Michael Abrahams | Time come for a PNP wake-up call

The general election is behind us, with the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) defeating the People’s National Party (PNP). The Labourites drew the Comrades’ blood and extinguished their fire. Third term loaded.

There are many reasons why the PNP lost the election. Some are beyond the control of the party. For instance, the JLP reportedly had more money and therefore more resources to aid with their campaign. There are also reports of widespread irregularities, including vote buying and voter suppression, which, if they did occur, would have worked against them.

However, regardless of the aforementioned factors, pre-election polls consistently showed that the race would be a close one. Yes, the JLP was once again chosen by a minority of the electorate. PNP flipped more than a dozen seats, but the fact remains that they lost the election. Not only that, the JLP has beaten them three times in a row, under three different leaders. The PNP must examine the hierarchy and culture of their party and ask themselves why the public has repeatedly rejected them. What do Jamaicans see that turns them off?

One issue is the tendency of its members to speak out of turn, sending mixed messages to the electorate. For example, last August, the PNP’s spokesperson on education, Damion Crawford, talked about raising GCT to assist with education. The party subsequently distanced itself from Crawford’s comments and stated that his proposed plan was not a party position. Similarly, this January, PNP general secretary and spokesperson on agriculture Dayton Campbell spoke of a plan involving taxes on food imports. The party subsequently explained that Campbell’s comments were misinterpreted. More recently, Crawford announced a plan that would involve children staying at school for two additional hours each day. Again, this was not a party position, and the backlash prompted Crawford to embark on a media tour to clarify his comments.

INCONSISTENCY

Inconsistency with messaging is definitely an issue. The rural school bus system involves two ministries: those concerned with transportation and with education. The voice consistently heard on the government side was that of Transport Minister Daryl Vaz, while Education Minister Dana Morris Dixon also made comments. However, on the PNP side, in addition to the spokespersons on transport and education, there were multiple other voices, with the loudest being that of Peter Bunting, who is the spokesperson on neither, and the messages were not all in sync.

The party’s communication skills need to be sharpened. For instance, regarding the rural school bus programme, there are genuine safety concerns. However, when Bunting said on a political platform that the buses would “kill off” our children, the remark was seen as fearmongering, serving as a catalyst for the already present “bad mind” label placed on Comrades. I harshly rebuked Bunting at the time for what I thought were baseless concerns. Subsequently, I apologised publicly to him for the harshness of my rebuke, acknowledging that I share similar concerns while maintaining that I would have expressed them differently.

The Opposition also appears to be deficient in political strategy and sheer common sense. When the massive salary increase for lawmakers was announced, on the heels of teachers being given a “take it or leave it” ultimatum, many public sector workers were irate. However, the PNP accepted the increase too, and their members took everything, failing to differentiate themselves from the “unreasonable” government, perpetuating the belief by many Jamaicans that the parties are two sides of the same coin.

Poor vigilance is another glaring flaw. For instance, a prime minister’s spouse, regardless of gender, should not be the House Speaker, as this sets the stage for a conflict of interest scenario. When the prime minister’s wife, Juliet Holness, was appointed Deputy Speaker, the writing was on the wall. The PNP said nothing. When she was appointed Speaker, the PNP accepted it, only for their party leader to call it out six months later during his budget debate presentation.

NOT COLLABORATIVE

Another issue is that the party is not as collaborative and consultative as it could be. In fact, a former National Executive Council (NEC) member publicly expressed his frustration with a tweet on X. He spoke of communicating with the PNP hierarchy years ago, offering advice on issues ranging from speaking standard English vs patois, wardrobe matters and the importance of always looking “prime ministerial,” not alienating some audiences when speaking on platforms, and being aware of “the echo-chamber risk.” All were sound advice, but he said he was “brushed off.”

As for their campaign, the PNP clearly has not learnt from its mistakes. In the 2016 election, the PNP focused on Andrew Holness’ house and his perceived corruption, and that strategy contributed to their loss. Their concerns were valid, but harping on them was perceived by his supporters as a smear tactic, and it only served to galvanize their support for him. Nine years later, it is déjà vu. This time, it concerns his statutory declaration woes and allegations of illicit enrichment. Again, the concerns are valid and should be expressed, but the amount of energy focused on Holness and his integrity has once again been perceived as a smear tactic.

During the election campaign I kept hearing people say that the PNP has re-energised their base, and that is great, but there exists a large group of other Jamaicans to be addressed, including persons who do not vote, young people who were not eligible to vote in the last election but now are, and JLP supporters who are not “die-hard” and may not be fully satisfied with their party. I saw no serious effort to reach out to these people.

The PNP has noted the arrogance of the Government. However, they must acknowledge their own arrogance. If the Government is as flawed as it is, it is an indictment on them that losing to the JLP has become a habit. The PNP needs new blood, introspection and re-organisation, or they will remain in the wilderness for a long time.

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator, and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on X , formerly Twitter, @mikeyabrahams