But things won't change, will they?

Stephen Vasciannie

IN THE wake of the 2002 General Election, and the success of the People's National Party once again, there have been several prognostications as to the directions which the Government may take, and as to the evolution of Jamaican political culture. In most instances, the analysts have tempered their perspectives with heavy doses of realism: thus, although some commentators are inclined to hope that the PNP's rising sun will herald a glad confident morning, others expect very little to change during the current electoral cycle.

It is difficult to be optimistic in the present circumstances. As Dr Duncan has demonstrated, over 50 per cent of the Jamaicans of voting age opted not to vote earlier this month. Not only does this statistic highlight apathy and lack of interest among the majority, it also points to deep alienation in some instances.

The apathetic crew includes persons who cite Biblical authority to withdraw from the electoral process, persons simply too lazy to register and to vote, and others who are just unwilling to accept the intellectual challenge of deciding between contending candidates. In contrast, the alienated voter is a little more difficult to categorise. (S)he is likely to have been involved in the political process at some time in the past; having seen, however, that the political process tends to bring out the worst in our people, (s)he has opted, by conscious decision, to stay far from incompetence, corruption and chicanery.

CHALLENGE

One challenge for the political parties is, therefore, how to bring the alienated back into the fold; there is little reason, though, to believe that the main parties will meet this challenge in the near future. Take the PNP, in the first instance. Although the reduced majority in the House may prompt their more sensitive members to improve representation in practice, the underlying message of the unprecedented fourth term is quite the opposite.

The PNP's victory -- even in the face of a substantial swing of electoral opinion -- is likely to instil a sense of political invincibility within that party, and this may, in turn, undermine efforts to change the country's political culture. For them, the system is working, so why change it unless the proposed changes will further entrench their electoral dominance, relatively speaking?

Similarly, the stimulus for reform from the PNP side is likely to be undermined by the forthcoming leadership race. Even though Prime Minister Patterson is now on the field for the purposes of securing his legacy, it is doubtful that he will introduce radical measures designed to change the political culture. All indications are that the PNP will proceed with the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council. This could be viewed as an important change in the political system, broadly defined, but notice that this change is likely to be undertaken without a referendum. In other words, the decision concerning the Privy Council will not necessarily reflect the will of the people; and it will certainly reinforce the notion -- deeply entrenched in our political culture -- that some people are more equal than others.

More generally, it may be fair to suggest that Prime Minister Patterson is instinctively conservative and loyal in his political decisions; and if this is so, it is hardly likely that the next few years will witness fundamental political changes, even as Patterson tends to his legacy. One assumes there will be much talk about the need to engender unity and so on; but, quite frankly, the Prime Minister has already had a good stretch at the wicket, and he is not likely to change his batting style near the end of the innings.

CONSERVATISM

The leadership race will also prompt a significant round of conservatism among the lieutenants in the PNP. Peter Phillips, the front-runner, is not (now) a radical, and we cannot realistically expect him to upset the status quo that has placed him on the inside track. Nor can we reasonably expect radicalism from Portia Simpson Miller, for, every step that she makes away from the pathways of the party's establishment will be cited as evidence -- fairly or not -- for the view that she is unfit for the job.

As to other possible contenders, it is difficult to argue that Dr Davies and Mrs Henry-Wilson, as steady organisers, come to the table with a reform agenda, while the political winds are now blowing heavily against the saint. In any event, if you are competing to succeed a leader who has won three terms on the trot, you may well be inclined to attach your agenda to the tried and tested formulae for success; full steam ahead (or as they say, "don't stop the progress") will be the political cry of the PNP core for the next five years.

Not much of an opening for the alienated in the PNP then, but what about the JLP? Here, much turns, as always, on the perspective of the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Seaga, depending on the level of "vim, vigour and vitality" in his system, may possibly be inclined to remain in control at Belmont Road and to contest the 2007 General Election (if it is not called early). He maintains, with conviction, that he has a vision and a mission; and bearing in mind his major contribution to Jamaica not only in the aftermath of the first Manley Government, but generally, I want to encourage him.

But, such encouragement would probably be unduly influenced by sentimental considerations. At 72, Mr Seaga should be giving serious thought to resignation, and he should not await pressure from other members of the JLP. Admittedly, he is still the most popular politician in the opposition ranks, and from all indications, he is still intellectually more sophisticated and agile than most, if not all, the younger people within reach of the JLP leadership position.

The reality, however, is that the voting public -- and especially the alienated -- are not likely to view Mr Seaga as a change agent at age 77. And this perception will be strengthened when Mr Patterson steps down from the leadership of the PNP; for, we can anticipate that the new leader of the PNP will bask in the glow of energy and renewal for the next round of elections.

It may be that Mr Seaga wants to test the waters again in the Local Government Election; but, in the meantime, he opens himself up to the criticism that he is really holding on because he wishes to give Golding time to re-establish himself into the upper echelons of the JLP. Mr Seaga should be careful that his legacy to Jamaica is not undermined by such narrow political criticism.

In the end, therefore, neither party at present seems poised to lead the march in favour of a change in the country's political culture. It is arguable that new and different leadership will stimulate change, but the current signs are not very promising.

Back to Commentary