 'salt', in Jamaican parlance. In 2002,
after his impressive performance as opposition spokesman on finance and
his fiery, take-no-prisoners approach had solidified him as a formidable
potential successor to Edward Philip George Seaga - after Seaga's
falling out with his favourite son, Bruce Golding - disaster struck. The
moneyed classes told Seaga if he brought back Bruce from his failed
National Democratic Movement experiment, they would shower him with
funds to blast Patterson out of the electoral waters. It was an offer
Seaga could not refuse.

Shaw was devastated, for he
knew that with Bruce back, he stood no chance of succeeding Eddie -
after so much work and putting up so much fight to Patterson. Seaga was
unpopular, but Audley kept the JLP in focus by continually talking about
scandals, corruption, overexpenditure - things which riled up many
Jamaicans.

There is no better politician to
manufacture outrage, and with a face perfect to communicate alarm and
disgust. But with Bruce by his side and money to oil his election
machine, Seaga saw Bruce as his golden opportunity to walk back into
Jamaica House.

After Seaga lost the election, a
disenchanted group of JLP leaders began plotting his overthrow. Bruce
was to be the new messiah of the JLP: He was bright, articulate,
sophisticated, highly admired by civil society, including the media, and
favoured by the business class. Audley was seen as a man who could rev
up people and fire them up about corruption, thieving and bandooloo, but
he was never seen as bright and as technocratic as
Bruce.

But when Bruce lost all his political capital
over the Dudus affair and resigned suddenly, another grand opportunity
opened up for Audley. But now the JLP faced a Herculean task: how to
sell itself to a country repulsed and revolted by the Dudus affair and
the Manatt debacle, and with a recessionary economy without IMF
funds.

Everybody was writing off the JLP. The eulogies
were being read when they were interrupted by what seemed like a
brilliant flash of insight: 'Play the youth card by anointing Andrew
Holness.' The euphoria that swept across this country when Andrew was
tipped was palpable.

Andrew was marketed as this
young, bright, promising post-Independence generation leader battling an
ageing and tired PNP leadership, led by a 65-year-old matriarch. The
youth card was the one possible magic elixir that could be found. Audley
again was dumped. His supporters huddled and went to Andrew to beg him
to back off and give way to experience. The youth was stubborn. His time
had come, he said. Audley was again devastated, as history and
circumstances had cynically and almost conspiratorially worked against
him. 'Salt fi true.' Audley was depressed, according to reports that
were reaching me.

Age was not on his side. But the
youth card was a blank. A bad card. The young man was beaten badly by
the experienced politician. Mama gave her son a sound spanking. You need
to understand the context of this present challenge and, indeed,
Andrew's rise. Andrew was created for an occasion, a moment in time, to
serve a special set of emergency circumstances. He did not serve his
purpose; therefore, in the eyes of some, he is now expendable. His time
has passed, they feel.

Andrew does not, in the eyes of
many, tower over Audley intellectually or otherwise. It was not like a
Bruce Golding or Audley Shaw comparison or an Eddie Seaga versus Pearnel
Charles or Mike Henry, for example. There is no great distance that is
perceived between Audley and Andrew in terms of
stature.

So Andrew's hold is tenuous. And when faced
with high prices, a devalued dollar, a 10-year-high unemployment rate
and a punishing austerity programme, what is on most delegates' minds is
which leader can light fire under this administration and get us back
into power.

Which leader can 'tek it to Portia' most
stridently; which leader can defend the people's rights more
vociferously and vehemently. This is the issue on the streets. Right
now, I suspect most delegates are with the status quo and Andrew. They
are saying 'don't rock the boat. Don't disturb the peace'. But delegates
will be listening to people. And if they sense that people feel Audley
can better fight Portia, that will count for something. Comrade Damion
Crawford smells the rat.

Pearnel was at his humorous
best on Sunday night. (Only Audley can come near to him in terms of
platform mastery.) But his biggest joke was when he said that anybody
who wanted to challenge Andrew now must be working for the PNP. The fact
is, it is in the PNP's interest to keep Andrew in and keep Audley out,
though I am sure Comrades believe Portia is strong enough to beat
either. (But every Comrade in his heart of hearts knows that Audley
would put up a bigger fight.) Audley's ability to 'chuck badness', as it
were, is a major asset on the ground.

Holness too
soft

Many feel Andrew is too soft, too pastoral, too
conciliatory and too palsy-walsy with Portia, who calls him her son.
They think there is too much love in that family and they want to stir
up things a bit. There are nearly 6,000
delegates.

Don't watch the big-name MPs supporting
Andrew. First, they can't determine whom their delegates will vote for.
Their delegates will come in their buses and vote against their man. MPs
know that. Delegates are thinking about who best can fight out this
Government and put them in power so they can be on the gravy train soon
again.

Second, there are far more caretakers than JLP
parliamentarians, many of them disillusioned and alienated from party
central. Andrew is no big spender and is genuinely trying to change
things. Many of these caretakers and delegates are resisting change.
They want the old-style politics - the eat-a-food, oppose, oppose,
oppose politics.

Andrew is having a hard time changing
the culture, and before he gets time, Audley has jumped in. But Audley
has nothing to lose. Time is running out for him, anyway. It's now or
never. It's better he take his chance now and lose than not try at
all.

He would have retired anyway. Better to retire
after defeat knowing you tried, than sit depressed in retirement
wondering, "What if?" Andrew is front-runner now, but two months is a
very long time in politics.

Ian Boyne is a veteran
journalist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and
ianboyne1@yahoo.com.