UNIVERSITY students have declared Thursday’s leadership debate between Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) leader, Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness and People’s National Party (PNP) president, Opposition Leader Mark Golding as “the best of the three” staged by the Jamaica Debates Commission in the run-up to the September 3 General Election.

According to the students, while both men landed personal blows, the debate offered greater focus on national issues and gave Jamaicans a glimpse of two leaders prepared to defend their record and outline their vision for the country.

Third-year political science student at The University of the West Indies (The UWI), Mona, Therel Marriott noted that Golding appeared more confident, articulate, and prepared to tackle lingering doubts about his ability to lead, while Holness leaned on his record in office.

“It was the best debate, by far, out of the three. Both leaders showed up, and I think if you watch debates across the world, in particular the recent US presidential debates, this is probably the best debate we have seen in the western side of the world for the past couple of years,” Marriott said.

He highlighted Golding’s fiery response to challenges over his Jamaican citizenship, describing the Opposition leader’s display of his birth certificate as a defining moment of the night. He said the move not only silenced critics but also gave Golding the opportunity to prove his composure under pressure.

“It was a good debate, and for Mr Golding there was a lot of doubts of whether or not he would show up — and he definitely showed up. Mr Golding announced himself… onto the stage to the Jamaican people that he has what it takes to be prime minister,” he said.

“He came out swinging. He was ready. He knew that the personal attacks were coming in terms of the citizenship and the birth paper, and he was ready — and I think that moment with the birth paper will go down in history as a great political moment. So, I think Mark did well all through the debate as he was fiery and he was ready for the battle,” Marriott added.

He noted that while Golding showed readiness and energy throughout the debate, Holness recovered from a slow start and countered with his Government’s policies, record, and vision for a possible third term.

However, he believed that some of Golding’s attacks against the prime minister’s wife, Speaker of the House Juliet Holness, may not have landed well with the wider public.

“I understand she’s the Speaker of the House but maybe he could have made the argument that the Speaker of the House, who happens to be the prime minister’s wife, creates a conflict of interest, but to continuously attack the prime minister’s wife, I think that’s a bit distasteful and it could turn off hard-working women out there,” he argued.

However Marlon Mattison, a third-year law student at The UWI, Cave Hill campus, while agreeing that Golding might have crossed the line, said that Juliet Holness being a political representative does not exclude her from being brought up in the debate if there are genuine concerns surrounding her position.

“It’s a fair game in the politics, but that was a bit overdone by the leader of the Opposition,” he said.

Beyond that, Mattison felt Golding delivered the stronger overall performance, describing him as composed and clear in his answers.

“He was adequately prepared. He provided the information that many Jamaicans wanted to hear… I have to be fair, the edge of this debate goes to Mr Mark Golding. He came with his receipts, and his receipts show everything that he needs to,” he explained.

Mattison, too, pointed to Golding’s use of his birth certificate to dispel questions about his nationality.

He said the move would have resonated with many Jamaicans, particularly older citizens familiar with the older-style certificates.

Mattison also acknowledged that Holness did his best to steady himself after a shaky start, relying on the Government’s record to appeal to voters.

“The prime minister was clearly discombobulated at the beginning of this debate, and I believe that’s on the sun level given the fact that he is coming off the campaign trail. However, I think what we have to remember is that both candidates are on the campaign trail; both candidates are out in the communities, in the various constituencies trying to garner some support for September 3 so yes, leeway can be given but at the end of the day it’s a national debate — you have to come prepared,” he added.

He also noted that Holness remained under heavy pressure throughout the night, particularly when questions of integrity and corruption were raised.

“At that point it felt like he was on the ropes, but it’s clear that the Integrity Commission questions and the whole matter of corruption will definitely be a weight around his neck going into this election as I don’t think Jamaicans are convinced, based on his responses, on the whole matter of the statutory declarations,” Mattison said.

However, third-year communication studies student at Northern Caribbean University Nathan Roper offered a more cautious assessment.

He argued that although Golding proved his personal capability, he did not succeed in convincing voters that the PNP as a whole is ready to govern.

“In this debate Mark proved that he has the chops to be a good prime minister, but in my opinion he did not prove why his party, why the PNP deserves to form the next government. So while I think it was good for Mark Golding, I do not think it made much a difference as it relates to some people’s perception of the People’s National Party,” Roper said.

He also expressed concern that the debate, though lively, too often descended into personal exchanges rather than meaningful discussion of national priorities.

“Once it started, it never stopped… and I do not think a person who was voting for the JLP is going to switch his vote to the PNP as a result of this debate,” he said

Connor England, a second-year international relations student at The UWI, Mona, said the debate stood out because it showed both leaders handling themselves with a level of poise that had been missing in the other debates.

He pointed to Golding’s precise delivery and Holness’s reliance on his Government’s record as indicators of their readiness to be tested on a national stage.

“It was probably the best display of true leaders of the political parties that we’ve seen in recent political debates. The prime minister was able to highlight what his Government had achieved while also painting a vision for the future, and Mark Golding showcased himself as someone with the capacity to lead a government,” England said.

He believes that the debate gave undecided Jamaicans a clearer picture of the contrasting leadership styles.

Despite differing views on the strengths and weaknesses of each leader’s performance, all four students agreed the final debate gave the public a sharper, more engaging contest than the previous two, and for Marriott, it was also a reminder of the importance of civic duty.

“The style was good — and we needed that. And hopefully that kind of style, that kind of entertainment will drive young people to the polls, and people that weren’t so interested, to go to the polls and express the franchise that our forefathers fought so hard to have,” he said.

Organised by the Jamaica Debates Commission, the first face-off on August 23 between JLP and PNP teams focused on social issues, while the second debate on August 26 saw teams from both parties discussing the economy.