'Driva' crashes into mountain of misery
Published:Sunday | October 9, 2011 | 12:00 AM
Gordon Roinson, Contributor
And so it came to pass, after seven days and seven nights in the wilderness, Jamaica's prime minister finally got around to addressing the nation regarding his previously private announcement that he was abandoning his elected office before completing one term.
He said:
"Last Sunday, I advised my party's Central Executive that I wouldn't seek re-election at the annual conference to be held next month and I would step down as prime minister as soon as a new leader had been elected. I had come to this position after deep contemplation and prayer, seeking to do what is best for the country and the party."
But the country was treated as an afterthought. Seven days after. Why now, Driva?
"... Let me explain the timing.
The annual conference of the JLP is scheduled to be held on November 19 and 20. As stipulated in the party's Constitution, the deadline for nominations is October 19. Sufficient time, therefore, had to be allowed for potential candidates to consider offering themselves ... . Sufficient time had to be allowed, as well, for the delegates to contemplate their choices ... .
"In addition, the Central Executive ... was ... holding its last meeting before the annual conference. I had to make my decision known then."
Why all this detail about the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) constitution? And the convenience of JLP leadership candidates? Obviously, the JLP's interests took priority over all else. But, Driva, you weren't speaking to the JLP. Your audience was Jamaicans who believed they were listening to their prime minister. They don't give a flying fig about the JLP's constitution. Nor do they expect their prime minister to use the JLP's constitution as a reference point when resigning as prime minister. It wasn't the JLP constitution that elected him PM in the first place.
Seizing the moment admirably and putting on a good show of concern for the Jamaican Constitution, the JLP's 'parliamentary caucus' has rendered both the JLP's constitution and its political party games redundant by publicly signalling that Young Andrew Holness, who commands their confidence, is Jamaica's new prime minister. The governor general must immediately do his duty and swear Young Andrew in as prime minister, leaving the JLP to subsequently conduct whatever internal leadership drama it considers necessary. Driva, the self-styled protector of constitutional rights, has been taught a valuable lesson in how not to try to manipulate our Constitution.
Running from work?
In explaining his private statement to the JLP Central Executive that "the challenges of the last four years had taken their toll ...", Golding elaborated as follows:
"The last few years, perhaps, have been the most difficult period that any government has had to face. Like most other countries, we have taken a battering from the global recession ... ..
"I've worked hard these past four years, 16-18 hours a day most days, in navigating our way through these treacherous waters."
What in tarnation are you crying about, Driva? Have you forgotten that you asked for the job? In your inaugural address, you spoke specifically of "the awesome responsibilities of leading this nation". You said then:
"As we begin this new chapter in the life of our nation, I am mindful of the challenges that we face:
The enormous debt that we owe that must be repaid, even as we try to improve the delivery of critical services to our people;
The high level of crime that must be tackled ... ;
The jobs and other economic opportunities that must be created ... ;
The persistent cry for justice from so many of our people, to which we cannot continue to be deaf, to which we must respond.
All of a sudden this is just too tiring? Too much like 'work'?
Back to Sunday, October 2, when Jamaica's prime minister said:
"While the worst may have passed, we are not yet out of the woods. There are challenges that remain on many fronts that will require strong leadership to overcome and absolute confidence in the authority of that leadership."
Seaga always told us Driva wasn't a strong leader. Is he now admitting that he's nothing but a Chief Vacillator? Confidence can't be the problem since the Central Executive of the JLP, that institution he appears to respect above all others, voted unanimously to reject his resignation.
Here it comes:
"Questions about the role I played in the Coke-Manatt matter have remained a source of concern in the minds of many people. It was never about Coke's guilt or innocence.
"It was about a breach of our Constitution ... . We have since amended the Interception of Communications Act (IOCA) to permit in the future the action that was taken in Coke's case but which, at that time, was in violation of our Constitution."
Well, kiss mi neck! Blouse and skirt! Pants and shirt! Not only is he continuing to show little remorse, he's continuing to excuse his inexcusable actions. Also, in the same breath as he insists he was defending the Constitution, he now says he has solved that problem by amending the IOCA. It reminds me of a tongue-twister from my days at Mrs Sasso's prep:
"Amidst the mists and cold frosts,
he thrusts his hands against the posts
and still insists he sees the ghosts."
Anyone who believes a constitutional breach can be cured by amending an ordinary statute, please go directly to The Gleaner Company on North Street, where I'll discuss my sale to you, of a flat piece of land near to a tranquil river in Bog Walk.
Time for the 'new'
"However, the episode has affected me deeply and the perceptions that are held by some people haven't been dispelled, notwithstanding the exhaustive deliberations of a commission of enquiry."
Perceptions? Surely you jest? Was it not the said commission of enquiry which found your conduct "inappropriate"? Was that just a "perception"? Why not resign immediately after the report was published? What's new?
"I cannot allow the challenges we face and the issues that we as a people must confront to be smothered or overpowered by this saga and the emotions that they ignite. It would not be fair to my country; it would not be fair to my party."
Violins, Maestro (sob)! Bad news, Driva, the challenges remain. All that's changed is that you have finally accepted that you must atone, however belatedly, for your misconduct.
But the sting is in the tail:
"There are other considerations that led to my decision. It's time for my generation to make way for younger people whose time has come, who are more in sync with 21st-century realities, whose vision can have a longer scope and who can bring new energy to the enormous tasks that confront us."
Oh, please! Where has this suddenly come from? Last week, when addressing JLP Central Executive (before Baugh and Henry declared themselves leadership aspirants), this wasn't one of Driva's stated reasons. To the contrary, he said then he'd planned to lead the party into a second term of government and retire within two years. Didn't he know that he would have reached 67 years old by then?
This recently discovered 'consideration" smacks of a blatant and inappropriate attempt to interfere with the selection process which his parliamentary colleagues may have foiled within 48 hours.
"I feel it's time for me and people like me to make way and allow a new crop of leaders to step forward ... . There are young people in my party, indeed in both parties, who are capable of providing the leadership that the country requires at this time. We must not, for the sake of personal ambition, block their emergence ... ."
That was nothing more than a gratuitous insult to Mike Henry and Ken Baugh in particular; a bitter, divisive statement; a sign of open hostility against JLP colleagues; and a cheap shot at the Opposition for no apparently rational reason. No statesman would so publicly express such a partisan preference regarding his political replacement. But, then, in light of his recent conduct, who could accuse Driva of statesmanship?
"The election of a new leader is a process that must be conducted in a mature, transparent and dignified manner. This is especially so since we form the government."
No 'grace' left to gain
What about the election of a new prime minister? Oughtn't that to be done by parliamentary caucus not party delegates? Anyone who read Edward Seaga's fascinating account of the appointment of Donald Sangster, then Hugh Shearer as PM, couldn't help but be impressed with the maturity, transparency and dignity of that process. But, then taking Seaga's advice has never been Driva's strong suit.
"In my remaining few weeks, I will ... hand over the reins of office gracefully to my successor... ."
Sorry, Driva, the "graceful" ship has long sailed with your "younger people" faux pas. As it turned out, you weren't present to pass the baton "gracefully" or at all when it was prised from your grasp at the parliamentary caucus' press conference. Why? Did you threaten the 'Norman Manley Option'? Applying that misnomer to any such tactic would be another insult, since Manley, the quintessential statesman, called an election out of a deep respect for democracy having just lost a crucial plebiscite. The 'Norman Manley Option' contemplates neither pique nor political strategy.
When it comes to grace, Young Andrew hasn't started well, using the word 'I' 40 times and the words 'me' or 'my' 27 times in a 12-minute speech. However, he's young and hopefully will learn that team leaders prefer 'we'. If I were the JLP, I'd capitalise on the expected bounce in the polls and call elections now before the shine is rubbed off the ball. It would also add another positive by showing a courtesy to the electorate that's been sadly lacking to date.
Now, what of the PNP? Will Portia Simpson Miller recognise, albeit even more belatedly than Driva, that she owes Jamaica a real choice at the next election by making way for a new PNP leader? Or will she continue to stubbornly cling to desperate hopes of political redemption from the same electorate that gave her the boot in 2007? Will the next election pit a fresh, new Young Andrew against an obstinate, recycled Portia stubbornly refusing to take no for an answer from voters?
If so, how will we react? Peace and love.
Gordon Robinson is an attorney-at-law. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.