Today, Jamaicans from all walks of life will cast their ballots in the 19th parliamentary elections  of independent Jamaica. Even members of the Jamaican Diaspora, especially in North America, will be converging on the island to register their decision as to which party is best suited to lead Jamaica as Government for the next five years. This is a good sign and demonstrates that democracy is alive and well in Jamaica despite the threats to this construct from places like the USA, once considered the greatest bastion of democratic freedom in the world.

In my last piece I gave what I considered to be important reasons the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) should be given a third term. In the brevity assumed by a column, and not by a term paper or dissertation, I was not able to spell out in detail the several factors that support my thinking. But I think the reasons for a JLP third term have been well attested to.

The avalanche of negative comments that I was expecting did not materialise. To those who believe that not having a vote in an election disqualifies one from stating a position, and that I should, therefore, go off into a corner and keep myself quiet, I say that as a citizen of Jamaica I have a right to express myself and give prognostications as to what is best for my country. The fact that you logistically are not able to express this tangibly by a vote at any given time should and certainly does not preclude you from publicly expressing your opinions.

So here we are, and today is the day of decision. Having listened to the three national election debates, a few comments are necessary. I believe that debates of this kind should have a more organic flow rather than the mechanical and stage-managed process that was presented. There were crucial moments when further rebuttal from the other side would have been welcomed but was refused on the basis of the tight time management structure that was adopted. The interviewers should also have been given more latitude in questioning the debaters as this would allow for a freer flow of conversation and a lessening of the tension which arose from gliding from one question to the next, with viewers left wondering about the veracity and authenticity of what they just heard. Time for fact-checking would have been welcomed.

The manifestos speak for themselves. I believe the Peoples National Party (PNP) is in a bit of a dilemma, in that not having the benefit of incumbency and not being privy to information as the Government is, it appears to be bobbing all over the place, like flotsam and jetsam, or a floating plastic bottle on the open sea. Thus, it should be more cautious in what it promises, such as increasing the tax threshold to $3.5 million to be done through a dubious process of “organic growth” only to revise it by adopting another formula. It is clear that this big tax giveaway, whatever process is engaged, will lead to cuts in other programmes which can be injurious to the health of the economy. The truth is that the PNP does not have a clue as to what extent this may be the case, thus the need to tread more cautiously. People are not fooled.

A word about corruption. Corruption in Government, or any organisation for that matter, must be strongly condemned at all times. With respect to Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness, it must be noted that, to date, no specific charges have been proffered to substantiate that he has done anything wrong. If there were credible charges, he should have been arrested and brought before the courts. This has not happened.

It should be of great concern to all well-thinking Jamaicans that, despite the most pervasive and invasive probe of any government official reporting to the Integrity Commission (IC) in recent times, that body has refused to certify the prime minister’s declarations. Why? And after all the innuendoes and attacks on him and his family and the besmirching of his integrity and character, there are those who seem to think that he should sit idly by while his reputation is being savaged. He has rightly turned to the judicial process to defend himself, which is the right of any citizen. We rightly trumpet that no one is above the law, but should anyone be below it?

You will notice that corruption is low on the totem pole of the things that most concern Jamaicans. It is not that corruption does not bother them, far from this. Part of the reason is that, especially for those above 50 years, neither political party comes to the table with clean hands or a clean heart when it comes to corruption. Those who have lived through the depredations of the unbroken 18.5 years of PNP rule know too well the many credible charges of corruption against that Administration, one of the most obvious of which was the “run wid it” admission by the then minister of finance Omar Davies. Who wants to be worried about running deficits when there is an election to be won. After all, the people will pick up the tab later, whether in taxation or the lessening of government programmes. And pay it we did.

Pragmatically, people have taken notice of what this Administration has been doing. They have to wonder why there has not been any dramatic charges of corruption involving the infrastructure projects presently underway. There may be charges of incompetence with respect to some projects, but incompetence and blatant acts of corruption are not one and the same thing, though they both can, and do, sit in the same seat. In the past 10 years well-thinking Jamaicans have seen progress on many fronts: from infrastructure development to transportation — especially the roll-out of the rural school bus programme for our children — and the management of the country’s economy, to name a few. They believe, like I do, that the anti-corruption mechanisms of the country must be strengthened and that there is a powerful place for an integrity commission in this respect.

To the fence-sitter and so-called undecided voter I say this: If logistically I could vote in this election, I would come down off the fence and vote for progress, for the continuation of what has been achieved. This is not the time to gamble with these well-earned successes by putting in untested, and I would suggest, belligerent leadership from an Opposition which does not seem to have got its act together. If we could bottle up political hot air and sell it, we would be a rich country. The incendiary rhetoric that has spewed from political platforms has not been helpful to the Jamaican people who want to understand the issues and make informed decisions.

But we can be effective judges of the 10 years of the JLP in office and decide whether we want that to be refined, improved, or even revamped in some areas and new measures and projects introduced. We must also be effective judges of those who come promising gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh without any clear indication of how these can be delivered. Lastly, we should reject the suggestions of the intemperate and those who apparently have axes to grind, who are urging citizens to vote “no” as a protest strategy. This is not helpful.

My prediction is that the number of registered voters opting to vote will be over 55 per cent, with the JLP winning over 40 seats. Let me wish you a happy voting day, whichever side you choose.

Dr Raulston Nembhard is a priest, social commentator, and author of the books Finding Peace in the Midst of Life’s Storms; Your Self-esteem Guide to a Better Life, and Beyond Petulance: Republican Politics and the Future of America. He hosts a podcast — Mango Tree Dialogues — on his You Tube channel. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or stead6655@aol.com.

Andrew HolnessPhilp Lemonte

The incendiary rhetoric that has spewed from political platforms has not been helpful to those who want to make informed decisions.

Raulston Nembhard