KINGSTON, Jamaica — Prime Minister Andrew Holness has responded to criticisms over his recent statements referencing former Prime Minister Michael Manley which sparked a furious backlash from several quarters.

Holness, speaking at a July 9 launch of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) Education Fund scholarships, had said the island was still “paying the price” for the misadventures of the Opposition under the leadership of former Prime Minister Michael Manley.

Speaking at the time the prime minister said the, “misadventure of the People’s National Party (PNP) diverted us from the path of economic growth, selling the people of Jamaica false hope and unrealistic dreams”.

He said the then PNP-led administration, which lasted from 1972 to 1978, squandered the successes Jamaica made under the previous, post-Independence JLP government, with a “flirtation with ideologies that were foreign to us and did not serve us well”.

“With all the social problems that needed to be addressed, had we stayed the economic course and ensured that our economy was aligned to the opportunities that were created by the industrial transformations that were taking place, Jamaica would be a better place today,” the JLP leader said further.

Speaking yesterday ahead of the launch of the 14-member commission which will carry out a comprehensive review of the education system to be led by Professor Orlando Patterson, Holness said he was “taken aback” by the “furore” over his comments.

“I respect and studied his work and believe still in his method. I was taken aback and I did not respond because it is not appropriate that we should not always as a country reserve a level of respect and dignity. Even if we are critical we do so respectfully.

“There are those who would want to create a difference between what I have said and the vision of Michael Manley. My father had a perspective and he is still a socialist. We had raging debates about these ideologies and that shaped my mindset and it has indeed shaped how I approach government. I have long since come to the conclusion that there is a balance to be struck,” Holness said.

“As I stand here today launching this commission, it is not to divide or to engage a debate which I believe in the minds of the average man is settled, not by who is the better debater, but what the results are,” he continued.

He added: “Much of what I said relied not on my own thoughts, but on what those who participated and now have the 2020 vision of hindsight have come to realise. Let me declare that I love and respect Michael Manley and I value his work and his contribution to making us who we are and I would like to put that to rest”.

Opposition Spokesman on Education Peter Bunting, who spoke ahead of Holness, in a veiled reference said, “if we use only the limited measure of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) growth to determine the success of that 70s administration, then perhaps it would be poorly graded as would be the case with this current administration. However, if instead we used some broader measure of social transformation, we would come to a different conclusion”.

He said while the value of an awakened consciousness could not be quantified easily, what could not be dismissed was the fact that “the confidence and self-worth instilled in the children of that era facilitated many, myself included, to become successful entrepreneurs in the decades to come”.

Alicia Dunkley-Willis