Assessing the Jamaica Labour Party manifesto

Published in the Jamaica Gleaner: Sunday | August 5, 2007

Ian Boyne, Contributor

The Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) has been getting rave reviews for its recently unveiled manifesto which was masterly presented by its leader, Bruce Golding. While the discussions have focused on the economic and social issues, what is most evident is that Golding has not changed the course in terms of certain key proposals for changing the Jamaican political system.

When Bruce Golding returned to the JLP just before the 2002 General Election, he was savagely criticised in the press for betraying the cause, turning his back on his programme to reform the country's decadent political culture and chastised for selling out to Eddie Seaga for raw opportunism. I was alone among journalists who felt he had made the right strategic move by choosing to go back to a party through which he was more likely to be able to implement his agenda for reform of our political system.

Dead end

The third-party option was a dead end, and Golding wisely reasoned that with Seaga's fortunes low in 2002, it made sense for him to go back home to a more welcoming JLP then, biding his time to take over the reins of leadership. Sure enough, in time, he ascended to the leadership of the party, and while, expectedly, he would receive some resistance to some of his more bold proposals for constitutional reform, over time he would be able to convince them to make the change.

And so for the 2007 JLP manifesto, we have under the section 'Governance' some of the first steps toward the reform agenda to which Golding has been committed for some time. What Golding has presented in his governance framework should be adopted by the country as a whole, including the People's National Party (PNP) if it forms the next government, as all the polls suggest it will.

The country must learn to accept good ideas from whichever quarters it comes, and maturity in our politics must mean that parties should feel free to adopt ideas from one another in the interest of the country and good governance.

Increasing the membership of the Senate to include civil society representatives is a good thing for the country. Establishing the office of a special prosecutor to punish corruption and enacting provisions for the impeachment of public officials is a good thing. Imposing criminal sanctions for violation of the rules governing the award of contracts is both good and long overdue. Appointing a special coroner to conduct inquests speedily in instances where citizens die under suspicious circumstances at the hands of the State is a good thing.

Strengthening Parliament

Significantly, too, the JLP manifesto contains important provisions for strengthening the role of Parliament. The recommendation that all special select committees be chaired by a member of the Opposition to ensure the diligent oversight of Government's activities, as is the case of the much-publicised and much-appreciated Public Accounts Committee, is an excellent and potentially far-reaching proposal which is essentially about the redistribution of power; a commitment which Golding has had since his NDM days.

In our tribalised and divisive society, the JLP manifesto proposal for a two-thirds majority approval for appointments to such sensitive posts as Chief Justice, President of the Court of Appeal, Director of Public Prosecutions, Public Defender and Contractor General is spot on.

The commitment to reform the libel and slander laws should be welcomed by journalists. I am also happy to see that the JLP has accepted the need to have legislation governing the financing of political parties.

On the sore point of the role of Members of Parliament, the proposal for a Constituency Development Plan is welcome.

"A Constituency Development Fund will be established, funded with two and a half per cent of the annual budget and allocated in equal amounts among all constituencies to finance the approved projects". That all expenses from this fund would be audited by the Auditor-General and reported to Parliament, as well as disbursements made through relevant government agencies is commendable and works against the pork barrel politics which not only feeds corruption but criminality.

Which leads us to another crucial area of our decadent political system: garrisonisation. There is an important proposal in the JLP manifesto that the Political Ombudsman be required to monitor the conduct and activities of political representatives, especially in garrisons, and report to Parliament. He will also be entitled to refer any matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Grounds for impeachment

Says the JLP manifesto significantly: "Any report made to Parliament by the Political Ombudsman which reflects negatively on the conduct of any elected official may constitute grounds for impeachment and removal from office". Now this is a significant proposal which should be adopted by all interest groups and lobbies to ensure that any government elected on August 27 commits to this. Proposals like these should be national, not partisan. We, as a nation, must own them. They are good for all of us and must be so acknowledged.

I long for the day when our politicians can have the maturity to publicly commend opponents for good ideas and commit themselves to supporting them.

It was disgusting and repulsive to hear PNP apologists on the air behaving disingenuously toward the JLP manifesto, dismissing it tritely as though there is no value in it; just because to ascribe anything good from the political Nazareth might risk losing votes. When do the country's interests really trump narrow partisan interests? When will we really go up? (Remember we are now 45!)

Importantly, too, the JLP manifesto calls for contractors registered with the National Contracts Commission to produce satisfactory criminal records. The criminal network which feeds the garrisons is sustained and facilitated by these criminals who go under the guise of contractors and who use their contracts to bolster their criminal oppression of the poor.

In terms of the economic and investment issues, I support the mega-agency for investment promotion financing and marketing. It is an idea whose time is overdue. The JLP says creating jobs will be "the central focus of our economic strategies". This is a critically important point and while the manifesto does not tell us exactly how that would be done, there are some interesting and very worthwhile ideas floated on strengthening manufacturing.

Again ideas which should be adopted even if the PNP wins the election. One I have been pushing for a long time as a student of development studies: The creation of venture capital financing to encourage start-ups, as well as for the expansion of businesses. This is how East Asia did it. In the development literature, venture capital financing - where real but calculated risks are taken with people with good ideas but no collateral - has been key to economic transformation and the creation of jobs. The proposal for a cutting-edge National Research and Development Centre attached to the University of the West Indies and University of Technology is a welcome one. The proposal to establish Kingston as an offshore financial centre is also a good one.

Similar to government policies

One of the things which struck me as I read through the hefty manifesto is how similar are the JLP proposals to policies and programmes the Government actually has right now. Indeed, there is far more which is similar to what the PNP is doing than what is dissimilar. For someone like me who has to research government policies intimately, it's amazing the congruence between the thinking of the two parties. But it is not in their interest to tell you that, for each must present itself as the font of wisdom, and belittle the other.

A lot of what the JLP is proposing is actually already being done by the PNP Government. I could do whole columns to prove this. In the section on foreign policy, there is nothing different from what the Government is pursuing. The party begins by saying: "The traditional focus of our foreign policy has been to maximise aid and development assistance and sustain preferential arrangements." This is patently untrue. From the 1970s Manley along with the Non-Aligned Movement adopted the slogan 'Trade, not aid'. That was what the New International Economic Order was all about.

The JLP's ideas on economic development are not radically different from the PNP's, despite a lot of blustering from Audley Shaw. But there are two significant differences which are actually Seaga's proposals. This is the proposal for an independent central bank and for a constitutional limit on the fiscal deficit.

These are two of the most dangerous proposals in the manifesto, though lauded by many in the media. Wide reading in development economics should make us cautious. A developing country like Jamaica with our structural deficiencies would be taking dare-devil risks with our people's social welfare if we removed control from the hands of elected representatives to look after the people's interests.

Jeopardising factor

Fiscal and monetary policies are too critical to social welfare to cede to any institution or any private individual in a small, open economy such as ours. Progressive intellectuals and activists should be raising their voices strenuously against this JLP proposal, fearing the social disaster that could result if the JLP really wins and goes ahead with this set of policies.

In fact, the JLP's own proposals for comprehensive health care, education, etc., would be seriously jeopardised were it to hobble itself with an independent central bank while placing constitutional limits on the fiscal deficit. Even the European Community has not been able to honour its own Growth and Stability Pact.

The JLP needs to seriously reconsider this proposal and Omar Davies must show, with his razor-sharp intellect, in his debate with Audley Shaw, why this move would blow apart the entire social components of the JLP manifesto.

The JLP cannot be promising so much and not have political control over monetary and fiscal policies.

Another major disappointment of mine is the lack of focus on the fundamental problems we face with our poor social capital and declining positive values and attitudes. The JLP has tragically marginalised an important discussion.

Its ideas on governance issues are the best, its proposals for re-stimulating manufacturing worthwhile and, overall, the manifesto finds synergy with a host of government policies and initiatives.