IN the Daily Observer report of September 18, 2015, ‘Embattled PNP MPs had it coming’, the President of the Senate Floyd Morris tries to make sense of the recent challenges of some MPs in the People’s National Party (PNP). The severity of the story is illustrated by the size of the article which dwarfed the press release of the 77th Annual Conference of the PNP to the bottom left of the page. Senator Morris’s view of those members not heeding to the warning of the party president on their quality of leadership is not an adequate reflection of the real problem. The describing of the situation as infighting is also wrong. This position has been advanced by the media. There is a major difference between infighting and, as correctly stated by the party president recently, people exercising their democratic rights.

This idea of infighting has caused many PNP supporters to liken the PNP to the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP). There is a view that the PNP is looking more and more like the JLP. I agree that the PNP looks more and more like the JLP, not because of the people asserting their democratic rights. These activities, more or less, do not take place not randomly, but in an organised manner consistent with the constitution of the party. In my thinking, the party resembles the JLP in terms of political thinking.

Contrary to the views of Senator Morris, and those voices championing infighting, there are some deeper matters concerning the challenge for leadership positions in the PNP. What is happening, by and large, is an expression of the people intending to reclaim their party. They are re-establishing that the P in PNP means People’s, and nothing else. There was a time when running for some offices in the party was privilege exercise. In recent decades, not any member could put himself/herself up to run for MP. One must have money to run for that position. These changes permit the party leadership from time to time to parachute their preferences into some constituencies, while in others, having some money and the ambition to become an MP will do. In both political parties, people with money and family connections become major features in party politics.

In a television broadcast on the challenge in the constituency of St Ann South Eastern, a party member was open against the idea of the party leadership planting its candidate choice in the constituency. Party members have been expressing opposition to this move from day one, yet they remained neglected. The argument is very much the same for the assertion of people’s rights in St Elizabeth North Eastern. The argument about these challenges rooted in the politics of spoils is also wrong. There may be spots of high demands because of hard times, and also because in these times politicians spend much to urge their followers to participate in their activities, making the politics of spoils a big feature in the game. In a reasonable manner, the people must be free to express themselves in their party activity which is a public affair, as opposed to a private affair.

So, party supporters do not have to be frightened of these activities; which do not threaten the viability of the party but deepen its strength. There can be no change without critique. This emerging adult population is more informed than the previous generation. They are more vocal and willing to make more demands of their political leadership.

From where I am standing, the PNP looks more and more like the JLP because it has lost its difference. It is this difference that gives the historical PNP its winning edge. This difference involved a well-oiled group structure and the opportunity for any member of the party to aspire for leadership. A second characteristic of the difference was “the plan”. It was the party with “the plan” designed with careful consideration for the development of the people and the society. Today, like the JLP, the PNP embraces the development strategies of the international regimes regarding real growth and development; embracing narratives of abstract propositions as recipe for national development: Are divestment and privatisation attractive features to attract votes? The recent political activities in Greece showed us how the people can challenge the plans of the international regimes. It is time for the electorate in Jamaica to challenge both the JLP and PNP in the privatisation and deregulation-led growth strategy. There is the need for the gathering of the residue of the forces on the left to rise from the ashes to lead a radical and independent path of discussions for the future. There is the need for an independent forum to encourage and advance political discussions, perhaps, outside of status quo.

The PNP must find the difference it has lost in order to advance a practical plan for national development. The party has a rich history in politics and development in Jamaica. Its rich tradition in international relations has also been aborted. To recover its difference it must consult with Norman Manley’s ideas for science and national development. The first president of the PNP saw development as a deliberate process involving the role of the University College of the West Indies to supply and apply research and practical application of science to the everyday-lived experience. This approach has no reliance on abstract propositions; it is grounded in the realities of transforming this ex-slavery colony. If the party has severed itself from its history, the time has come for it to reattach itself to the roots and return to the source.

thearchives01@yahoo.com