Dear Editor,
It now appears that Jamaica will have an opportunity in the very near future to select a new parliament. With elections imminent, what should we be thinking about or demanding of our representatives in the new parliament? Therefore, this is probably as good a time as ever to determine what it is that we should be looking for and just why the outgoing ones have failed us so miserably.
Has the tribal nature of our politics contributed to any such failures, real or perceived? If we accept that the tribal nature of practised politics has contributed to this failure, are our representatives not conscious of that contributing factor? And, are they going to be content with continuing in the same manner, thereby disregarding the discontent and the apathy about politics that prevails among perhaps the majority of Jamaicans?
On the other hand, if politicians aren't aware of our discontent, how best can we get them to sit up, take note, and change their attitude?
It is certainly my belief that we should be looking for representatives who will represent the views and interests of their constituents even at the expense of going against their party's policies or position. How, it may be asked, given the tribal nature of Jamaica's politics, are we going to achieve any such outcome? Consider an excellent article written by Peter Edwards, entitled 'Jamaicans: 3 reasons why you should vote'. The author rightly expresses his great concern regarding Jamaicans' disillusionment with their politics and is fearful that we will just not bother to vote. He suggests three very good reasons why we should. However, I believe that two of the three reasons he lists might be better described as proposing how we should vote. I certainly believe those two methods could easily be used, if not to dismantle tribal politics, then certainly to send a very strong message of protest on our rejection of the tribal nature of our politics. The two methods outlined by Edwards, and which I wholeheartedly support, are either to spoil our vote by voting for both the head and bell on the same ballot paper, or we encourage, support, and vote for one independent candidate in each constituency. This election must, therefore, be used as our way of protesting our rejection of tribal politics and reclaiming and demonstrating that we the people hold the power and that we matter, and not just the loyal party card-carrying members or their base support. We cannot continue to be treated with contempt and thereafter it must be the people first and not the political party. Isn't it sad that in every representative legislature in democracies throughout the world, constituents are able to identify members of their respective chambers who have specific interests or expertise that, regardless of party allegiance, will champion the cause with passion and zeal. And, apart from Mike Henry of the JLP, who has been championing the reparation cause, what other members of parliament do we turn to on such matters as human rights abuses, gender or other forms of discrimination, security forces corruption and brutality, right to life, and hanging, to name just a few? After all, ministers are assigned portfolios but must conform to their respective party's policy or positions and, therefore, cannot be relied upon or expected to advance the wishes or concerns of respective constituents' concerns for which they might have particular portfolio responsibility, especially when such concerns are in opposition to their party's policy or position.
Colonel Allan Douglas
Kingston 10
alldouglas@aol.com
Time to 'colt' the tribal political game
-->
It now appears that Jamaica will have an opportunity in the very near future to select a new parliament. With elections imminent, what should we be thinking about or demanding of our representatives in the new parliament? Therefore, this is probably as good a time as ever to determine what it is that we should be looking for and just why the outgoing ones have failed us so miserably.
Has the tribal nature of our politics contributed to any such failures, real or perceived? If we accept that the tribal nature of practised politics has contributed to this failure, are our representatives not conscious of that contributing factor? And, are they going to be content with continuing in the same manner, thereby disregarding the discontent and the apathy about politics that prevails among perhaps the majority of Jamaicans?
On the other hand, if politicians aren't aware of our discontent, how best can we get them to sit up, take note, and change their attitude?
It is certainly my belief that we should be looking for representatives who will represent the views and interests of their constituents even at the expense of going against their party's policies or position. How, it may be asked, given the tribal nature of Jamaica's politics, are we going to achieve any such outcome? Consider an excellent article written by Peter Edwards, entitled 'Jamaicans: 3 reasons why you should vote'. The author rightly expresses his great concern regarding Jamaicans' disillusionment with their politics and is fearful that we will just not bother to vote. He suggests three very good reasons why we should. However, I believe that two of the three reasons he lists might be better described as proposing how we should vote. I certainly believe those two methods could easily be used, if not to dismantle tribal politics, then certainly to send a very strong message of protest on our rejection of the tribal nature of our politics. The two methods outlined by Edwards, and which I wholeheartedly support, are either to spoil our vote by voting for both the head and bell on the same ballot paper, or we encourage, support, and vote for one independent candidate in each constituency. This election must, therefore, be used as our way of protesting our rejection of tribal politics and reclaiming and demonstrating that we the people hold the power and that we matter, and not just the loyal party card-carrying members or their base support. We cannot continue to be treated with contempt and thereafter it must be the people first and not the political party. Isn't it sad that in every representative legislature in democracies throughout the world, constituents are able to identify members of their respective chambers who have specific interests or expertise that, regardless of party allegiance, will champion the cause with passion and zeal. And, apart from Mike Henry of the JLP, who has been championing the reparation cause, what other members of parliament do we turn to on such matters as human rights abuses, gender or other forms of discrimination, security forces corruption and brutality, right to life, and hanging, to name just a few? After all, ministers are assigned portfolios but must conform to their respective party's policy or positions and, therefore, cannot be relied upon or expected to advance the wishes or concerns of respective constituents' concerns for which they might have particular portfolio responsibility, especially when such concerns are in opposition to their party's policy or position.
Colonel Allan Douglas
Kingston 10
alldouglas@aol.com
Time to 'colt' the tribal political game
-->