Dear Editor,
I write in response to the Sunday Observer article headlined ‘PNP campaign was dysfunctional, divided’, published Sunday, June 5, 2016.
In the heat of the election campaign, the People’s National Party’s (PNP) had insisted that Andrew Holness, the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) leader, answer a series of questions before the PNP would agree to participate in three planned national debates.
But even after Holness answered the questions, the PNP stuck to its position of not participating in the debates, a decision that the committee established by the PNP to probe the reasons for the party’s general election defeat in February this year has described as “fatal”.
The PNP never expected Holness to answer their questions and made up more excuses to prevent Portia Simpson Miller from taking part in public debates. Throughout her term as prime minister the PNP had shielded her from the media, well aware that public exposure requiring intellectual efforts would embarrass and compromise her and her Government and political party.
Doubtlessly, participating in public debates would have completely ruined her image and would have resulted in a landslide victory for the JLP.
Intellectuals within the PNP, like Raymond Pryce, were sidelined. If any PNP intellectuals are still holding important party positions, they certainly do not show it, but secretly keep it to themselves.
I welcome the change, which I had anticipated and predicted long ago. However, I am not at all happy with the defeated PNP. Healthy democracies require control and stimulation by a competent Opposition.
FB
friedrich.buecking@online.de
I write in response to the Sunday Observer article headlined ‘PNP campaign was dysfunctional, divided’, published Sunday, June 5, 2016.
In the heat of the election campaign, the People’s National Party’s (PNP) had insisted that Andrew Holness, the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) leader, answer a series of questions before the PNP would agree to participate in three planned national debates.
But even after Holness answered the questions, the PNP stuck to its position of not participating in the debates, a decision that the committee established by the PNP to probe the reasons for the party’s general election defeat in February this year has described as “fatal”.
The PNP never expected Holness to answer their questions and made up more excuses to prevent Portia Simpson Miller from taking part in public debates. Throughout her term as prime minister the PNP had shielded her from the media, well aware that public exposure requiring intellectual efforts would embarrass and compromise her and her Government and political party.
Doubtlessly, participating in public debates would have completely ruined her image and would have resulted in a landslide victory for the JLP.
Intellectuals within the PNP, like Raymond Pryce, were sidelined. If any PNP intellectuals are still holding important party positions, they certainly do not show it, but secretly keep it to themselves.
I welcome the change, which I had anticipated and predicted long ago. However, I am not at all happy with the defeated PNP. Healthy democracies require control and stimulation by a competent Opposition.
FB
friedrich.buecking@online.de