On September 20,2008, the delegates of the Peoples’ National Party (PNP) in Jamaica, spoke in clear and precise tones by re-electing Mrs. Portia Simpson-Miller as its leader. Dr. Peter Phillips challenged for the leadership on the basis that many party members throughout the country had been urging him to challenge for the leadership. There is no doubt that he was being urged, but in my view, the fundamental reason why Dr. Phillips challenged for the leadership was his belief that Mrs. Simpson-Miller is either unable or incapable of providing the type of leadership that the party needs at this crucial juncture. It is also possible that he was in a hurry because he shared the general view that the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) Government would be forced by circumstances to call an election very soon. Clearly, he miscalculated and underestimated the tenacity and toughness of Mrs. Simpson-Miller.
Now that the dust has settled, I wish to address the following fundamental issues that cry out for attention in the political arena:
1. Corruption in party politics
2. Leaders in waiting
3. Time for action
Corruption in party politics
Let me state in emphatic and unquivocal terms that the process through which the two political parties (Peoples’ National Party (PNP) & Jamaica Labour Party (JLP)) elect party leaders and select candidates to contest for public office is absolutely corrupt. The sad thing is that party leaders know it, party members know it and the public at large believe it, but there is a corrosive sense of resignation to, and acceptance of the notion that it is a normal part of the political process.
Talk to anyone who is close to the political process in the PNP, and you will be told that in the recent contest for the leadership of the party, “money flowed like a river”. It is commonly known that each side of the contest passed out cash to persuade delegates to vote for its candidate. Under normal circumstances, this is seen as bribery, but in the political arena it is seen as normal behaviour. As a matter of fact, it is so well accepted that whether the political contest is intra-party or inter-party, each side will urge delegates or voters to accept the bribe from both sides and then vote as originally intended. This is why Dr. Phillips’ side was so shocked by the outcome of the September 20, 2008 contest. Clearly, his supposed pledged supporters took him for a ride.
Each political party functions like a private club, doing things the way it chooses solely for the benefit of the elite in the party, and they don’t give a damn about the country. Is it any wonder then, that when these persons get into government they take with them the corrupt attitudes, behaviours and structures that are characteristic of the political parties.
The tragedy that confronts us is that none of the leaders of the two major political parties have done anything to reign in the corruption in the parties. I know that some of you will defend them by saying that they did not or do not know of the dastardly behaviours of their followers. I categorically reject such assertions, because these party leaders are all very astute and perceptive individuals with key informants throughout the political system. They have either chosen to be complicit with the corruption or to turn a blind eye in the interest of party solidarity and personal survival.
The Change we need
The time has come for change in how the political parties function, and we the people must be the catalyst for such change, because the political parties are the beneficiaries of the corrupt system therefore, they have no genuine interest in change. The question then is this, what kind of change do we want? The situation in which a handful of delegates can elect the party leader who then becomes the Prime Minister if the party wins a majority in parliament is unacceptable. The time has come for us to demand that the Prime Minister be elected by popular vote in a national election. Each party should be required to participate in a primary process in which a candidate for Prime Minister is selected to represent the party in a general election. Currently, the process for selecting candidates for Parliamentary elections is often highly unfair and corrupt, therefore the same primary process should also be applied to candidates for Parliamentary seats.
Such a move would open up the selection process to a wider spectrum of candidates and would allow for independent candidates as well. It would ease the strangle-hold of a small party elite and their cronies, and create transparency where none now exists. It would require the involvement of the Elections Commission, thereby providing transparency and legitimacy.
I call on both major political parties to abolish the position of Care-Taker at the constituency and division levels. This position undermines the legitimacy of the sitting Member of Parliament or Councilor, and it provides the person in office with a lousy excuse for attending only to the needs and interests of those who voted for him/her. It is not unusual for some members of a constituency to see the Care-Taker as their representative because the sitting Member of Parliament is from the opposite party. The Care-Taker position lends itself to corruption by the party that is in power, because the government quite illegally, finds ways to direct resources through its Care-Taker who was not successful in the election. Furthermore, it provides the care-taker with a permanent position from which to exclude potential rivals for candidacy. A vibrant democracy should open up avenues for political participation by the widest cross-section of potential office-holders and not restrict participation to a small cadre of persons.
Leaders in waiting
The young people who qualify as “leaders in waiting” do not give me much hope for the future, because they are only as good as the system that produces them, and the system is broken. Kern Spencer is a case in point. He was seen as a rising star, but his involvement in the light bulb scandal has eclipsed his stardom, and no one I know is surprised. Sometimes ago one of the young “leaders in waiting” in one of the two major parties and I were involved in a political conversation, and in highlighting his preparation for the political arena, he said with pride that all he knows about politics he owes to a certain politician. That shocked me, because that certain politician was known in party circles to be very corrupt.
There is a sense in which the “leaders in waiting” have the potential to be worse than those they hope to succeed, because in keeping with the times, they want everything all at once at the beginning of their political career. They want the spanking new SUV right away; they want the big house on a hill instantly; they want the big salary without delay, and they want high status right away. All of this is a prescription for a corrupt career in politics.
A time for action
Given the above scenario, what then is the answer? Clearly, there is a need for constitutional change. Every politician of whatever colour will agree while in opposition, but once they form the government, they say little or nothing and do nothing about it. Secondly there is a need for political change which establishes clear formal guidelines for how political parties should conduct their affairs.
In other words, it is a time for action; but given the history of the political parties, this action will not come from the politicians. Such action will require an assertive public that refuses to accept the political status quo. It requires a vigilant populace that rejects complicity in a corrupt system; it requires a populace that is willing to put country above self; and finally it requires collaboration among concerned citizens and organizations in a bold assault on the dastardly and corrupt practices that have become a standard in political life. IISPEC stands ready to collaborate in such efforts.
Jaslin U. Salmon, Ph.D.
Professor Salmon is President/CEO of a think tank “International Institute for Social, Political and Economic Change” (IISPEC), and former Advisor, and head of the National Poverty Eradication Programme in the Office of the Prime Minister.
