A second chance for Portia, PNP to make impact

 

It is now quite clear that the People’s National Party (PNP) was superior to the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) in formulating and executing its strategic plan for victory at the polls. Having achieved that objective, Mrs Simpson Miller and her team must be cognisant that a substantially different strategic plan is required for the Government to guide the country on its way to Vision 2030. We expect at least the same level of plan formulation and execution by the administration as by the party.

Government Planning

In essence, the administration’s strategic plan must have three components: a) specific objectives and targets in line with Vision 2030; b) major strategies and initiatives to achieve these targets; and c) realignment of government (structure, accountability, resource reallocation, approach, relationships with stakeholders) to deliver on the targets, objectives and, eventually, Vision 2030.

There is an old Japanese proverb which goes something like this: “Vision without (strategy and) action is a daydream; action without vision (and strategy) is a nightmare. Vision plus strategy plus action = success.”

While it is important to implement initiatives and action items, the Government must be held accountable to the achievement of objectives and targets. In other words, if a minister promises to do X with the expectation of achieving Y; the minister may need to rethink X if implementing it does not result in Y.

Unlike other commentators, I will refrain from suggesting any specific first-step actions to the prime minister. Instead, I will encourage the PM and the Cabinet members to spend the next couple of months in serious planning mode. Yes, there are some pressing issues which need to be dealt with. However, for the most part, the permanent secretaries and their teams can deal with day-to-day operations.

It is the role of the Cabinet to drive the transformation needed to make the day-to-day operations more effective and efficient. The more time spent planning will result in greater levels of achievement.

Head of the transition team, Dr Omar Davies, has insisted that the administration cannot set any targets at this time as they need to get a full understanding of the existing situation. Without such a full understanding, the administration cannot really formulate any meaningful plans.

I am, therefore, willing to cut them some slack (and I am encouraging others to do so) until the Budget Debate in March or April to reveal wholesome plans for the Government, as well as for each of the ministries, departments and agencies. Mrs Simpson Miller has promised greater levels of consultation, and I expect much involvement by civil society in policy formulation. Notwithstanding the consultations and involvement of others, the administration must be clear that it will be held accountable for the achievement of the performance targets.

On her ascension to the post of prime minister in March 2006, Mrs Simpson Miller enjoyed an unprecedentedly high favourability rating of some 85 per cent. Within 18 months, by her own doing, this rating was reduced to near 45 per cent as the PNP went on to lose the 2007 election.

Today, the people of Jamaica have once more afforded Mrs Simpson Miller a tremendous amount of political capital. Having learnt her lesson the hard way, she must do all that is necessary to avoid any recurrence of this capital erosion. It is against this background that I am surprised at Mrs Simpson Miller’s failure to level with the people of Jamaica and admit that she may have got it wrong when, in 2007, she criticised Mr Golding’s 19-member Cabinet.

At that point, her only experience was tweaking a Cabinet already in place. Mr Golding, on the other hand, was reconstructing a new Cabinet coming in from the Opposition. Now that she has had to do likewise, while realising the enormity of the task ahead, she has named a 20-member Cabinet.

The prime minister has, therefore, completely missed the point of criticisms of her credibility gap by taking pains to defend the size of the Cabinet while failing to admit she spoke from a position of ignorance in 2007. She was even more off base when trying to justify the large Cabinet, suggesting that succession planning is a main reason. I may be wrong, but I thought that succession planning is done via ministers of state, not full Cabinet ministers.

Constitutional Rights and Obligations
Many persons have been speculating and commenting on the very low turnout at the recent polls. Susan Goffe, chairperson of Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ), has lamented that there is cause for concern as many persons seem to be “outside the democratic process”.

Many other persons to whom I have spoken share similar sentiments to those of the JFJ chairperson. In fact, several persons actually blame the poor conditions in which Jamaica finds itself on citizens who “did not exercise their respective constitutional right to vote”.

I see it differently. On December 29, 2011, I exercised my right to vote; however, I respected others who exercised their right not to vote. We must differentiate between a right and an obligation. I have a right to vote, and I also have a right not to vote, if I so choose. On the other hand, I have an obligation to pay my taxes, but no such obligation to avoid taxes.

I cannot agree, as Mrs Goffe suggests, that choosing to place an X beside a preferred candidate is the full extent of one’s “involvement in the democratic process”. Gordon Robinson, writing in The Sunday Gleaner of January 8, 2012, correctly criticised Damion Crawford for suggesting that persons who do not vote usually do not contribute to the nation.

According to Mr Robinson: “Is Damion saying that a doctor who gives free service to his community; a teacher who tutors thousands over a lifetime; a private citizen who helps to send his gardener’s daughter to school; a businessman who employs others, just because they don’t vote, make no positive contribution to Jamaica?”

Human behaviour is such that we eagerly make a choice when the result of such choice makes a discernible difference. On the other hand, if we believe there is no difference in the outcome of the choice, we will shrug our shoulders and literally say: “Eenie, meenie ... .” Or we simply decide not to choose.

Many persons are convinced that there is little difference between the parties, and that life will continue regardless of which party is successful. Why then vote? I am sure were we to have had a 90 per cent voter turnout in 2002, when the PNP were handed victory, there would still have been the Operation PRIDE, Trafigura, and Cuban light bulb scandals, high murder rates, and low growth compared to the rest of the world.

Similarly, if the JLP had won in 2007 with a 90 per cent voter turnout, we would still have had the Dudus extradition, Manatt controversy, Tivoli incursion, JDIP, IMF challenges, etc. Many problems get solved when citizens get involved between elections such as the April 1999 gas riots and the more recent Dudus extradition.

Therefore, while registering and voting must be encouraged, we must get much more involved in the democratic process (and encourage others to do so), not simply reactively by blocking roads, but more proactively, such as by lobbying political representatives on national as well as parochial issues; by speaking out against wrongdoing; by forming think tanks to discuss issues and putting solutions forward to make Jamaica the place of choice to live, work, raise families and do business.

■ Robert Wynter is managing director of Strategic Alignment Limited, which facilitates organisational realignment and leadership development. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and rob.wyn@hotmail.com.