JLP inna bangarang

 

For those who opt to listen keenly, place their noses to the grindstone or lift haughty, misplaced heads from under the proverbial sand, the ongoing rumblings in the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) over its leadership are getting louder.

Just in Monday's Standing Committee meeting, the rift crescendoed with a volley of rapid-fire threats and ultimatums and intimidation that harked back to the worst days of internecine JLP implosion.

At a time when the JLP should be crafting transformative strategies, talk of an impending leadership challenge has intensified, serving as a distraction to a party already struggling to convince an apathetic electorate of its relevance.

The party, celebrating 70 years of existence, is being subjected to the piercing scrutiny that should ensure the leadership drama be put to rest by firm action, one way or another.

With attempts to use the milestone as a launching pad to re-energise itself likely to be derailed by the rumblings, the current state of affairs of the JLP demands answers to crucial questions.

Why does the JLP persistently relapse into behaviour that has, in the past, banished the party into the political doldrums despite a comparatively positive record in governance and the economy?

Why are supposedly intelligent and patriotic participants in the JLP - men and women who have played critical transformative roles in nation-building in and out of Jamaica House - unable to coalesce around a leader to forge a path forward?

All this is happening less than two years after Andrew Holness' sudden elevation into the position of party leader and temp prime minister, after Bruce Golding eased out of the hot seat citing "challenges of the last four years" taking a toll.

Holness was not, in the truest sense of the word, elected leader. He was catapulted thanks to the endorsement of the parliamentary council of the JLP. It is a point of interest that he, hitherto, had not held an executive position in the party.

Could the absence of an authentic democratic tradition, as it relates to leadership, be the spoke in the wheel that has provoked chronic disquiet over the years?

In this regard, the history of the People's National Party (PNP) stands in stark contrast to the JLP's. The PNP has a history of leadership elections; the JLP does not.

Portia Simpson Miller had to withstand the pressure of two crucial elections when she staved off the challenges of three senior members of the PNP - Dr Peter Phillips; Dr Omar Davies and Dr Karl Blythe - in 2006.

After Simpson Miller squandered her popularity in the 2007 polls, she was again challenged by Phillips, in 2008, and the matter was put to rest once and for all.

As uncomfortable as they may have been at the time, these democratic acts appeared to have paved the way for some semblance of stability in the PNP, with members coalescing around a common cause.

Even if the bad blood lingered in the aftermath of the elections, Simpson Miller has been able to work with Phillips, the man she entrusted to be by her side to help steer Jamaica out of its economic mess.

Simpson Miller was defeated by P.J. Patterson in 1992, after the former PNP President and Prime Minister Michael Manley retired.

No strong support

Holness does not have that luxury, or convenience, of proven 'backative' from the delegates.

In February 1969, when Norman Washington Manley retired, his son, Michael, had to withstand the challenges of the cerebral attorney, Vivian Blake.

Manley prevailed after a tumultuous leadership campaign and went on to win the 1972 general election.

Leadership succession was never easy in the PNP, but the party suffered through the melodrama, and history bears testimony to its reward - Manley won the election after his ascension to the leadership of the PNP.

So did Patterson and Simpson Miller.

As it was with Holness in 2011, with Bruce Golding in 2005 and Edward Seaga in 1974, the JLP has devised ploys to circumvent a full-fledged leadership election.

Without the comparable democratic exercises in the JLP, leadership succession has been difficult, and wearers of the crown appear to be constantly at the mercy of disgruntled members at all levels.

The outspoken Mike Henry constantly boasts that he is the only person in the JLP who has challenged a leader - from as far back as 1978.

This has, in the long run, proven to be a good thing for Henry, as Seaga, in one of his books, has expressed some level of respect for Henry.

Holness may be only be able to lead with some confidence when he faces opposition in an authentic election.

To heal itself, the JLP would do well to dispense with its predictably defensive stance, strip itself of its tiring persecution complex, and chart a different future.

Gary Spaulding is a political affairs reporter. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and gary.spaulding@gleanerjm.com.