Carolyn Cooper | Holness makes considerate concession speech

On election night, Andrew Holness made a truly remarkable concession speech. Of course, it was not the conventional concession speech given by the leader of the party that has lost the election. Surprisingly, Holness announced that he was making an “acceptance” speech, not a “victory” speech. What was the significance of this distinction? Given the Jamaica Labour Party’s overwhelming defeat of the People’s National Party (PNP), one would have expected the party leader to jubilantly celebrate victory. But he declined to do so.

Holness’ low-key speech seemed to be a concession to the fact that low voter turnout may have been one of factors in the spectacular success of the JLP. This year’s turnout was approximately 37 per cent of eligible voters, down from 48% for the last election. In his acceptance speech, Holness acknowledged that, “There is, indeed, cause for celebration”. Then he made this unexpected admission: “But there is also, I would believe, significant cause for consideration. There are many Jamaicans who did not participate. There are many Jamaicans who, for fear of the virus, decided not to come to the polls”.

This rather late “consideration” seems to be a classic Anansi manoeuvre. If you didn’t know better, you might have concluded that it was a superhuman power, whether divine or devilish, that had determined the date of the general election. Not Andrew Holness himself! Conventional wisdom confirms that low voter turnout usually favours the party in power. It seems as if Holness made a careful calculation that the right time to hold the general election, to the advantage of the JLP, was soon after the predictable spike in virus cases from the Emancipendence celebrations. Low voter turnout would, most definitely, be guaranteed.

FUNDAMENTAL CYNICISM

This was certainly not the time to put narrow party interests ahead of the health of the nation. But that is the nature of partisan politics. The fundamental cynicism of many politicians is exactly what makes so many Jamaicans stubbornly refuse to participate in the political process. I keep telling my friends who don’t vote that they are, in effect, aiding and abetting whoever wins. They are actually voting by default.

Furthermore, given the struggle of poor black people in this country to claim the right to vote, I always argue that we owe it to our ancestors to vote. Our celebrated poet Louise Bennett Coverley reminds us that the right to vote is a great social leveller in class-conscious Jamaica. In her poem ‘Revelation’, published in Jamaica Labrish, she gleefully asserts:

“Everybody got a vote, an

Every vote gwine swell de score;

Missa Issa, Missa Hanna

An de man wat sweep de store”.

In his acceptance speech, Holness did concede that it wasn’t just the virus that stopped many people from voting: “But there are also many Jamaicans who, for other reasons – apathy, frustration with the process – decided not to participate. So even though we have this overwhelming majority and the people have given us the mandate that we require, we are still considerate of those Jamaicans who still look on with some suspicion, some concern, some apathy on the political process.”

Holness elaborated his considerate appeal: “As I stand here tonight, I am obviously happy to have won. But I want to assure all of you that I do carry this burden with great consideration of the expectations of not just those who elected us but those who are looking at us for future decision about whether they will participate in the process.” Holness will have to offer far more than suspicious consideration if he wants to attract potential voters who have nothing but scorn for party politics.

BORN-AGAIN PARTY

Many Jamaicans choose to distance themselves from the corruption that seems to be an essential element of the political process. In his acceptance speech, Holness addressed this troubling matter. Presenting the miraculously new JLP as a born-again party, Holness made this apparent confession: “In our last government, the narrative of corruption dogged us. And it is not something that we can hide away from. And I want to be clear, because there are many persons who will now be assuming state authority who may not have the understanding as to how that authority should be used. They will know clearly that this government does not stand for corruption.”

But was corruption in the last government only a narrative? Was it just a story that could have actually been pure fiction? If Holness is serious about drawing sceptical Jamaicans into the political process he must start by talking the truth, plain and simple. Corruption was fact, not fiction under his watch. And what about those delinquent members of Cabinet who were seemingly punished by being put in the holding pen that was the office of the prime minister? Will they be baptised and given redemption in the new dispensation?

Then, it is truly alarming that Holness would concede that there may be new members of parliament who do not already understand how state authority should be used. Were they planning to take their cue from the old JLP? Corruption did not cost the JLP their victory this time. But it remains a truly urgent consideration. Andrew Holness needs to carefully contemplate the way forward for his party. Rooting out corruption in both political parties may very well determine whether or not potential voters on the sidelines will ever trust the word of sweet-talking politicians.

- Carolyn Cooper, PhD, is a specialist on culture and development. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and karokupa@gmail.com.