Tweet
Policy contradiction, ideological vacuum
2008-05-03 Written by: Garnett Roper 
The official visit to Cuba by Prime Minister Bruce Golding and several of his Cabinet ministers more than anything else, is illustrative of the absence of a unifying and defining philosophy in the new political administration. The visit over the weekend includes PM Golding, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade, Dr. Ken Baugh; Minster of Health, Rudyard Spencer; Minister of Agriculture, Dr. Christopher Tufton; and Minister of Tourism, Edmund Bartlett.
On his official visit, the Prime Minister will hold talks with President Castro and other senior Cuban officials on an expanded programme of bilateral co-operation in healthcare, food production, water resources development, housing and tourism.
Nothing that the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) administration has said or done since taking office or even before is helpful in providing the nation with a framework with which to set such a visit to Cuba in perspective. What does this mean? Is it that the JLP has come full circle and has made an about turn on Cuba? The last JLP administration severed relationship with Cuba and expelled its ambassador. Is this entourage to Cuba nothing more than political opportunism and expediency? Why should so many Cabinet ministers make the trip to Cuba even before they have sorted out the historic differences between the JLP and Cuba?
The trip to Cuba is not isolated for the contradictory policy signals being sent by the new administration; policy contradiction runs like a thread to the foreign policy. Recently, in the budget debate, Dr. Omar Davies put on record his appreciation to President Hugo Chavez and the people of Venezuela for the Petro Caribe facility. As Dr. Davies noted, this has been singularly the most beneficial foreign policy initiative from which Jamaica has ever benefited, as the facility has so far provided Jamaica with soft loan funds of U$500 million.
The members of the opposition applauded, while government members withheld their applause. When it is also recalled that the JLP organised a protest to coincide with the signing of the Petro Caribe agreement a few years ago, it is difficult to figure the basis on which the new administration is now courting Venezuela for fertiliser and LNG.
It can be argued that rather than being illustrative of policy contradiction and policy confusion, the foregoing merely indicates the degree of practicality and flexibility with which the new administration approaches its task. It may well be so, but they would be taking an awful lot for granted in approaching foreign nations in this manner. However, the policy contradiction, ideological vacuum and confusion go further and run deeper than the approaches to Venezuela and Cuba. It runs like a thread in the new administration.
Contradiction
The government and the PM in particular, has made a number of solemn pledges that he has contradicted by his actions. Mention has been made about the pledge of allegiance to uphold the Jamaican Constitution while allowing Daryl Vaz to continue to sit in Parliament when the court has already ruled that he is disqualified to sit in Parliament.
The PM promised to abolish the power of the PM to call elections on a whim. He said that within the first 100 days of taking office he would pilot legislation to abolish that power of the PM.
And yet as soon as he found the intention of Abe Dabdoub to pursue the appeal of the ruling of Mrs. Justice Zaila McCalla that a by-election should be held, to be unpalatable, Golding used the very power of the PM he depreciated, to threaten his political opponents with the prospect of snap elections. How then is the PM’s word to be taken? Can we dare to take him seriously when he speaks?
Governance was one of the buzzwords that were used by the JLP in its campaign.
It was going to develop an approach to governance that was gentler and more accountable to the people. Nothing that the JLP has done since taking office indicates that its approach to governance will vaguely approximate what it said in its manifesto. If anything, what we have seen so far proceeds in the opposite direction. There has been highhandedness and sometimes arrogance to its discourse. One does not need to rehash the manner in which it handled the recommendation of Professor Stephen Vasciannie to the post of Solicitor General or its dismissal of the members of the Public Service Commission (PSC) on a trumped-up charge of misbehavior because they refused to give in to the wishes of the PM; those are old stories. The mishandling of the Attorney General’s Chambers by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Senator Dorothy Lightbourne, that has precipitated a mass exodus of senior attorneys from that department, is also an old story.
What we saw this week of the Minister of Finance and the Public Service, Audley Shaw, addressing a group of public sector functionaries and threatening them with prison, smacked of someone wanting to re-incarnate the old time Jamaican ‘Busha’ addressing a group of field hands. Audley Shaw sees going to prison as the ultimate humiliation. This is not something that someone like Audley Shaw should relish doing: he has been the beneficiary of generous handling: he speaks of FINSAC as a bad thing, but it was very good to him.
Cassava casino
Nothing shows the ideological vacuum, contradiction and policy confusion of the present administration more than its announcement of the granting of two casino gambling licences. In the same budget debate that PM Golding with fanfare, made his announcement of casino, Minister of Agriculture, Dr. Chris Tufton, announced the cassava-ization of Jamaica. There are all kinds of problems associated with the eating of cassava. But one understands the spirit in which the minister made the announcement. It is self-reliance. It is as he said, eat what we grow and grow what we eat. This is a form of affirmation of the sense of self of the nation, an affirmation of its culture, its dignity, its legitimacy and its viability in the world of nation states.
In the same budget debate, PM Golding announced the introduction of casino gaming. The two approaches, one of self-reliance in support of our own industry and the other a promotion of an industry from which, of necessity, Jamaicans would have to be excluded, are mutually contradictory. We cannot have it both ways. If it is yes to cassava, it is no to casino!
It goes deeper than just that, however. PM Golding has appointed the Rev Al Miller to liaise with the churches on what he calls a “Fresh Start”. This is a renewal of core values and morals, which are at the heart of the viability and sustainability of the nation. The PM has pre-empted his own initiative by a repudiation of moral consideration as a basis for policy decisions. More than that, he has failed to consult the church. Like it or not, the church/the collective Christian presence in our midst, are legitimate stakeholders in this country. They deserve to be consulted, even if the PM had no intention of taking their advice. As it is, does the PM seriously believe that any moral ‘fresh start’ could succeed in a context where morality has been repudiated as a basis for policymaking?
Does the PM seriously expect that the church could maintain its credibility and play any role in his ‘fresh start’ initiative from a government which will go down in history as the government that brought casino gambling to Jamaica?
Casino gambling, it was said, was desired by the majority of the people of this country. It has turned out, if the most recent Don Anderson polls are to be believed, to be something opposed by the majority of Jamaicans. The majority of the persons polled said that they oppose casino gambling. Some 51 per cent strongly oppose, five per cent oppose, 27 per cent strongly support, 10 per cent support and seven per cent were unsure.
The best case is a 12-point differential in favour of those against. This begs the question of who really wants casino. It is not for the poor; it is for those who have always had their way. It will never alleviate poverty; tourism never does; the resort belt on the north coast from Negril to Ocho Rios is the squatter belt. The tourism industry has failed to make the social investment, whether in housing for workers in the industry or in paying their fair share of taxes in the country. All of this means there is lack of clarity in what is being done by way of the granting of casino licences. We have sacrificed moral consideration to simply exacerbate the gaps between the rich and the poor.
Mixed signals
It seems an eternity ago that I participated in a debate leading up to a general election as a part of the panel asking questions. Bruce Golding represented the JLP and Hugh Small represented the PNP. I asked both Mr. Small and Mr. Golding then to say what was the vision of Jamaica that was guiding their respective political parties, what kind of Jamaica did they want? Both of them waffled on the question; they had not thought of it. Today, all of these many years later, I raise the same question of Bruce Golding; what is his vision of Jamaica, what kind of Jamaica does he want? The answer has to form the basis of policy directions like a unifying and defining thread. To this point and even after his budget presentation that unifying thread is not clear.
There are mixed signals, there are contradictory approaches and, in fact, mutually exclusive options are being pursued. It is said that we are in a post-ideological world. This is not about any old ideology. This is about a central purpose. If you do not know where you are going, any road will take you there.
Related Articles:
Defending the rule of law
US$10,000 in Cash
Dr. Cassava Toughtimes
The politics of dual citizenshi
The budget debate
Article Summary
Times Read: 128
Times Commented: 0
Scroll down to comment
2008-05-03 Written by: Garnett Roper The official visit to Cuba by Prime Minister Bruce Golding and several of his Cabinet ministers more than anything else, is illustrative of the absence of a unifying and defining philosophy in the new political administration. The visit over the weekend includes PM Golding, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade, Dr. Ken Baugh; Minster of Health, Rudyard Spencer; Minister of Agriculture, Dr. Christopher Tufton; and Minister of Tourism, Edmund Bartlett.
On his official visit, the Prime Minister will hold talks with President Castro and other senior Cuban officials on an expanded programme of bilateral co-operation in healthcare, food production, water resources development, housing and tourism.
Nothing that the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) administration has said or done since taking office or even before is helpful in providing the nation with a framework with which to set such a visit to Cuba in perspective. What does this mean? Is it that the JLP has come full circle and has made an about turn on Cuba? The last JLP administration severed relationship with Cuba and expelled its ambassador. Is this entourage to Cuba nothing more than political opportunism and expediency? Why should so many Cabinet ministers make the trip to Cuba even before they have sorted out the historic differences between the JLP and Cuba?
The trip to Cuba is not isolated for the contradictory policy signals being sent by the new administration; policy contradiction runs like a thread to the foreign policy. Recently, in the budget debate, Dr. Omar Davies put on record his appreciation to President Hugo Chavez and the people of Venezuela for the Petro Caribe facility. As Dr. Davies noted, this has been singularly the most beneficial foreign policy initiative from which Jamaica has ever benefited, as the facility has so far provided Jamaica with soft loan funds of U$500 million.
The members of the opposition applauded, while government members withheld their applause. When it is also recalled that the JLP organised a protest to coincide with the signing of the Petro Caribe agreement a few years ago, it is difficult to figure the basis on which the new administration is now courting Venezuela for fertiliser and LNG.
It can be argued that rather than being illustrative of policy contradiction and policy confusion, the foregoing merely indicates the degree of practicality and flexibility with which the new administration approaches its task. It may well be so, but they would be taking an awful lot for granted in approaching foreign nations in this manner. However, the policy contradiction, ideological vacuum and confusion go further and run deeper than the approaches to Venezuela and Cuba. It runs like a thread in the new administration.
Contradiction
The government and the PM in particular, has made a number of solemn pledges that he has contradicted by his actions. Mention has been made about the pledge of allegiance to uphold the Jamaican Constitution while allowing Daryl Vaz to continue to sit in Parliament when the court has already ruled that he is disqualified to sit in Parliament.
The PM promised to abolish the power of the PM to call elections on a whim. He said that within the first 100 days of taking office he would pilot legislation to abolish that power of the PM.
And yet as soon as he found the intention of Abe Dabdoub to pursue the appeal of the ruling of Mrs. Justice Zaila McCalla that a by-election should be held, to be unpalatable, Golding used the very power of the PM he depreciated, to threaten his political opponents with the prospect of snap elections. How then is the PM’s word to be taken? Can we dare to take him seriously when he speaks?
Governance was one of the buzzwords that were used by the JLP in its campaign.
It was going to develop an approach to governance that was gentler and more accountable to the people. Nothing that the JLP has done since taking office indicates that its approach to governance will vaguely approximate what it said in its manifesto. If anything, what we have seen so far proceeds in the opposite direction. There has been highhandedness and sometimes arrogance to its discourse. One does not need to rehash the manner in which it handled the recommendation of Professor Stephen Vasciannie to the post of Solicitor General or its dismissal of the members of the Public Service Commission (PSC) on a trumped-up charge of misbehavior because they refused to give in to the wishes of the PM; those are old stories. The mishandling of the Attorney General’s Chambers by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Senator Dorothy Lightbourne, that has precipitated a mass exodus of senior attorneys from that department, is also an old story.
What we saw this week of the Minister of Finance and the Public Service, Audley Shaw, addressing a group of public sector functionaries and threatening them with prison, smacked of someone wanting to re-incarnate the old time Jamaican ‘Busha’ addressing a group of field hands. Audley Shaw sees going to prison as the ultimate humiliation. This is not something that someone like Audley Shaw should relish doing: he has been the beneficiary of generous handling: he speaks of FINSAC as a bad thing, but it was very good to him.
Cassava casino
Nothing shows the ideological vacuum, contradiction and policy confusion of the present administration more than its announcement of the granting of two casino gambling licences. In the same budget debate that PM Golding with fanfare, made his announcement of casino, Minister of Agriculture, Dr. Chris Tufton, announced the cassava-ization of Jamaica. There are all kinds of problems associated with the eating of cassava. But one understands the spirit in which the minister made the announcement. It is self-reliance. It is as he said, eat what we grow and grow what we eat. This is a form of affirmation of the sense of self of the nation, an affirmation of its culture, its dignity, its legitimacy and its viability in the world of nation states.
In the same budget debate, PM Golding announced the introduction of casino gaming. The two approaches, one of self-reliance in support of our own industry and the other a promotion of an industry from which, of necessity, Jamaicans would have to be excluded, are mutually contradictory. We cannot have it both ways. If it is yes to cassava, it is no to casino!
It goes deeper than just that, however. PM Golding has appointed the Rev Al Miller to liaise with the churches on what he calls a “Fresh Start”. This is a renewal of core values and morals, which are at the heart of the viability and sustainability of the nation. The PM has pre-empted his own initiative by a repudiation of moral consideration as a basis for policy decisions. More than that, he has failed to consult the church. Like it or not, the church/the collective Christian presence in our midst, are legitimate stakeholders in this country. They deserve to be consulted, even if the PM had no intention of taking their advice. As it is, does the PM seriously believe that any moral ‘fresh start’ could succeed in a context where morality has been repudiated as a basis for policymaking?
Does the PM seriously expect that the church could maintain its credibility and play any role in his ‘fresh start’ initiative from a government which will go down in history as the government that brought casino gambling to Jamaica?
Casino gambling, it was said, was desired by the majority of the people of this country. It has turned out, if the most recent Don Anderson polls are to be believed, to be something opposed by the majority of Jamaicans. The majority of the persons polled said that they oppose casino gambling. Some 51 per cent strongly oppose, five per cent oppose, 27 per cent strongly support, 10 per cent support and seven per cent were unsure.
The best case is a 12-point differential in favour of those against. This begs the question of who really wants casino. It is not for the poor; it is for those who have always had their way. It will never alleviate poverty; tourism never does; the resort belt on the north coast from Negril to Ocho Rios is the squatter belt. The tourism industry has failed to make the social investment, whether in housing for workers in the industry or in paying their fair share of taxes in the country. All of this means there is lack of clarity in what is being done by way of the granting of casino licences. We have sacrificed moral consideration to simply exacerbate the gaps between the rich and the poor.
Mixed signals
It seems an eternity ago that I participated in a debate leading up to a general election as a part of the panel asking questions. Bruce Golding represented the JLP and Hugh Small represented the PNP. I asked both Mr. Small and Mr. Golding then to say what was the vision of Jamaica that was guiding their respective political parties, what kind of Jamaica did they want? Both of them waffled on the question; they had not thought of it. Today, all of these many years later, I raise the same question of Bruce Golding; what is his vision of Jamaica, what kind of Jamaica does he want? The answer has to form the basis of policy directions like a unifying and defining thread. To this point and even after his budget presentation that unifying thread is not clear.
There are mixed signals, there are contradictory approaches and, in fact, mutually exclusive options are being pursued. It is said that we are in a post-ideological world. This is not about any old ideology. This is about a central purpose. If you do not know where you are going, any road will take you there.
Related Articles:
Defending the rule of law US$10,000 in Cash Dr. Cassava Toughtimes The politics of dual citizenshi The budget debate Article Summary
Times Read: 128 Times Commented: 0Scroll down to comment
Comment