Will the new broom sweep clean?

BY Daniel Thwaites

Who knew that my few comments last week about how Montague and Tufton were sidelined without a run-off would cause such mad-ants behaviour? It tells me that this is a sore point.

And much as I would want tounderstandhow and whyMr Holness, who never held any officer position in the JLP, was hoisted over those who do, the fact is that he's in place and we therefore have to invest our hopes in him.

Let me hasten to propose three changes for Mr Holness' consideration while I stop off in Grants Pen like Reverend Al and pick some plums. In the first 100 days, Mr Holness could commit to campaign-finance reform. Join the Electoral Commission, the Opposition, and the call of pretty much every segment of civil society (except some in the private sector) in demanding that party political funding be made transparent.

Next, call off the spending spree and carnival of corruption called JDIP, and commit to running the programme through established channels and, more generally, follow the recommendations of the contractor general about the programme.

Finally, Mr Holness can changehis mind about "continuity" with the IMF. It indicates that he is at some level satisfied with this current economic fiasco. Unemployment has skyrocketed, poverty doubled, income inequality increased, debt has reached astonishing levels, foreign investment declined, and the country's friendliness to business decreased. Every possible excuse has been tendered, and we keep being told the "fundamentals are in place".

I agree, to an extent. The "fundamentals are in place" to push poverty and desperation on to the next three generations if we don't stop and change the track we're on.

With all of this in mind, the Cabinet 'unshuffle' was uninspiring. Wednesday morning, I looked at the picture carried in The Gleaner of Mr Holness and his Cabinet and mistook him for a geriatric-home administrator surrounded by some staff and patients. That is, of course, apart from the comely Shahine and Babsy, who are roses among thorns. But seriously, this must be one of the oldest Cabinets in the history of the country.

Perhaps Mr Holness had this in mind when he strongly intimated at the very ceremony of investiture that he would rather have another deck. That's hardly a vote of confidence for who's there now, but surely there was no more appropriate time to serve that notice.

Is Mr Holness a new broom that wants to sweep clean? That must be news to Mike and Pearnel. Remember that the Driva also has 'to know de corna', particularly after the recent economic and constitutional crashes. So I don't see where this argument about 'old vs young' helps us forward very much, or at all.

Incidentally, I don't think Shahine should be barred from ministerial appointment because of her dishonesty in the court case about dual citizenship. Whatever punishment is due to her should be applied by the court. Perhaps the law should be amended to block someone in her position from going back to Parliament.

No limit on representation

But once she has become eligible to stand for election and the voters of NE St Ann have sent her back to represent them, there ought to be no limit on that representation, and she ought to be available for any appointment that her talent allows.

Democratic elections throw up choices that we may not like, but the counting of actual ballots has to be accorded great respect. Shahine became eligible, she got the votes, and there is no provision for 'half-members' in the House.

As to whether those parliamentarians of either side who knowingly took seats for which they were ineligible should repay the taxpayer for squatting, that is a more delicate question. It would definitely be a disincentive against any further flouting of that constitutional requirement!

I don't wish to minimise the concern of the Jamaica Civil Society Coalition, as it is on to an important point in its complaint about Ms Robinson. I suggest that it should train itsinfluential advocacy on to the issue of eligibility requirements of candidates for Parliament. Civil society can lay out, and the legislature can bring into law, an understanding of the 'fit and proper' threshold that all political candidates ought to meet. That, along with the disclosure of political contributions, would help us along tremendously.

Daniel Thwaites has a New York law firm and is a student of Norman Manley Law School. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.