Undoubtedly, the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and its leader, Andrew Holness, have identified Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller and “passing the International Monetary Fund tests” as main subjects of its campaign’s focus heading into the next election. However, neither the leader nor the JLP-collective has laid the predicate for why it should be elected to office.

Undoubtedly, the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and its leader, Andrew Holness, have identified Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller and “passing the International Monetary Fund tests” as main subjects of its campaign’s focus heading into the next election. However, neither the leader nor the JLP-collective has laid the predicate for why it should be elected to office.

It is all well and good for the JLP to dance and prance to the rhythm of its catchy revival-like campaign songs

Roll Call andBye-bye, Portia, bye-bye; they are indeed captivating campaign songs, beguiling political theatre and enticing rhetoric to serve particular political purposes, But, by themselves, they are not enough for political parties to use to mount credible campaigns. Neither are they good enough reasons to entreat or persuade likely voters to repose trust, confidence and support in a political entity, especially if that political entity appears hell-bent on engaging candy rhetoric over substance.

Make no bones about it, political campaigns and slogans, canvassing, conversion activities, and festivities are vital parts of our robust political culture. Collectively, they are relevant to the political process; they are substantially beneficial and germane to “on-the-ground” mobilisation efforts and so on. It is entirely up to the JLP to pursue whichever communication method(s) or political strategy it feels is central to amplification of its message and elections plans. The intention, on my part, is to demand de-escalation in political campaign activities that have not even yet started in the real sense. The greater purpose of this piece is to advocate for the inclusion of substance on the political platform.

Incontrovertibly, politics is fundamentally as much about contrasts as it is about similarities. Whilst there could be some intrinsic political value in advancing personal attacks, masked as contrasts, the tactics usually become boring after a while because they are mostly schoolyard contrasts that ultimately yield little, except to reinstate avoidance of the substantives issues relating to policy differences, national development, socio-economic direction, and leadership temperament.

Therefore, before the political zealots declare this column to be coming straight out of the People’s National Party (PNP) headquarters, I hasten to disabuse them of that notion because there is no malintent. The column is not maliciously calling out the JLP.

However, as will be explained further on, the PNP will have to focus on mounting a vigorous defence of its stewardship. The PNP will also have to explain to the Jamaican people how a future PNP Government intends correct the various shortcomings (economic, governance and social) that have surfaced since its return to power on December 29, 2011.

Politics is as much about subject as it is about predicate. However, in political cultures such as ours, where political nouns are never in short supply, predicate (verbs) should become the first priority of the political challenger as well as for the defender. The political imperative for the JLP, therefore, requires far more than the “fluxy” fixation of the Opposition leader on the physical fitness and rumour-filled tattletales about the mental inferiority of the incumbent prime minister, who looks at least a decade or so younger than her biological age,, in fact, seems exceptionally healthy; is mentally capable; physically fit; and daringly courageous.

Still, it would serve the JLP to consider a truism about the journey to political success. The journey to political success does not lie exclusively with descriptivism (situational analysis). The political journey to success also requires prescriptivism — plans to get things to be how they are supposed to be.

Hence, saying, as I did in this space last Sunday that, “Opposition Leader Andrew Holness and the JLP are up to something” absolves neither Holness nor the JLP of the arduous task and serious responsibility of laying the predicate for why they should be elected to office. Furthermore, the sentence of politics requires firm agreement between the political subject and the political predicate.

The focus cannot only be about the subjects: Portia, passing the IMF tests, and the “wutliss” PNP. It would be a colossal mistake were the JLP to limit its rhetoric and focus to purveying “ray-ray” politics. It is criminally ironic that this “ray-ray” politics was something Andrew Holness, himself, once accused Audley Shaw of engaging in during the party’s internal leadership race. Holness cannot now metamorphose into the cow that gives good milk, but kicks over the pail. He needs to take his own advice.

The JLP must explain, by way of clear policy initiatives, precisely what a JLP Government would do (verb) differently if elected to office. It should do so without fear that the PNP could “tief” its ideas. Lest we forget, Andrew Holness’s “Team JLP” accused Audley Shaw’s “Team Shaw” of “a gross act of plagiarism, either because of a sloppy mistake or a calculated attempt to hijack the platform of Mr Holness and make it their own”. Plagiarism or not, the JLP knows that, on the more cerebral issues of policy formation, articulation and differentiation strategies, the political burden of proof usually rests disproportionately with the political Opposition rather than with the incumbent party — unless, of course, the performance of the incumbent is of such terrible quality that it would most likely upset the dead.

Consequently, maintaining a realistic balance between political frivolity and earnestness (subject and predicate) could make a huge difference come election day, especially in situations where a political party casts its election success upon participation of undecided and issues voters.

JLP political hacks, too hasty to make premature declarations about the underlying purpose of this column, should now breathe easier because, as illustrated, the purpose of this piece is to underscore the point that within the context of present-day Jamaican politics, dominance (particularly in the transmission of ideas) rests more heavily with the JLP than with the PNP.

There has been a lot of talk, for instance, about the absence of “growth”, but the truth is economic growth does not mean the same thing as job growth; and to her credit, the prime minister has been echoing the policy of her administration to achieve both.

The JLP held political power between 1962 and 1972. During this time average GDP per capita grew at 5.4 per cent per year. However, rising unemployment accompanied that very strong period of economic growth. Hear this: “The unemployment rate was 13 per cent in 1962, but climbed to a whopping 23.2 per cent by 1972. It was not only rising unemployment that featured very prominently during the glory days, but widespread income inequality, inequity, social tension and underdevelopment, both infrastructural and human.

Lest we forget, it was the tough socio-economic conditions of the 1960s through 1972 that propelled the rise of Michael Manley on the premise and promise that “better must come”. He too, wanted to move us from “poverty to prosperity”.

The sooner the JLP begins to make that connection between the subject of its campaign and the ameliorative proposals it has in mind the better it would be for party and country. It cannot be that the party carries on with its mocking recitation of belittlement insofar as the Government’s “passing IMF tests” is concerned; worse in the face of overwhelming evidence that passing these quarterly tests are necessary and important accomplishments under the current economic programme.

For, although slow in producing robust economic and job growth, the fiscal discipline and economic reforms have produced tangible results in many areas of the economy. The country’s national debt is declining, employment is increasing, balance of payments is improving, both foreign and local direct investments are increasing, revenue collection is improving, the trade deficit is decreasing, and so on. All of these things are happening simultaneously with improvements in consumer and business confidence. The programme is not perfect, the results are not yet far-reaching, the sacrifices have been burdensome, and hardship is aplenty, but things are looking up for Jamaica.

The JLP must not tell the country how it intends to build on these successes and how it will apply better leadership and governance to the business of State. The JLP needs to articulate the political predicate insofar as management of the political economy is concerned, having already made Portia the main subject of its “soft” election campaign. The JLP has spent the last three and a half years amplifying the political nouns. The time is nigh for it to flex the verbs — the predicates — of the changes it envisions and the policies that it will use to transport those changes.

Maybe the PNP deserves to be voted out of power, but the unfettered truth is that there are no magic wands for the JLP to wave. There are no abracadabra tarots for it to play. If the JLP wins the next election, it would immediately become straitjacketed by the current IMF agreement. And, given the unpredictable nature of global economic activities and internal shocks, things could get more difficult — heaven forbid!

That aside, there is something aspirational about the JLP’s “poverty to prosperity” message. Besides the ubiquitousness of the phrase, there is something substantive, though idealistic, about its transformative power. In many ways, it imposes a special kind of urgency that makes the reduction of poverty feel like a moral obligation because it addresses economic security issues without tomes of references. One can just look at the faces of the majority of the people and tell that they have been through some tough times. However, like any other transformational programme, “poverty to prosperity” takes time because it is process driven.

On the one hand, amplification of the “poverty to prosperity” message is attractive. But, on the other hand, (and in of itself) it is as inanimate as lifelessness itself. It cannot, by itself, a single job create or a millionaire make.

Do not get me wrong, I am a staunch “possibilities” believer. However, we must also accept that the transformation from “poverty to prosperity” will not and cannot happen overnight. It requires, among other things, deep and steady changes in attitudes and behaviours that are deeply rooted in cultural norms and customs that cannot be easily dislodged or displaced.

Therefore, I am curious to learn about how the JLP plans to move an entire society from “poverty to prosperity”. Will it deemphasise the new thrust toward fiscal discipline, for instance? Will it underscore the prudence of living within one’s means? Will it help those who cannot order their priorities to become responsible individuals? Will it involve a community campaign to get parents to save for their retirement and children’s education, instead of investing in multiple cellphones and games of chance? How will this transformation work? And, over what period will it happen? What will be the role of Government in facilitating the robust national campaign?

Undoubtedly, a realistic transitional process can make the transformation happen, but its foundation rests not in the sole remit of politicians or political parties. Yes, governments can facilitate growth and development and can work toward achieving an orderly society, but, ultimately, it is entirely up to individuals to cultivate the ambition and pursue the actions that will move them closer to achieving their goals. Enough “rags to riches”, “poverty to prosperity” stories abound that chronicle the phenomena; however, hardly any of the tens of thousands of experiences include dependence on political actions or reliance on politicians. In fact, most successful individuals will tell you that their success — outside of winning the lottery or gaining an inheritance — rests with hard work, street smarts, and risk-taking. Hold tight.

Burnscg@aol.com