Editorial | Apathy to democracy

As a political partisan, Prime Minister Andrew Holness, on the face of it, has good reason to celebrate. Jamaicans continue to rate him, and his party, the figurative ‘streets and lanes’, ahead of the Opposition.

But as the chief steward of Jamaica’s democracy, Mr Holness has every reason to be concerned. For not only is the foundation upon which his support rests thin, new polling data underline Jamaicans’ deepening apathy to political participation. That is a danger to democracy.

The problem, and its solutions, belong not only to Mr Holness. For the crisis in Jamaica’s democracy is reflected even more deeply in the opposition People’s National Party (PNP), which enters its 84th annual conference this week with significant questions about its viability and echoes of this newspaper’s warning a year ago that political parties, even formerly greater ones, have no inherent right to exist.

Few people in Britain in the early 20th century, we noted then, would have contemplated the death of the Liberals, the party of titans like Gladstone, Asquith and Lloyd George.

If the PNP is to avoid the fate of the Liberal Party and its slow march to extinction, or that of the Whigs of 19th-century America, it has to emerge from its fractious personality fights and convince Jamaicans that it has a mission worthy of their investment and support. Much, therefore, hinges on the outcome of this week’s conference, including how the party’s refashioned philosophy is articulated as practical, implementable policies.

RATINGS

Regarding Mr Holness, just under four in 10 Jamaicans (38 per cent) believe that he is doing good (25 per cent) or very good (13 per cent). Another 35 per cent rates his performance as average. Mr Holness can reasonably, therefore, argue that adding those who rate his premiership as average, 73 per cent of Jamaicans have no major qualms with his leadership. That is a five percentage point slippage from a year earlier (his ‘good/very good’ column fell four points and his ‘average’ increased by a similar amount), while Jamaica contended with the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. The JLP enjoys similar ratings.

In contrast to Mr Holness’ 38 per cent, only 18 per cent of Jamaicans rated the PNP leader Mark Golding’s performance as good or very good, while 43 per cent said it was average. Overall, the number of voters who perceived Mr Golding’s performance in purely negative terms (poor/very poor) declined by eight percentage points, while strongly positive views increased seven points. However, only 18 per cent of Jamaicans said they would vote for the PNP if an election was called at this time, a statistically insignificant increase of one percentage point on a year earlier. On the other hand, 31 per cent said they would vote for the JLP – a five percentage point increase. That is beyond the poll’s margin of error of three per cent.

More significant, though, was the 17 per cent who were not sure how they would vote, and the 34 per cent, up three percentage points, who had no intention of voting.

That is the particularly worrying bit.

We are concerned that many of the waverers could fall firmly into the ‘not voting’ camp, continuing the trend of recent elections.

The JLP won the 2020 general election by a landslide with over 56 per cent of the popular vote and 49 of Parliament’s 63 seats. However, only 37.2 per cent of the registered electors cast ballots. The JLP received the support of a mere 21 per cent of all voters. The low turnout might have been exaggerated by the coronavirus pandemic, but in 2016 less than half (48.37 per cent) of the eligible voters cast ballots.

DISAFFECTION WITH DEMOCRACY

That has been the trajectory since the early 2000s. Indeed, this shows an increasing disaffection with Jamaica’s democracy and its election processes, as was captured in the latest biennial survey on attitudes to democracy in the Americas by Vanderbilt University’s LAPOP research laboratory. While 57 per cent of Jamaicans said they supported democracy, 46 per cent would tolerate a military coup to tackle corruption. Fifty-five per cent wouldn’t mind a strongman leader who bent the rules if their personal economic circumstances were improved – and the leader did not curb free speech.

Only 35 per cent fully trusted elections and less than a fifth (18 per cent) believed that votes were always properly counted, against 65 per cent who said it only happened sometimes. A third of voters were certain that ballot secrecy was never guaranteed. Half was sceptical about the process. A third felt that elections were always bought. Fifty per cent said that money sometimes played a role.

This cynicism towards our democracy and electoral arrangements is against the backdrop of a large majority of Jamaicans – over 70 per cent – believing that they live in a highly corrupt country. Changing those perceptions and rebuilding trust in the country’s institutions demands an absolute intolerance to corruption. That must be aggressively led by the chief steward of our democracy and the head of the Government: Prime Minister Holness.

The process calls for assertive moral leadership at all levels. Moreover, political parties must stand for something. The PNP has lost its way. Perhaps the Anthony Bogues Report on how it might adapt its old philosophy to the new times, as a “mass party of democratic left”, can help it chart a course back.