Shalman Scott, ContributorIt is interesting to watch
and listen to the various spin doctors in their sometimes desperate efforts to secure political advantage for one or other of the People's National Party (PNP) presidential candidates. Some of the utterances span from the ridiculous to the bizarre to downright dishonest. But perhaps no one should be
surprised that the same infectious malady that always attends politically competitive moments would manifest its deceptive self even as each spin doctor thinks he is smarter than everybody else.
Despite empirical evidence that the majority of Jamaicans, including delegates of whichever party, are way ahead of the campaign tactics, the strategists remain busy in their exercise of self-delusion.
tool of self-deception
Large crowds at rallies are one such tool of self-deception. The shock reactions of Michael Manley and D.K. Duncan in 1980 and Eddie Seaga in 2002 with his now infamous 'God is asleep' comment seem to have done nothing for the learning curve of some of our spin
doctors.
Another area of self-deception is in some strategists' exercise in wish fulfilment. In this case, a suggestion that PNP delegates and members of Parliament are at loggerheads in the choice of the party president. Some people totally ignore the fact that many times an MP's political position is nothing more than the constituency delegates' instructions!
STRATEGIC VOTING
First, there have always been a few delegates who act outside the constituency strategic wishes but this number remains a few, not the majority. Except where there is an irretrievable breakdown between the MP/caretaker of a particular constituency and delegates, we are unaccustomed to seeing the majority of delegates voting in opposition to wishes of the MP/caretaker and the settled position of the constituency led by that MP/caretaker.
Second, the community of interest otherwise called a constituency with its stakeholders of MP/caretaker, councillors and delegates are not naturally and diametrically opposed in their expectation for that constituency. On the contrary, the commonality of interest among stakeholders has its nexus in the idea of constituency development. This idea has two major dimensions: personal development and advancement of individuals living in the constituency and second, the development of a facilitating environment inclusive of
community, social and physical infrastructural upliftment.
Within this less than simplistic web of relationships there are less than simplistic political plans to meet the often complex and varied needs of a constituency. Tactical political planning becomes a mature necessity as the stake-
holders decide what political alignments are necessary to achieve their common goals.
They identify the source through which needed help is better able to come and so tend to vote collectively and strategically rather than emotionally and individually. To this end constituency delegates and leadership meet as a 'family', admittedly sometimes in turbulence, but after the 'family meeting' talk usually emerge with a position as to how the constituency will vote or not vote. The major motivation and consideration at these meetings is not so much the display of emotions about who is loved by whom or most hated but rather what is best for their advancement and development in the short and long term. All that having been settled, the issues of party strength and continuity, party unity and its ability to manage the external competition (read opposition) become part of the mix. But the promise or perception of personal and constituency rewards is uppermost in these deliberations.
WRONG DIAGNOSIS
Accordingly, the attempt to peddle the dialectically cosmetic view that the upcoming PNP presidential race is only about for whom delegates will vote as opposed to where MPs vote will go exposes a gross misunderstanding of or dishonesty about the tedious sociological
processes involved in casting the internal party vote.
This business, I wish to
reiterate, is more about individual constituency positions and less about the position of
individuals! And so it seems to me that the much talked about impending crisis within the PNP is nothing more than the figment of some people's imagination. It is a result of a wrong diagnosis leading to a wrong prescription and conclusion about an
outcome which cannot be
sustained.
this argument about an imminent crisis within the PNP, in my opinion, is being pushed to whip up defiance of delegates to go against what some see as party establishment wishes. The danger in such a strategy, if that is the case, is that it is set to backfire as no serious delegate want to see the PNP smashed and would prefer to toe the line rather than further weaken the party through sustained antagonistic behaviour.
The further psychological upshot of this is that delegates, in the interest of party unity, and with nothing major to lose, exchanging one comrade leader aspirant for another, will act in ways to avoid any crisis. This subtler consequence of delegates' reaction seems to have been lost on the architects of what I regard to be nothing more than unhelpful political scheming and dreaming.
another responsibility
Then there is the matter of the PNP members of parliament having another responsibility in which the constituency delegates have no direct say. And that is to select the next Prime Minister of Jamaica. The Jamaican constitution does not legally recognise political parties and the decision they make. Rather the constitution states that the Governor-General will appoint as prime minister the person who in his opinion, commands the support of the majority of the members of the House of representative. So it is the MPs who select the prime minster while delegates select the party leader or president.
My investigation tells me that settling-down time within the constituencies has begun engendering serious 'family' talks. Accordingly, expect a smooth transition of leadership and prime ministership from the PNP in February 2006!
