By Lynford Simpson, Parliamentary Reporter
LAST WEEK, Prime Minister P.J. Patterson again demonstrated in no uncertain manner that he puts his governing People's National Party (PNP) above country, and that he should not always be taken at his word.
Not that any of this is new, he has simply reaffirmed that that's the way he is; that's the way he does business. And, at 68, we should not now expect him to change.
In his more than 10 years as Prime Minister, Mr. Patterson has, on more than one occasion, said one thing while meaning something else. In fact, the PNP has for several years promised economic growth and job creation but the set targets have never been realised.
Six per cent growth per annum was promised in the past, so too the creation of 40,000 IT jobs in three years. All these have remained elusive, but still the promises persist.
That Mr. Patterson prefers his party above even those who re-elected him to office for an unprecedented fourth term, was again demonstrated by him last week when he came out in full support of Finance and Planning Minister Dr. Omar Davies who made statements that embarrassed the government, bringing its credibility into question.
I had credited Dr. Davies with better sense than his recent remarks about government spending in the lead up to last October's general election - comments that naturally landed him in hot water with numerous calls for his resignation. The Minister admitted at a PNP conference three Sundays ago that he had maintained spending on government projects during the run-up to last October's general election, to the detriment of the economy. At the same function, he accused members of the Jamaica Employers Federation (JEF) of being thieves.
As head of government, Mr. Patterson might reasonably have been expected to back the most important man in the Cabinet after himself. But, he could have done so without seeming to hold the people of Jamaica in contempt. Firstly, he should have distanced himself and the government from the comments made by Dr. Davies then go on to state his continued confidence in the man. Nothing is wrong with that approach. I just don't know who advises the PM.
Secondly, he should have resisted the temptation to, like Dr. Davies, bash those who dare to criticise the government. Even Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has critics in his own country. Let me remind you Mr. Prime Minister that criticism goes with the territory. After all, it is not a God-given right for you to govern the country, it's not your birthright. It is the Jamaican people who put you there.
So, at last Monday's post-Cabinet press briefing at Jamaica House, the Prime Minister, threw his support behind the embattled Minister who, by that time, would have experienced a nightmarish week. Hitherto, he had widely been regarded as one who stood above partisan politics. Being the one who holds the purse strings, it is important for him to be seen as such. Now with a Budget just weeks away, he has painted a picture of himself as potentially reckless with public spending if it means securing the interest of his party. I have a few questions for the Minister: did you make your admission during a moment of temporary insanity, or was it just arrogant Omar? Did you really not expect the kind of response that your remarks triggered?
For the Prime Minister to have told reporters that he had no problem with the Minister's remarks regarding the JEF was less than Prime Ministerial. His reason for backing Dr. Davies on this one was that the government had often been the subject of much abuse from various sectors.
Like Dr. Davies, who had insisted he would not apologise for calling JEF members thieves or for maintaining government spending despite the implications, the Prime Minister came across as pompous. Since Dr. Davies has now apologised to both the JEF and for the "tone and manner" of his statement regarding public expenditure, what will the Prime Minister now do?
Back to why the Prime Minister can't always be taken at his word. For those who have already forgotten, in a carefully crafted swearing-in speech on October 23, 2002, one week after a narrow election victory, Mr. Patterson promised a government "without taint of corruption" and where arrogance would not be tolerated. With his Cabinet not yet named, he told hundreds at Emancipation Park: "The team I choose will be expected to serve diligently and with humility." For his part, he pledged to work "steadfastly, without arrogance..."
With the other members of the Cabinet expected to take their cue from the PM and Dr. Davies, the country should expect more pompous, arrogant behaviour from the government. The PNP has long been known as an arrogant bunch and a fourth straight general election victory has done nothing to temper that.
I remember Robert Pickersgill, the Minister of Transport and Works, in the weeks leading up to the general election, telling the Jamaica Labour Party's Andrew Holness during a debate in the House of Representatives, that "the problem with you (the JLP) is that you have forgotten how to win and we (the PNP) have forgotten how to lose."
Let me remind the PNP that under the British Westminster system of government that we claim to embrace, high ranking Ministers in the British Parliament have resigned for much less than what Dr. Davies did. Peter Mandelson twice resigned from the Tony Blair Government, on one occasion because he failed to disclose that he had secretly received a 373,000-pound loan from his then fellow Minister Geoffrey Robinson, to buy a house in London.
On the second occasion, he stepped down over allegations that he misled the Cabinet about the extent to which he assisted Indian billionaire Sricandhinduja in securing British passports.
The difference here is that in Britain, politicians know what responsibility and accountability mean. They understand that the buck stops with them. In the past, the PNP government has sought to blame civil servants for its errors. The NetServ scandal readily comes to mind.
Based on its track record, lack of responsibility and accountability while all the time being arrogant, the PNP must now accept that its so-called values and attitude campaign is all but dead in the water. A government is expected to lead by example but the values and attitude of too many members of this party leave a lot to be desired.
To the respected Burchell Whiteman, former Minister of Education who now holds the Information portfolio, I say, stop wasting your time sir. I'm sure in giving him responsibility for the values and attitude programme, the Prime Minister took into account Mr. Whiteman's image as a nice guy, a gentleman. But, that will not be enough to save this programme. The government has long lost the moral authority to lead such a programme and I dare say it's only the government that is yet to realise this.
Email comments to: lsimpson@gleanerjm.com
