Jamaican Opposition Leader Portia Simpson-Miller’s fiery speech at the People’s National Party’s annual conference this weekend has already sparked criticism.
In an editorial today, the Jamaica Gleaner stated:
But responsible criticism can never be confused with the kind of demagogy displayed on Sunday. It was an outrageous performance with alarming implications for Jamaica and the PNP.
The editorial in today’s Nation newspaper in Barbados was of much the same view:
The warning given by former prime minister Portia Simpson-Miller at her party’s 69th annual conference at the weekend could only have a negative impact on the yet to be structured “engagement” between government and opposition.
Both were of the opinion that Mrs. Simpson-Miller should have been more responsive to the conciliatory tone set by new Prime Minister Bruce Golding who, from his initial victory speech on September 3, has spoken of the need for bipartisan co-operation, particularly in light of the very close election results (less than 1% of the popular vote seperated the Jamaica Labour Party and the PNP).
On the one hand, I have been impressed by Golding’s call for more co-operation and rather convinced by his argument that the close election results might show that Jamaicans are weary of the vicious partisan nature of their politics and by their actions are forcing the political parties to work together in the best interest of Jamaica.
On the other hand…isn’t this what democracy is all about? Can not the closeness of the election and narrowness of the victory margin also be seen as the voters’ way of keeping checks and balances on their politicians? Mulling it over now, I wonder if it could not be a way of ensuring that the party in power does not get too comfortable.
After all, until the PNP’s unprecedented run of power began in 1989, Jamaicans were pretty much a ’two term’ electorate. Just as the party in power started to become smug and complacent…out you go! Next!
Bajans used to be that way too but that is a whole ‘nother post…
Perhaps Jamaicans realised they had erred in allowing one party to become too comfortable and by effecting such a narrow balance of power in the House, they have decided to get back to keeping politicians on their toes- as they should be.
After all, corruption is a serious issue in Jamaica and Jamaican politics. A party with a small margin of victory and a watchful, pitbull Opposition is less likely to raid the public coffers and try to get away with million-dollar hanky panky.
For example, if the party in power here was more seriously challenged, would we so many instances of ridiculous cost overruns like the one on the Operation Freeflow highway expansion project here in Barbados, where we were blithely and vaguely informed that the ’scope of the project had increased’ and so the project cost was likely to increase threefold from US$60 million to US$180 million? And would the government have been so arrogantly complacent as to remain silent about it for weeks or would they have rushed to explain and itemise exactly where this money was going? And would a government spokesman really have had the temerity to offer such a bs rationale as Clyde Mascoll did this weekend, saying ‘oh, it’s not really increasing threefold, just two-fold’?
Ok, I’m on a bit of a rant now…back to the subject at hand.
I am thinking perhaps Portia’s threat to:
Let them have sleepless nights … We are going to be their worst nightmare… So them look after themselves first and think we are going to just sit down and sup it. It not going like that, and we want to know how much all of them going to cost. Let me serve notice that we are going to ask every month for the cost and we going to check it up.
may not be such a bad thing after all. I’m still torn …. is it in JA’s best interest for the PNP to be conciliatory doves or aggressive, watchful hawks?
3 Comments
September 18, 2007 at 7:42 pm
I just wonder if there isn’t a middle ground? Can the PNP not be a responsible and vocal opposition without being vitriolic and bitter? The Opposition is a part of the governance structure, they have a role in building not only criticizing and hounding the government.
One gets a sense that Portia’s response was made out of bitterness at her loss, and not wholly motivated by a genuine concern for Jamaica’s welfare. (Did you see the ugly look on her face on the front of today’s Gleaner?)
The Cabinet is a bit big, but the way the economy is going i think Mr. Golding would be justified in putting even more people in the finance portfolio. His one innovative move, to bring someone with a proven track record with finance and management into the finance ministry has been slammed by the PNP.
I think the JLP needs some time to get their feet wet. They have close to 1 trillion dollars in debt, a sluggish economy and one of the highest crime rates in the world to confront.
Checks and balances are good, but there is the risk that the government may become afraid to make the bold changes needed if they are going to be constantly attacked by an opposition trying to score political points.
The PNP had a role in bringing about the present state of affairs. One party alone cannot bring us out of this mess! Above all else, a new collaborative politics in needed.
September 18, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Concillatory? Concillatory my rass!!! Why should she be concillitory with people who spent the last few months debasing her, tarnishing her name, questioning her intelligence and just about using every opportunity to malign her? Fuck ‘em all, if this was some other situation I would say shoot them all and let God sort out the bodies. I am happy she let them have it, and the Gleaner, The Nation & tThe Observer can all fuck off!!!
September 20, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Ahh…malibu…isn’t the tone of your comment simply underscoring the very point many have been making about the PNP/Portia’s response being vitriolic and bitter rather than constructively critical?
I did not say Portia should be conciliatory, I said people have indicated she could RESPOND to the conciliatory tone of Golding.
Anyhow, that is semantics- to the meat of the matter…you question why should Portia be responsive to people who spent the last several months maligning and insulting her? Being maligned and debased is part of politics is it not? Even when the attacks are personal, it’s not personal if yuh get me. It’s just the business of politics. Wuhloss, what Jamaican politicians would do if they had calypsonians to contend with? Talk about insults?
So that should not influence her actions one way or the other. Your response seems to indicate Portia should just give them tit-for-tat so you don’t business one way or the other.
I think that is wrong, though I still don’t decry Portia’s comments- I don’t think they were that vitriolic. If she had been personal or nasty ye, but I don’t think her declaration that she is going to be keeping a close eye on them and basically riding them like a duppy is a bad thing.
However, unlike you (?) I think her concern should not be so much getting back at the JLP so much as being a vigilant and strong Opposition leader. Jamaica needs a strong opposition. So does Barbados but that is a whole ‘nother post…