Where is the Rev Phillip Phinn?

by Peter Espeut

Before the 2007 election, the Reverend Phillip Phinn - the Prophet - predicted a win for the People's National Party (PNP). And Portia Simpson Miller so believed him that she declined to concede defeat: "It ain't over till it's over," she declared. Where is Prophet Phinn now?

For the 2011 election, Gleaner pollster Bill Johnson has remained silent, declining to make any sort of prediction. The Gleaner made its own prediction published last Tuesday, based partially on some of his polls: that the JLP would have won 34 seats to the PNP's 29. It was wrong!

Professor Ian Boxill, a student (like myself) of the late Professor Carl Stone, also declined to make a prediction, but probably for a different reason: he believed that it was too close to call. His latest poll results did not differ significantly from his previous findings: 41.5 per cent for the JLP as opposed to 40.0 per cent for the PNP - a statistical dead heat.

In Boxill's view, the numbers were too close for him to suggest how the election would go, and, therefore, he could not predict a winner. He, too, was wrong, because in the end, the election was not so close at all!

Don Anderson called it right in 2007, and came into this election with credibility as a pollster. He put his reputation on the line by going against the flow and predicting a PNP victory - first on Tuesday by 34-29 which he updated on Wednesday to 33-30. His prediction of a PNP victory was correct, and so some of his credibility has remained intact. But he was wrong about the extent of the victory, and his last-minute adjustment was in the wrong direction.

Prophet Phinn, had he made his prediction, might have come off better than all the pollsters!

Low turnout an indictment

None of the pollsters predicted such a low turnout - the lowest in the history of contested elections in Jamaica. Almost half the Jamaican electorate stayed away, voting with their feet, indicating their rejection of both parties, and of Jamaican politics.

The received wisdom is that a low turnout favours the party in power. In this case, the turnout was so low that it indicated that Jamaicans have matured and have abandoned both parties and the old politics.

I don't think the PNP has much to celebrate about in the results of this election, as it has won only about one-quarter of the possible votes. That represents only a small minority of Jamaicans. I believe they are just as surprised as anyone else at the turn of events.

This is a victory for civil society, who put pressure on both parties to put an end to corruption and garrison politics. In the end, Manatt-Dudus and JDIP, and Trafigura and the light bulb scandal, have had their cumulative effect, producing a larger negative impact on the JLP than on the PNP. The people have spoken, and the PNP needs to be sure it hears the message that is being sent.

This election result has overturned one of the most widely held political axioms: that the party that spends the most money in its campaign stands the best chance of winning the election. Despite the estimated $2 billion spent by both parties on their campaigns, the turnout has been the lowest ever. The negative campaign advertisements turned off the electorate. They b(r)ought out the crowds with the curry goat and the 'dallahs', but they could not bring out the votes.

And the JLP, which dramatically outspent the PNP, has lost the election. The favourite of the moneyed class has been rejected by the people. This fact may verywell change the complexion of all future Jamaican general
elections.

The electorate has rejected the
'politricks', but it has rejected the JLP more, blowing the Labourites
out of water. I am sure the PNP will focus more on their decisive win
than on the reason for it: they have more 'diehearted' supporters - core
supporters - than the JLP.

Civil society has made the
2007 JLP Government the first one-term administration in Jamaican
electoral history. Should the PNP come back with more old-style
politics, its new Government could be the second. Civil society will be
watching!

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and an
environmentalist.Email feedback to
columnist@gleanerjm.