So the excitement came to an end when the results of the leadership election in the People’s National Party (PNP) were known last Saturday evening. Most commentators expected Dr Karl Blythe to lose his bid for the PNP presidency, but some 800 delegates did not vote at all for a president. Was it because it was a foregone conclusion that Portia Simpson Miller would win? Was it to send a message that it is time Portia steps down? Or was it a little of both?

In the race for the vice-presidential posts, it was significant that Dr Fenton Ferguson was out front, swapping places with Angela Brown Burke, who came first in 2008 while Ferguson then came fourth. Battered by the media and the then Opposition to the handling of chikungunya virus outbreak while minister of health, he retained his seat in Parliament by an increased majority. Ferguson did this while the PNP lost power and had reduced percentages everywhere else in the country.

Ferguson is very well organised and it is mobilisation of voters that wins elections in Jamaica, not issues. It partially explains why he is only the second person ever to win the St Thomas Eastern seat for the PNP and has held it ever since — a total of 23 years so far. But there is another reason Ferguson came first in the vice-presidential race. Lisa Hanna had come out in opposition to Angela Brown Burke. Had Lisa Hanna opposed any of the other contenders, they also would have lost votes, and perhaps had she openly opposed Noel Arscott, she might have won.

In such a scenario, Hanna would have received more votes from Region Three, which has the largest bloc of delegates. But openly opposing Brown Burke was seen as a sort of political sacrilege in Region Three, except in two constituencies, namely St Andrew Southern and St Andrew East Rural. This is because Region Three was built up by her husband, Paul Burke, who served as its chairman some years ago, and where both Paul and Angela are still very popular.

But Lisa was supported by the pro-Peter Bunting delegates in St Andrew Southern, where Mark Golding will succeed Omar Davies as the PNP candidate. His future election is a certainty in a solid PNP constituency. Word on the ground is that in St Andrew East Rural, Brown Burke was not heavily supported. Was this because of a rift between former Member of Parliament Damion Crawford and herself which has not yet healed? Other than that, Region Three did not support Lisa Hanna.

As of 1967, the PNP has elected four equal vice-presidents, rather than four vice-presidents ranked from first to fourth. Incidentally, in that first race under the new system there were 11 nominees, and P J Patterson came last with only 55 votes. Two years later, in 1969, Patterson was elected a vice-president, coming second in the amount of votes cast. It is believed by many that having been the campaign manager for Michael Manley in his successful bid for PNP president in 1969, the spillover effect was a victory for Patterson in the vice-presidents’ race.

Up to 1972, PNP delegates could vote for four or less nominees for vice-president. But in a 1971 resolution moved at the first leg of the PNP conference (as the PNP annual conference was then structured), the late Leacroft Robinson moved that all delegates be obliged to vote for four nominees and any ballot containing less would be spoilt. The resolution was passed and came into effect in 1972.

Assuming that the 1971 Leacroft Robinson resolution was fully adhered to — and I understand it was never repealed — the results indicate that if PNP delegates who voted for Angela Brown Burke did not vote for Lisa Hanna, and vice versa, then either would have had received fewer votes. So a minority ‘mixed’ their votes by voting for both Brown Burke and Hanna. However, it is very difficult to pinpoint which delegates voted for both.

The result of the election was also a ‘slap in the face’ for the high-profile former PNP Cabinet members who supported Lisa Hanna and opposed Angela Brown Burke. Was their support for Lisa Hanna because of a genuine desire for renewal, or a lingering vendetta because of principled positions taken by Paul and Angela prior to the general election?

In my first column after the general election this year, I mentioned that Paul Burke, as general secretary, had been undermined. That drew some negative comments, no doubt from paid political hacks who might have been revelling in the Jamaica Labour Party victory. They accused me of bias because Paul and I are brothers — as if I write like that. Today, more and more people are coming to know the truth.

Those that speak of renewal within the PNP should understand that, since elections cannot be run without money, whatever is received should always be honestly and properly handled. This has less to do with the age of leaders than it has to do with having an honest frame of mind.

Those who speak of renewal within the PNP should also understand that competence has nothing to do with age. How can someone who was an incompetent minister of Government accuse anyone of that?

And those who speak of renewal within the PNP should understand that it has to do with the PNP going back to its roots in a new way, which has far less to do with age than commitment.

I have been of the opinion for more than a decade that Dr Peter Phillips should lead the PNP — a totally different view from that of my brother and sister-in-law. Who else is competent to bring the PNP back to its Norman Manley roots? Certainly not Peter Bunting, who never sounds Norman Manley-like to me. And certainly not Lisa Hanna, who supports Peter Bunting and who has never been known to even fathom, let alone understand the fundamental principles of the PNP.

I ask again of Peter Bunting to state publicly what his views are on co-operatives. Let us compare his views on co-operatives with those of Norman Manley. But politics makes strange bedfellows. Who brought Lisa Hanna into the PNP?

ekrubm765@yahoo.com