pharoah
05-22-07, - 10:07 PM
http://www.bahamapundit.com/2007/05/the_way_forward.htmlThe Way
The way Forward for the PLP After the Bahamas Election
by Sir Arthur Foulkes
As the dust settles from the 2007 election both national political parties will no doubt be assessing their standing in the country and the challenges facing them – external and internal.
The Free National Movement is, of course, in the better position. Having won the election, the primary objective of Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and his colleagues is now to govern well, even though they will be taking a good look at their performance, especially in some constituencies they expected to win but did not.
Opposition Leader Perry Christie and his colleagues must not only mount an effective opposition in parliament but they also face the daunting task of examining why they lost the election and became the first one-term government in Bahamian history and, more importantly, what to do about it.
Political parties are notoriously prone to over-confidence in an election and perhaps they cannot be otherwise, or at least cannot appear to be. That is not so bad because to look like losers even in the face of imminent defeat is to invite annihilation.
What is far more dangerous is the failure to face up to the reasons for defeat and to take corrective measures.
PLP Leaders are having great difficulty coming to terms with the fact that they lost the election in the first place and if they do not get past that hurdle they are not likely to be honest with themselves in answering the painful questions.
According to Mr. Christie, the FNM, does not have the “moral authority” to govern, presumably because of the slim margin of the popular vote. That makes no sense at all and Mr. Christie should know it. If the FNM does not have the authority to govern, who does?
The electoral system in The Bahamas is basically the same as in Britain and in most Commonwealth parliamentary democracies. It is configured on constituencies and not on a national popular vote.
It is therefore possible for a party to win the majority of seats in parliament with a minority of the popular vote. A government elected in this fashion would have no less constitutional and moral authority to govern.
As Mr. Ingraham has already pointed out, it has been some years since a British government was elected with as much as 50 per cent of the popular vote.
Roughly the same system is in effect in presidential elections in the United States. It is on the basis of states won and the electoral votes assigned to them rather than a national popular vote. The whole world knows that George W. Bush got less votes than Al Gore in 2002 but still became President.
Mr. Christie and his party do a disservice to the Bahamian people and especially young Bahamians whom he should be educating about our system of government instead of trying to misinform them just to save face for his party.
Mr. Christie and his colleagues have also made statements that seem to suggest that the FNM won because it had more money, some from the so-called white knights and some from unnamed special interests.
The claim that the FNM has always had easy access to money and has always out-spent the PLP is simply not true. In most of the elections since 1967, the PLP has had no shortage of money.
The owners of the Grand Bahama Port Authority, beginning with Wallace Groves, have contributed liberally to the PLP ever since 1968. They have also contributed generously to high-ranking individuals in the PLP and some of the money donated to the party found its way into private bank accounts.
Furthermore, in later years the PLP was well-funded by new PLP millionaires as well as a succession of foreigners wanting to do business in The Bahamas, not all of them exactly desirable.
Some in the latter category were not so much interested in fostering the democratic process in The Bahamas. They were clearly on buying the favour of the PLP in government.
The most notorious case of this kind was that of Mohamnad Harajchi who made perhaps the biggest contribution to any Bahamian political party from a single source. Mr. Harajchi said it was $10 million but Mr. Christie suggested that it was nearer $3 million.
In any event, the man who is now complaining about how much money the FNM got and from whom saw nothing wrong with accepting such a large contribution from a foreigner who had a specific objective in mind, and a dubious one at that.
The man who after five years in power is now talking about campaign finance reform, that same man when pressed about the Harajchi affair had a very revealing response. Said Mr. Christie: “So what!”
Incidentally, a prominent Bahamian cleric who had a lot to say about “reports” of FNM expenditure in a previous election had few if any pronouncements to make about the clearly scandalous Harajchi affair.
It takes a lot of money to run elections in The Bahamas, and a party or a candidate can lose for lack of sufficient funds to mount a credible campaign and to maintain an effective organization on the ground. But no election has been lost or won primarily because of money since the 1950s.
The PLP was defeated in the last election simply because it lost favour with the Bahamian electorate, and it lost favour for a number of reasons, one being a failure of leadership.
This had its roots in the past when Sir Lynden Pindling decided to support Perry Christie for leadership of the party over Bernard Nottage. A majority of the hierarchy of the party did not think Mr. Christie could cut it, but Sir Lynden liked Mr. Christie and apparently had ideas about controlling him.
So he got the rank and file of his party to support Mr. Christie in a rancorous campaign that led to Dr. Nottage’s departure from the party. The hierarchy was right about Mr. Christie.
Now, despite the usual noises about confidence and loyalty, the PLP would be very shortsighted if it allowed Mr. Christie to stay on and to lead it into the next election. He is incapable of carrying out the reforms the party so desperately needs.
The problem is that some of those who were previously seen as potential successors to Mr. Christie have been badly tarnished. The once promising Dr. Nottage is regarded as an opportunist by some PLPs who believe he only went back to the party because of personal ambition.
Others who were regarded as future leaders in 2002 have lost considerable lustre. Obie Wilchcombe, who maintained a pretty good image for most of the PLP’s five years in office, revealed some disturbing traits in recent months and stunned the country with his response to allegations of vote-buying in his constituency.
Fred Mitchell, a former favourite with many PLPs and others as well, was a big loser as he developed an image of arrogance and intolerance of criticism. Some of the pronouncements on his website, Bahamas Uncensored, since the election have been vicious, racist and abusive.
Whoever the next PLP leader turns out to be, he or she will have to do what Perry Christie dismally failed to do, and that is to rid the party of some persistent bad attitudes and habits.
He will have to subscribe to the new political culture in which victimization, unfair practices and an attitude of entitlement have no place. He will have to convince the Bahamian people of a genuine commitment to democracy and fair-play and a renounce claims to special privileges. That will be a tall order for the PLP.
The way Forward for the PLP After the Bahamas Election
by Sir Arthur Foulkes
As the dust settles from the 2007 election both national political parties will no doubt be assessing their standing in the country and the challenges facing them – external and internal.
The Free National Movement is, of course, in the better position. Having won the election, the primary objective of Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and his colleagues is now to govern well, even though they will be taking a good look at their performance, especially in some constituencies they expected to win but did not.
Opposition Leader Perry Christie and his colleagues must not only mount an effective opposition in parliament but they also face the daunting task of examining why they lost the election and became the first one-term government in Bahamian history and, more importantly, what to do about it.
Political parties are notoriously prone to over-confidence in an election and perhaps they cannot be otherwise, or at least cannot appear to be. That is not so bad because to look like losers even in the face of imminent defeat is to invite annihilation.
What is far more dangerous is the failure to face up to the reasons for defeat and to take corrective measures.
PLP Leaders are having great difficulty coming to terms with the fact that they lost the election in the first place and if they do not get past that hurdle they are not likely to be honest with themselves in answering the painful questions.
According to Mr. Christie, the FNM, does not have the “moral authority” to govern, presumably because of the slim margin of the popular vote. That makes no sense at all and Mr. Christie should know it. If the FNM does not have the authority to govern, who does?
The electoral system in The Bahamas is basically the same as in Britain and in most Commonwealth parliamentary democracies. It is configured on constituencies and not on a national popular vote.
It is therefore possible for a party to win the majority of seats in parliament with a minority of the popular vote. A government elected in this fashion would have no less constitutional and moral authority to govern.
As Mr. Ingraham has already pointed out, it has been some years since a British government was elected with as much as 50 per cent of the popular vote.
Roughly the same system is in effect in presidential elections in the United States. It is on the basis of states won and the electoral votes assigned to them rather than a national popular vote. The whole world knows that George W. Bush got less votes than Al Gore in 2002 but still became President.
Mr. Christie and his party do a disservice to the Bahamian people and especially young Bahamians whom he should be educating about our system of government instead of trying to misinform them just to save face for his party.
Mr. Christie and his colleagues have also made statements that seem to suggest that the FNM won because it had more money, some from the so-called white knights and some from unnamed special interests.
The claim that the FNM has always had easy access to money and has always out-spent the PLP is simply not true. In most of the elections since 1967, the PLP has had no shortage of money.
The owners of the Grand Bahama Port Authority, beginning with Wallace Groves, have contributed liberally to the PLP ever since 1968. They have also contributed generously to high-ranking individuals in the PLP and some of the money donated to the party found its way into private bank accounts.
Furthermore, in later years the PLP was well-funded by new PLP millionaires as well as a succession of foreigners wanting to do business in The Bahamas, not all of them exactly desirable.
Some in the latter category were not so much interested in fostering the democratic process in The Bahamas. They were clearly on buying the favour of the PLP in government.
The most notorious case of this kind was that of Mohamnad Harajchi who made perhaps the biggest contribution to any Bahamian political party from a single source. Mr. Harajchi said it was $10 million but Mr. Christie suggested that it was nearer $3 million.
In any event, the man who is now complaining about how much money the FNM got and from whom saw nothing wrong with accepting such a large contribution from a foreigner who had a specific objective in mind, and a dubious one at that.
The man who after five years in power is now talking about campaign finance reform, that same man when pressed about the Harajchi affair had a very revealing response. Said Mr. Christie: “So what!”
Incidentally, a prominent Bahamian cleric who had a lot to say about “reports” of FNM expenditure in a previous election had few if any pronouncements to make about the clearly scandalous Harajchi affair.
It takes a lot of money to run elections in The Bahamas, and a party or a candidate can lose for lack of sufficient funds to mount a credible campaign and to maintain an effective organization on the ground. But no election has been lost or won primarily because of money since the 1950s.
The PLP was defeated in the last election simply because it lost favour with the Bahamian electorate, and it lost favour for a number of reasons, one being a failure of leadership.
This had its roots in the past when Sir Lynden Pindling decided to support Perry Christie for leadership of the party over Bernard Nottage. A majority of the hierarchy of the party did not think Mr. Christie could cut it, but Sir Lynden liked Mr. Christie and apparently had ideas about controlling him.
So he got the rank and file of his party to support Mr. Christie in a rancorous campaign that led to Dr. Nottage’s departure from the party. The hierarchy was right about Mr. Christie.
Now, despite the usual noises about confidence and loyalty, the PLP would be very shortsighted if it allowed Mr. Christie to stay on and to lead it into the next election. He is incapable of carrying out the reforms the party so desperately needs.
The problem is that some of those who were previously seen as potential successors to Mr. Christie have been badly tarnished. The once promising Dr. Nottage is regarded as an opportunist by some PLPs who believe he only went back to the party because of personal ambition.
Others who were regarded as future leaders in 2002 have lost considerable lustre. Obie Wilchcombe, who maintained a pretty good image for most of the PLP’s five years in office, revealed some disturbing traits in recent months and stunned the country with his response to allegations of vote-buying in his constituency.
Fred Mitchell, a former favourite with many PLPs and others as well, was a big loser as he developed an image of arrogance and intolerance of criticism. Some of the pronouncements on his website, Bahamas Uncensored, since the election have been vicious, racist and abusive.
Whoever the next PLP leader turns out to be, he or she will have to do what Perry Christie dismally failed to do, and that is to rid the party of some persistent bad attitudes and habits.
He will have to subscribe to the new political culture in which victimization, unfair practices and an attitude of entitlement have no place. He will have to convince the Bahamian people of a genuine commitment to democracy and fair-play and a renounce claims to special privileges. That will be a tall order for the PLP.