JOAN Gordon-Webley’s attempt to join the People’s National Party (PNP), and the party’s response, offers interesting insight into how and why organisations make decisions, the current state of the PNP, the shadowy influences of history that goes back 40 years and the imperative to address those issues, the challenges of taking a stance in a small and morally confused society, and how much more difficult life is when we try to act outside of a guiding ethical framework.

As it is with most crises, this too comes with an opportunity for the country to ask hard questions of our political leadership, and for the PNP to clarify what it stands for. How are its ideals and the way to accomplish them different from those of its two best-known standard-bearers, Norman and Michael Manley? Understandably, organisations grow and change, but there comes a point where if the changes are substantially different from its core values, rebranding and renaming might become necessary. In other words, if the party becomes so organically different from its origin, is it still the same entity?

I went to the PNP’s website trying to understand how it is currently defining itself. I found only this: “The first political party in Jamaica and the English-speaking Caribbean. Committed to the economic and social progress of all the people of Jamaica by creating the environment for employment, business ownership, investment, economic growth, improved standard of living, quality education, housing, health care, security, and encouraging people participation and cultural expression.”

As a tactical move, or just plain public relations, the efficacy of admitting Gordon-Webley to the PNP can be resolved by phrasing the issue as questions and responding honestly, given her track record, her persona, and how and why she left the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP). In other words, draft a character sketch of her and ask: Is she more likely to impact the organisation’s brand negatively or positively, and 2) What does she bring at this time that is necessary, that it already does not have or cannot access elsewhere?

On the latter question, providing dirt on her former party to use in upcoming election campaigns should not be considered an asset, especially if said dirt is already accessible elsewhere. Additionally, if the ruling PNP is going to be inordinately dependent on smear politics to win the election, and if it is willing to use such a cynical tactic as the basis of their admission of Gordon-Webley, as some people suspect, then it must understand that this will not enhance its standing among well-thinking people. Worse, a victory could easily become a net loss if it ends up presiding over deeper disaffection and heightened chance of the confrontation in the streets that many fear is inevitable, unless there are fundamental changes in politics and governance.

Jamaica’s social and economic challenges demand leaders who can offer solutions; who, even in the context of a general election, should rely less on trashing opponents and more on presenting achievements and on offering a mature, engaging, and attainable vision of the future. The old ways have not worked. The present difficulties are testament to that, and those of us who have a heightened sense of what it means to live in a VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) world know that conditions globally will remain challenging. As a small nation state, Jamaica must work harder to resolve its primary challenges to better position itself to deal with bigger ones.

The tactical value of Gordon-Webley’s admission to the PNP, ultimately, is the least of my concern. Far more important is what I see is our inability to hit the bull’s eye and to deal with our problems in ways that are honest and courageous and provide clarity for present and future generations. For example, Manchester Southern member of parliament and House Speaker Michael Peart objects on the basis that “a leopard cannot change its spots”. Hanover Eastern member of parliament, Dr D K Duncan, said his objections were not about Gordon-Webley, but about the principles and philosophies of the PNP, implying that her acceptance would be in violation — but does not say why, nor does he identify specific principles. Former government advisor Delano Franklyn said he objects for two reasons which he has put in the public domain.

In response, mayor of Kingston and a vice-president of the PNP Angela Brown Burke commented: “I can think of many active, good members of the PNP who would not want us to mention some of their past actions/activities as a party faithful…If they can evolve, why do we think others can’t?…Let’s give her a chance…” The statement languishes apparently with no request from the media for Brown Burke to clarify her comments.

So, we know that sections of the PNP oppose Gordon-Webley’s membership, but we do not quite know why, and those who support her seem to be saying “whatever she has done, we have done it too…” An explication of the position of either side would shed light on our past and on why our challenges are so profound. I would love, for example, to discuss with Duncan his Facebook post, December 5, 2011, following the previous night’s fire at National Solid Waste Management Authority, and I would love for you readers to ponder with me: Is it possible to build a progressive and sustainable society outside of an ideological framework and without moral and intellectual leadership?

Grace Virtue, PhD, is a social justice advocate.