WHEN Andrew Holness becomes prime minister today he will not have the usual ‘honeymoon’ traditionally given to political leaders taking over the reins of government for the first time.

Starting with the swearing-in and inaugural address, his every move, word and deed will be closely examined even as we congratulate and extend best wishes to our ninth and youngest-ever prime minister.

Some of the attention is a consequence of the evolving style of political communication in the information age — an age when citizens demand greater transparency and accountability from leaders and have the technological means to keep tabs on them. It is the age when people care less about the authority that derives from high office and more about what office-holders do with that authority. Honorific titles and vestments do not intimidate people anymore.

But Mr Holness will also be scrutinised because of the unique circumstances that brought him to power; because voters know little of the man and his mettle; because of the enormity of the economic and social problems facing the country; and because of the cynicism of many in the generation of which he is a part.

Bruce Golding, who today officially ends his tenure as prime minister, was forced out by the scandal over his handling of the US request for the extradition of Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke, the now self-confessed gangster.

With polls showing Mr Holness as the man best positioned to beat Portia Simpson Miller and the People’s National Party, other aspirants for leadership of the governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) parked their ambitions to give the party its best chance of winning a second term.

So, in a real sense his elevation to the top job is not a reward for performance but an opportunity to confirm that he has what it takes to lead successfully this complex and contrarian country of ours.

Unless he confounds reason and common sense, Mr Holness will shortly (before year end) call a general election to allow voters to decide whether he is worthy of the trust that his parliamentary colleagues have shown in him.

In making that choice, voters will need to know more about the new leader and where he stands on the crucial issues. Can he deliver the jobs that Mr Golding didn’t? Can he deliver good governance? Can he build consensus among stakeholders with different and conflicting interests?

We know that Mr Holness, like PNP leader Simpson Miller, believes that he is the elect of the Almighty who has called him to this office. They, like all of us, have every right to faith and religious beliefs. But I am scared of political leaders who see themselves as being specially called to high service, rather than merely offering themselves for a temporary job circumscribed by the law and the constitution.

Baptism in the fire of tribal politics

The biographical outline is fairly well-known: Andrew Holness was born on July 22, 1972. He attended St Catherine High School and later graduated from the University of the West Indies; he’s married and has two children.

After serving as special assistant to former Prime Minister Edward Seaga in his private business, Mr Holness had his first political outing in West Central St Andrew against the PNP’s Dr Warren Blake in the December 18, 1997 general election.

That contest would expose the worst features of tribal and garrison politics, with accusations and counter-accusations of fraud, voting irregularities, violence and intimidation.

Indeed, the seat was not settled until mid-1998: First, Mr Holness was declared the winner on the basis that he had secured a majority of the votes cast; next, the court upheld a request for voiding the poll. In a new poll on March 26, 1998 the PNP candidate was declared the winner; but this went back to the Constituted Authority on appeal which ordered a third poll. This took place June 30, 1998, leading to Mr Holness finally taking his seat in Gordon House.

Since then, he has retained the seat by more comfortable margins, but he has reportedly lost ground to PNP standard-bearer Patrick Roberts and is eying the safe JLP garrison constituency of West Kingston.

His choice of where to run could be the first major indicator of whether Mr Holness represents the best hope of a new and different politics — so crucial to re-engaging the young and the disaffected to civic life — or whether he is a youthful version of old politics.

Frankly, I hope he remains in West Central, a competitive seat in which he has been able to prevail on the basis of what he brings to the table and what people see in him — despite the fact that the constituency suffers from the deprivations and neglect that characterise so many inner-city communities, regardless of voting preference.

Going to West Kingston would signal that the best politics is the safety of the garrison where there is no political competition. Worse, he could be trapped in the same vortex that caused Mr Golding’s sad and untimely undoing.

Managerial capability

Voters will also want to be satisfied that the new prime minister — indeed anyone who aspires to lead Jamaica today — understands the policy implications of the technologically connected world of the 21st century; the global financial crisis that is likely to get worse before it gets better; the shifting power from Euro-American dominance to Asia and how best to secure Jamaica’s interest in this new paradigm.

He will also have to demonstrate his managerial competence and decision-making skills. As minister of education for the past four years, he has done a creditable job, though he has not distinguished himself in terms of improved educational outcomes.

On the plus side, Mr Holness embraced the education transformation programme of 2004. This is creditable in a country where ministers and governments are notorious for throwing out everything they find on taking office rather than having the discernment to build on what is good, improve on what needs fixing and discard only that which is worthless.

Strapped for cash like his predecessor, he has not been able to implement the big reforms but has made some progress on some non-cash items like establishing the teacher council to certify practitioners and the national inspectorate to monitor school performance.

But Mr Holness’s relationship with the Jamaica Teachers’ Association (JTA) was less than stellar as indicated by a troubling managerial style.

His direct intervention against teachers protesting against the appointment of a new principal for Balaclava High; his insistence on retaining Mr Alphansus Davis in the conflicting posts of personal adviser and chairman of the Teachers’ Services Commission, and his singling out of three or four schools as ‘failing’ are examples of wasteful use of political capital and managerial time.

I have no doubt that Mr Holness wanted — and still wants — the best for education as the surest means of providing opportunity for all our children to achieve their full potential. He shares that with previous ministers of education. And I have no doubt the JTA is a tough trade union that will resist stoutly when the interests of its members are perceived to be under threat.

Fast-forward to the faltering agreement with the International Monetary Fund which must be addressed quickly to put public finances back into some semblance of order.

Specifically, the Government will have to show that it has the will and the way to reduce the public sector wage bill to agreed levels; that it has enough surplus (after expenses) to reduce the stock of debt by paying down on the principal; that it will reform the tax system to spread the burden equitably while increasing revenue by drastically reducing waivers to some taxpayers.

These are tough measures that are unlikely to be taken until after the next election. In the weeks ahead voters will have to decide which leader/party is better equipped to take and implement the right decisions.

kcr@cwjamaica.com