Can the JLP be saved?

Ian Boyne

I am not prepared, like some of my fellow commentators, to write off Andrew Holness' chances of holding on to his leadership of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), but I would not be surprised if Audley Shaw snatches victory today. And I can say, definitively, that no other challenger in that party could put up as strong a challenge to Andrew as Audley.

But what is a more critical issue now is not who will win today, but what his victory will mean for the JLP - and the country. As I had predicted, because the stakes for the two contenders are so high, things would become heated, vitriolic and messy. They were aware that the People's National Party (PNP) would have its recording devices out to capture every bit of the dogfight, and that we would be regaled with the best portions come election time, but they just could not help themselves.

As I explained, coarseness, crudeness, and 'chucking badness' are all part of our political culture. Polite, middle-class society scorns it and uptown veranda talk despises and abhors it, but politicians know that at the base, it works. Softness and the sweet-boy thing don't work well in our politics. In fact, that's a large part of what this very challenge to Andrew Holness is about! The two sides got more and more desperate and shrill as they came down to today, with the Holness camp confidently counting all their votes before one was cast, which seems like old-style psychological warfare to me (some would say it's plain whistling in the dark). The JLP has not done itself proud by how both camps have conducted themselves. The image of the party has suffered more battering in the public's perception. And the image of the party as hopelessly fractious, divisive and warring has been reinforced. Many are wondering not so much what will happen today, but what will happen tomorrow morning. Can the JLP be saved?

First, I believe if Andrew wins, he should prevail on Audley not to retire. Andrew and the JLP need Audley. There is a place for his stridency, tough talk, vigilance, economic analysis, and experience. You don't just cast that aside. Audley has his weaknesses and he does rub some people in the wider society the wrong way, but he has significant strengths which should be utilised. Age is on Andrew's side. Whatever happens today, Andrew is a winner by virtue of sheer age. If not today, his day will come. Audley knows he needs him. Too much salt and pepper spoil the food. You have to balance di ting.

But some of those who supported either camp are expendable. I expect some to fall away, but I don't see the great fallout and rift that many ex-pect. And some of the wounds will later be plastered over once there is the smell of electoral victory. The scent of power concentrates the mind wonderfully. At some stage, though, it should suit the JLP to break its generational curse of divisiveness and rancour. It should begin to inculcate a culture of democracy and diversity.

defenders of holness

The irony is that those who resented the challenge to Andrew Holness and displayed what many perceived as hostility to democracy will point to precisely what has now taken place as positive proof that they were right to oppose this challenge: In their self-fulfilling prophecies, they failed to grasp that if there were greater receptivity to democratic ideals, there would be no need for the kind of bitterness and war of words which ensued. When even a normally mild-mannered person like Gregory Mair, a shadow spokesperson, could have so unsparingly attacked his own leader, you have to wonder. How do you expect to work with a leader after you have so maligned him? How could your own conscience allow you to work with him and to ask the rest of us to believe in his leadership when you have so unflatteringly characterised him? These guys are not thinking, but are totally ruled by emotions.

I understand that political contests are not Sunday afternoon picnics, but these combatants have played unnecessarily brutally and mean. A party culture which respects democracy, diversity and intellectual freedom does not interpret a challenge as bad-mindedness, and red-eye, grudgeful mean-spiritedness. I don't have to hate you to run against you. And it doesn't have to involve a conspiracy. The party doesn't have to mash up because there is a challenge for leadership. The party should be ashamed of itself at 70, to be so politically immature and chil-dish. What a birthday gift! Shame on you, JLP, you have nothing to celebrate!

Andrew Holness said he welcomed the challenge and did not display the venom towards it that others in his camp did, but he said a number of unfortunate things which seemed to contradict that stated acceptance. So the party needs to learn not to see a challenge as necessarily debilitating and destructive. It must start a new day from today. For its own sake - and for Jamaica's.

And speaking of Jamaica, there are some wider issues for us, now that the JLP will settle who is leader today. Like what policies, strategies and approaches the newly elected JLP leader will bring to national life. In the midst of all the 'ray-ray' of the contest, Andrew Holness gave a most far-reaching and profound speech to the St Andrew Rotary Club last Tuesday, which again highlights that whatever happens today, the JLP and Jamaica need Andrew Holness.

Holness, according to the Observer on Thursday, said, "There is a deep political divide in the Jamaica Labour Party. There is a view held by some that the JLP has better policies and are superior managers; therefore, all we need to do is to rally and rev up the political machinery of the party and we will win the Government." Holness continued: "It is a workable strategy, and many will say that there is nothing wrong with this view. However, I view it as a short-cut approach, and though you may well win the government, you may not be able to govern the country." Profound, arresting point.

political philosophy

It is this kind of thinking and analysis I like to see in our politics. Yes, it's not sexy platform speech and does not aid in rabble-rousing and ray-ray, but Jamaica needs this kind of talk - whatever delegates say today. "You may very well be government, but you can't get an IMF (International Monetary Fund) deal all by yourself; you need the cooperation of the unions and civil society to secure a wage freeze. The political party, therefore, is more than an election machine. The political party is a social org-anisation." Brilliant point. With that view, Holness has philosophically challenged the truism that 'a political party exists (merely) to gain state power'. Andrew has infused political discourse with philosophical challenge. I don't care what the hell happens at the Arena today, this is a conversation we need to have in Jamaica.

Holness acknowledged that "the party's main focus must be to win elections", but he said, significantly, the party must mean something to its supporters outside of just elections. This is an implicit rejoinder to those who say that Audley is the man because he is best to 'tek it to Portia' and get the JLP back into power. Andrew is rightly going beyond merely recapturing state power. He is saying the party had better have a leader who sees beyond that; a leader who has national appeal; a leader who can build consensus with all classes and interest groups; a collaborative leader who is not hos-tage to sectional interests and the moneyed classes.

Hear him: "Those who embrace that short-cut approach could be seen as transactional in their leadership. Indeed, they see politics as a transactional exchange of money and favours for support. The problem with that approach is that it leaves the people behind. Nothing gets done with a transaction. There is no higher cause; there is reluctance to sacrifice; trust is low; and those outside the exchange circle are alienated and devalued." This is a serious bit of reasoning which we must reckon with beyond today. This kind of philosophical interrogation of politics is a scarce commodity in Jamaican political discourse.

I am forced to quote more: "In-deed, that approach leads to the commodification of our politics. The greatest exposition of this was made in the statement that if you can't win an election, you should join the Rotary club." The party, he said, must assess itself both as a social institution and as a competitive political organisation. Yes, it must be a competitive political organisation, but it has to be more than just that.

Bruce Golding's speech in New York a few weeks ago challenged us with some ideas about going forward. Today, the strategic direction of the JLP will be determined by delegates' votes. We will see which philosophical wind will blow in the National Arena today.

Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and ianboyne1@yahoo.com.