Stephen VasciannieLAST WEDNESDAY at The Gleaner's Editors Forum, Prime Minister Patterson was asked about his views on setting a fixed date for general elections in Jamaica. With campaigning in progress, but with the people and the political protagonists guessing as to the timing of the Prime Ministerial summons, this question is timely: is there anything to be gained by having an entire nation waiting in uncertainty while the Prime Minister deliberates on the date that will be most suitable for his party's political purposes?
In response to the question on the desirability of having a fixed election date, the Prime Minister offered three propositions for consideration:
(1) He is not ideologically opposed to having a fixed election date in Jamaica. In the event that Jamaica were to switch from its parliamentary style of government to a presidential system, then the question of a fixed election date for presidential elections would be an issue for debate, as the fixed date may be more appropriate for the presidential system than the parliamentary one.
(2) There are a variety of political problems in the country, and it is not clear that having a fixed election date will address these difficulties.
(3) In some instances, the floating election date allows the government the opportunity to return to the people in specially called general elections in order to gain a vote of confidence for a particular course of action, or to provide the government with the opportunity to have its mandate renewed in an emergency situation.
Thus, for the Prime Minister, the floating election date lends flexibility to the system, and as instances of this, he cited the case of the 1980 General Election called by Prime Minister Manley before full term as a means of ascertaining the popular will on the economic and political options to be exercised by the country against the background of the Cold War. In order to support the point of flexibility, the Prime Minister also cited the case of the elections of 1962, and contrasted this to what he described as the "rank opportunism" inherent in the calling of early elections in 1983 by the Jamaica Labour Party.
On the day following the Prime Minister's response, The Gleaner -- whose election coverage to date has been outstanding -- reported that Opposition Leader Edward Seaga has voiced his own opposition to fixed election dates. Thus, there appears to be a concurrence of views on this issue by the two main parties; and, in fairness, the call for a fixed election date, though supported by some groups in the society, does not really have traction at this time.
RANK OPPORTUNISM?
Nonetheless, the case for a fixed election date seems convincing to me. To start with Prime Minister Patterson's perspective, the first question would be why the Prime Minister believes that the fixed date is appropriate for the presidential system but not for the parliamentary one. What component of the former system may require a fixed date, in contrast to the parliamentary system? At no point in his extensive response at The Gleaner did the Prime Minister explain the distinction which lay at the heart of his first point.
Secondly, with reference to point number 3, although the floating system does allow for greater flexibility, does it not have disadvantages that need to be weighed in the balance? For instance, the Prime Minister himself referred to "rank opportunism" in 1983; but arguably, one man's rank opportunism is another man's shrewd political calculation. And, as long as the floating date is supported, there will be ample scope for further exercises in opportunism and calculation; indeed, that is the central core of the floating date system.
Moreover, it is all too easy to exaggerate the advantages of flexibility in the present context. How often will a government need to call early elections to gain a popular mandate for sharply controversial and divisive measures, or to renew its mandate following a natural disaster? These are, and should be, rare occurrences that probably should not be used to justify the overall system of election dates.
In fact, if natural disasters or other national emergencies are regarded as decisive factors in calling elections, it would be possible to list instances in which exceptions could be made to the rule requiring a fixed election date. In such circumstances, the onus would be upon the Prime Minister to justify to Parliament and to the popular will, why exactly he wishes to depart from the fixed date for elections.
INSTITUTIONAL UNFAIRNESS
More generally, the Prime Minister's perspective on the election date question is unconvincing because it seeks to justify institutional unfairness. In the present campaign, the opposition party is left guessing as to the election date, expending its resources on rallies, advertisements, organisational costs, and other paraphernalia; and yet, after all this expenditure, the Prime Minister will be fully within his rights to delay the election date until early next year.
In the meantime, the Prime Minister may bide his time, assessing when and how to spend his party's funds in order to maximise advantage. He may also initiate governmental measures designed to suit his party's best interests, with an eye to the unstated election date; but, precisely because the election date is unknown to all but himself, he may maintain the pretence that particular initiatives are not electoral gimmicks, they are part of the normal course of events under his beneficent leadership.
This is a weak system that encourages party tribal division by perpetuating the notion that the Prime Minister is a master strategist who should dedicate much of time to testing the electoral cake, checking the oven constantly to ascertain when the time is right to put his product on the market. Both major political parties are locked into the system, for they have worked with it (and have sought to manipulate it) since 1944. But that does not make it right. It's time for some leadership on this issue: we need to fix the election date.
Stephen Vasciannie is a professor at the University of the West Indies.
