Representation cannot be made in absence of consultation
THE position put forward by Senator K D Knight that the people elected political representatives to make decisions for them needs to be corrected.
Most Jamaicans are ignorant of the workings of the Westminster style of government. They seldom know that those who advocated for this system of government were already in or close to the control of the apparatus of the State and its resources. These people were the government-appointed English representatives, wealthy merchants, wealthy plantation owners, and the rest were the children of the privileged. They were the ones who stood to gain the most from control of the State’s resources by way of the political process, after freedom for the slaves, adult suffrage, and Independence.
Beyond the argument for those being disadvantaged by their employers, the former slave owners, and their peers, they were not people who would have taken the people they said they represented into their families through marriage, or even to have them live in their neighbourhood. But, based on lack of historical perspective from the people who were oppressed, now being “represented”, there is no objective position to counter the arguments of our so-called political representatives.
I believe this is responsible for creating the confusion of what political representatives are to do for the Jamaican people. The successful pressure on the colonial establishment by the power seekers has seen the patriarchal system of government cripple any sustainable growth of Jamaica’s economy by the majority of Jamaicans, and removed the legs from the civil service, which is responsible for the operational aspects of government. This has besieged Jamaican governance since Emancipation through Independence to today.
I believe that the two main political parties, born out of the plantocracy and colonial dictatorship, have successfully maintained their stranglehold on the country’s resources, inhibiting growth of the country, and enhancing their own. One need only read or listen to one of our national heroes who had so much disdain for the electorate, that he said that if he sends a dog to be their representative, the dog must be elected.
Incredibly, the people who were the subject of this disparaging remark to this day embrace this person who showed no respect for them or independent thought. This disrespect continues today with non-resident citizens of constituencies being “parachuted” into constituencies they know little or nothing about so they can become members of parliament. There is no public debate among aspirants on issues affecting the constituencies or solutions that might attend these issues. As it is now, this Administration has even seen fit to circumvent a duly elected person from their ranks to place their preferred person in place, in spite of a vote by the delegates to the contrary.
Whatever my opinion of the political delegate process, and the party operations, and constitutions, it seems to me that the party leadership has undertaken a non-democratic exercise. They cannot now turn around and expect the public to believe them when they say they stand for democracy, or represent us in any way. It seems clear that the party represents the interests of the party executive alone, the public is only needed by the party to get their hands on the State apparatus, wealth and power.
So enter Senator Knight in his contribution to the debate on the adoption of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) as the final court of appeal for Jamaicans, saying that he, a selection by his party to the position of senator, and his other “parachuted” representatives are chosen by us for the express reason of making decisions for us — the members of the public who are supposedly being represented — on matters as significant as the CCJ.
I wish to ask Knight how many of the 63 members of parliament in Gordon House have even read the Constitution of Jamaica in order to be able to make any informed decision on removing the Privy Council, and what effect the constitution has in all of this.
I believe the majority of parliamentarians have never read it, so whatever pertains to it and us and their “representation” of my interest is a fraud. They don’t know what my interests are, or how my interests are framed by the constitution. I should also ask Senator Knight what he and the other so-called representatives decided on my behalf regarding providing and improving roads, water, schools, and the health sector that has been beneficial to my community? Why have the conditions of all the above deteriorated to the extent that of my payment of taxes, fees, and everything else I have been asked to pay, the roads are now donkey passes, water is not clean and regular, the schools are turning out illiterates, and the hospitals are spreading disease. Are my representatives making decisions about these things? If they are, why is everything in ruin, and the politicians telling me that “all is well, we are improving”.
As a citizen of this country, it would be nice if most of my fellow citizens knew the content and relevance of the constitution, which I think could easily be achieved if each MP would facilitate a process of educating their constituents. However, not one politician has made it a point to educate the Jamaican public on this very important civic matter. Maybe we should have the Jamaica Information Service do it.
As a member of the public, I need to know the responsibilities of the MP so that there is a basis for me to make a selection of who is best suited to the job of representative in my constituency, based on their ability to understand the problems and provide solutions to them. It is noteworthy that the constitution has no reference to any academic qualification for an MP — who unfortunately must be made a minister — or what they are to do, as MPs, for their constituents.
So, Mr Knight, please, before you continue on your flight of fancy from your balcony on cloud nine, answer the question from this member of the public about the politicians’ responsibility to the public as representatives. Parliamentarians are to serve as collaborators and facilitators to their constituents in order to manage their affairs, and they must satisfy us that they are knowledgeable on relevant issues to make informed decisions, not random guesses, meant to appease the party faithful. No fundamental decisions are to be made without consultation with the public. MP Crawford, has never once in his four years of “shelling out” in parliament brought up for discussion or information the issue of the CCJ with anyone in my constituency that I know of. So for you to make the quantum leap to the conclusion that we elected you and your people to make decisions for us, is the same as saying that the Queen of England makes decisions about Jamaica’s budget, roads or ministries. Utter nonsense!
As for the Caribbean Court of Justice, I have no issues with it being the final court of appeal for Jamaica, however I do have issues with Jamaica’s current inability to render justice in Jamaica for all Jamaicans. I notice that for persons of influence the law is seldom applied and is rarely a shackle, as former Prime Minister P J Patterson said. However, for me and most ordinary Jamaicans, the application of laws here has placed the ship of justice in the doldrums of the seas of governance, going nowhere, and likely to be caught in hurricanes of discontent, as each case is deferred to oblivion for lack of lawyers, jury, facilities and an under-equipped police force. Justice for most Jamaicans is neither swift nor clear and the country’s growth and confidence is shackled by it, just as it was during slavery. If the Jamaican judiciary cannot manage what is in front of them, why would I want to give them additional opportunities to screw up the apparatus of the CCJ?
Perhaps the CCJ will provide more and better justice to the ordinary Jamaican citizen who does not belong to the ruling class, who is to say? But the current political class has demonstrated beyond any doubt that they do not represent me, only their party and its interests; and the law of the land is not the same for me as it is for them who have made themselves the ruling class.
So, Senator Knight, I would prefer if you skip the lecture on why or how you feel you came to represent me and so many other Jamaicans, since I don’t believe you and your political colleagues have been doing so. It is clear to me that representational politics has been the gate to State resources and power for politicians. Perhaps the debate can answer why justice and good governance for Jamaica has been so rare. After that we can consider the CCJ.
Hugh M Dunbar is an architect. Send comments to the Observer or to hmdenergy@gmail.com.