Why Andrew 'Call It'?
Published:Thursday | January 19, 2012 | 12:00 AM
By Rev Devon Dick
SOME POLITICAL analysts claimed that the People's National Party (PNP) would lose the general election because its campaign strategy was based on the Golding/Dudus saga and it had no alternative. Professor Ian Boxill, Radio Jamaica's (RJR) pollster, cannot admit that his claim that it was too close does not fit the result of a six per cent popular vote margin for the PNP. The Gleaner's political team predicted 34 seats for the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and 29 for the PNP, with its caption being, "The Candidates who will win". This was an amazing conclusion, because it was partly based on Bill Johnson's poll which said that the PNP had a two per cent lead. It is astounding how these persons called it incorrectly.
However, most puzzling is why former Prime Minister Andrew Holness "call it", that is, named the election date when there was no perceived pressure to do so and an excellent chance to lose. It was a very long shot to overcome a deficit of 12 per cent in popular support behind the PNP in two months. There were other credible voices such as political analyst Shalman Scott, former JLP mayor, who informed the public before the elections about the important roles of enumeration, message and mobilisation.
Another outstanding political analyst was Patrick Bailey who, on a programme on CVM TV, predicted it would be a mistake for Andrew Holness to call a general election in December 2011. He said Holness needed to wait until a "second bounce" such as the feel-good events from the 50th Independence celebrations, the London Olympics plus the employment effects from the Jamaica Development Infrastructure Programme (JDIP). He also added that most of the new persons on the voters' list were enumerated when the PNP was in high gear. So why did Holness "call it" with so many negatives; when the PNP was calling for a general election at its September conference; when the Manatt-Dudus enquiry was fresh in the memory and after the PNP had recently staged a successful bus tour?
Main problems
Why "call it" when the economy was just showing the first shoot of economic growth after at least 12 consecutive quarters of negative growth? Why "call it" when an International Monetary Fund agreement was in a stalemate for approximately a year?
On Christmas Day, The Gleaner front page said, 'Andrew's vote of confidence' because the negative views on the economy declined by nine per cent to read 54 per cent of persons who thought the country was heading in the wrong direction while 27 per cent said it was going in the right direction. Why "call it" when twice as many persons think the country is going in the wrong direction compared to those who said it was on the right track?
There was an analysis on RJR's 'That's a Rap' a few Sundays ago with Earl Moxam and senior journalists and not one person mentioned the economic problems as contributing to the JLP's loss! Was Andrew misled by media hype and an overrating of its public relations campaign, hence the scapegoat of G2K? Arrogance was not the main problem with the JLP, it was the economic suffering of people!
Perhaps Holness "call it" in spite of negative factors for the same reason former Prime Minister Bruce Golding resigned abruptly. Golding's resignation as a political ploy for JLP victory has been shattered; so it is time for his real reason to also emerge.
Things are not adding up as to why Andrew "call it" and it needs further explanation because it could have implications for the peace and prosperity of Jamaica, land we love.
Rev Devon Dick is pastor of the Boulevard Baptist Church in St Andrew. Send comments to columns@gleanerjm.com.