Editorial | An opportunity to debate fixed-date elections

The timing of Ruddy Spencer’s resignation from Parliament may well be political artifice, as the Opposition claims. But the People’s National Party (PNP) would be on firmer ground, from where it is more likely to be heard with sympathy, in pressing Andrew Holness to keep his promise to establish a fixed date for general elections, rather than boycott the March 2 poll to elect Mr Spencer’s successor.

The PNP, whatever the merit of its complaint, sounds more like it is having a whinge.

Mr Spencer, 76, is standing down as the Jamaica Labour Party’s (JLP) parliamentarian for South East Clarendon, a seat he has held since 2002 and considered relatively safe for the governing party. His departure at this time, with a general election constitutionally due in a year’s time, is pregnant with strategic manoeuvrings on the part of the JLP.

It is a seat that it is expected to retain. Nonetheless, a win in a by-election, not long before the general, would be a psychological boost for the JLP, and the reverse for the PNP. A third defeat for the opposition party in by-elections in three years – the previous ones in seats it held – could not only affect its confidence, but might be used to reinforce the narrative of the electoral unattractiveness of its leader, Peter Phillips.

That, though, isn’t the argument being advanced by the PNP for its intended boycott of the by-election, if one is called ahead of the national poll. It says that the J$30 million that would have to be spent on the election for Mr Spencer’s replacement would be unnecessary and wasteful, given the JLP’s signals of its intention to hold an early general election, for which the Electoral Commission is already preparing. The cost of that exercise will be more than J$1 billion.

“The People’s National Party respects the right of the people of South East Clarendon to have parliamentary representation, but has no intention of following the JLP into this unnecessary and wasteful political exercise, which will be a carnival of spending state resources, as were the cases in the two previous by-elections,” said the PNP’s general secretary, Julian Robinson, before the date was announced.

There are several points to note here. The pretext of this by-election won’t be the same as that of 1983, when the then JLP leader, Edward Seaga, broke his pledge not to hold another general election on an outdated voters’ register, giving the PNP the moral high ground for its boycott of the poll.

Moreover, in the absence of a fixed election date, Prime Minister Holness could go to the polls anytime between now and next June, if he uses the three months grace for holding an election after the end of Parliament’s five-year term. That would be a long time, if he goes to the extreme, for a constituency to be without parliamentary representation.

Complaints

On the other hand, while the concerns raised by the Opposition about the likely unfair use of state resources by the Government, during election campaigns, highlight some of the worst elements of our democracy, they aren’t sufficient for us to place limits on the process, or weaken representation, including the right of people to exercise their franchise. They insist upon greater rigour on the part of oversight bodies and institutions, so as to extract a price from those who would abuse their public office and taxpayers’ resources, to the detriment of our democracy.

The situation, perhaps, calls for a revisit of the idea for fixing the date of Jamaica’s general elections, which was once championed by Mr Holness, and the legislative process towards which he promised to start “within our first 100 days of government”.

Weakness, notwithstanding, a fixed election date removes the opportunity for gamesmanship by the PM, thus providing a level of certainty to the political process. The concerns about how to deal with crises in government, or the body politick, which might demand an early election, can be dealt with by allowing for the dissolution of Parliament with a vote by a special majority, or of no confidence in a government.

Or, in a case similar to what may now face Jamaica, we could adopt the principle of some Canadian provinces with fixed-date provincial elections, of not allowing a by-election within nine months of the provincial vote.