PORTIA Simpson Miller earned the political respect, long denied her by various elements of Jamaican society, by leading the People’s National Party (PNP) to a spectacular victory over the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) in the general election on Thursday, December 29.

She overcame a relentless negative advertising campaign that ‘demonised’ her, mocked her intellectual capacity, managerial competence and unsuitability to be prime minister of Jamaica.

The campaign was all the more telling as many of the words of disapproval came out of the mouths of senior PNP members who had used the same line against her back in 2006 when she contested for the leadership of the party. Now, they stand toe to toe with her.

As she triumphed in the PNP presidential races, so she did again Thursday as a majority of the Jamaican electorate determined that the 66-year-old Simpson Miller should be elevated to the prime minister’s chair, four years after she failed in her first bid to get her own mandate from the electorate after taking over from P J Patterson, who retired in March 2006.

Of course, the triumph does not suggest that she has become an intellectual heavyweight since 2006, although she has matured and learned a lot more about State craft.

The suggestion is that she possesses important leadership qualities that appeal to the Jamaican voter, and that significant numbers are willing to trust her to take and implement decisions that are in the best interest of the country and not the special interest of the privileged and those connected to power. They want to believe that ‘people power’ is not a catchy phrase.

Given her vast experience in politics and life, Mrs Simpson Miller knows that trust cannot be taken lightly; it has to be earned and re-earned by doing right. In the same way that the electorate threw out the JLP administration, they will give her the same treatment if she loses that trust.

According to the preliminary results, Mrs Simpson Miller and the PNP confounded polls and predictions, winning 41 of the 63 seats in the House of Representatives compared to 22 for the JLP. Final counts were proceeding at the time of writing Friday and, with small victory margins in several constituencies, the distribution of seats could change before this is all over.

Whatever the final number though, the result meant that the outgoing JLP administration — led by Bruce Golding from 2007 and, since October 23 by Andrew Holness — earned the unenviable distinction of being the first one-term Government since the first general election under Universal Adult Suffrage in 1944. It is a record that the JLP leaders would gladly trade, if only they could.

Meanwhile, as the country absorbs the reality of the landslide, several questions arise: What accounts for the unexpectedly wide margin of victory? What messages have been sent by the electorate who made the historic decision? What can we expect from Mrs Simpson Miller as she prepares for her second turn at the helm? How well can she govern a fractious nation enmeshed in the depths of an economic crisis exemplified by high debt and joblessness and a society where many exist on the margins?

Polls and voting intentions

The first thing to be noted about the landslide was that the three polling organisations which had been gathering and publishing voting intentions in the weeks and days ahead of the vote had all indicated a close election, although showing a trend towards the PNP.

The final Ian Boxill/RJR poll gave the JLP a 1.5 per cent lead and concluded that the election was too close to call; the Bill Johnson/ Gleaner poll gave the PNP a two per cent advantage (after the party was trailing by four per cent the week before); and the Don Anderson/CVM-TV survey had a four per cent lead for the PNP.

Anderson came closest to mirroring voting intentions, boldly calling the election 34-29 for the PNP while leaving open the possibility that the margin could be wider depending on what happened in some close contests. Hence, he must feel vindicated, especially in light of the verbal assaults he had to absorb from JLP leaders questioning his method and motive.

Based on voter responses, the pollsters assumed that turnout would have been considerably higher than the record-low 48 per cent who actually voted; indeed some were suggesting that the turnout would have been higher than the 60.5 per cent in 2007.

It seems that the PNP was better able to motivate and mobilise its supporters than the JLP, but the more important issue surrounding low voter turnout is the clear implication that there is growing disaffection with a political process which many are increasingly seeing as unresponsive to the needs of ordinary people, corrupt, arrogant and unaccountable.

This trend must be reversed through the co-ordinated efforts by all elements in society, including the political parties themselves, committed to democratic governance.

The wide margin also confirmed that the profound disapproval of the Golding administration’s handling of the US request for the extradition of Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke did not disappear with Mr Golding’s resignation paving the way for Mr Holness.

The JLP paid a high price for corrupting state agencies in the political defence of Coke (now awaiting sentence in New York), the loss of at least 73 lives, the direct cost to the country’s economy and international reputation; something acknowledged by Holness.

In addition, the still unfolding scandal over lack of accountability in the management of the US$400-million JDIP project also took its toll. The Government appeared too dismissive of concerns about whether taxpayers were getting value for money.

Mrs Simpson Miller served notice that allegations of corruption will be investigated. In her ‘victory’ speech she asked public servants to ensure the protection of Government property, and added: “Today, the Jamaica people assisted us to rescue Jamaica and to restore the power. You will hear from us soon, as we move to put our team in place to take charge of the Government.”

Meanwhile, the data and the experience of most Jamaicans affirm that the country is in an economic crisis. The biggest piece of evidence is the $1.6-trillion debt that is 130 per cent of gross domestic product.

In the campaign, both major parties agreed that the answer includes reforming the tax system to produce more revenue. This means that many individuals and sectors which have, in the past, evaded or avoided taxes will be required to pay their fair share. They will resist, but leadership must have the political courage to do what is right.

Government will also have to bring public expenditure more in line with revenue. Among other things, this will require reducing the size of the public sector wage bill and asking government workers to contribute to their pensions.

These are not easy undertakings, especially as they do not guarantee a quick turnaround for people who have lost their jobs or have seen their living standards fall over the past four years.

Mrs Simpson Miller’s sombre acceptance speech suggests she understands that she must avoid the urge to be triumphal.

She appeared to recognise that governing in these times depends not only on the skill and intelligence of those in the executive. It will require the co-operation of the Opposition, the workers and their unions, the private sector and all of civil society. Voters have a remedy for arrogance and impunity.

kcr@cwjamaica.com