Tweet
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>Poor people's politics</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline>Common Sense</SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>John Maxwell
Sunday, October 15, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P class=StoryText align=justify>More than 40 years ago, when I was editor of Public Opinion, I happened to be present on two occasions when my paper was formally, ritually and publicly torn to shreds. One was in Parliament, when the minister of education, Mr Edwin Allen, tore the latest edition of the paper into small shreds as he attacked me for criticising the prime minister, Sir Alexander Bustamante.<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=157 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>John Maxwell </SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>A few weeks later, I happened to be present at a meeting of the PNP's National Executive Council (to which I had been elected at the Party's conference) as the leader of the PNP, Mr Norman Manley, ripped the paper into two or three pieces as he denounced "the editor" for my alleged snobbery. The reason was my description of the PNP KSA council as "small men doing small things".<P class=StoryText align=justify>I am reasonably certain that Mr Manley knew perfectly well that when I referred to 'small men' I was referring not to class, but to the petty behaviour of the councillors. He had to say something because I had offended one of the most powerful men in the party, the former mayor and party strongman, Frank Spaulding.<P class=StoryText align=justify>I remember all this because as I watched events unfold over the past two or three weeks, I wondered what Mr Manley would have made of the PNP's recent misfortunes.<P class=StoryText align=justify>He would not, I am certain, have tolerated the behaviour of any minister who managed to bring the party into discredit, as several of them have done recently. He would, I am sure, have used the opportunity to clean house, ruthlessly.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The fact that Mrs Simpson Miller has not done that is probably due to the fact that unlike Norman Manley, she does not yet enjoy the unchallenged authority he did. But it is a missed opportunity because had she fired two more ministers she would have put her authority beyond dispute - at least for the present.
The Trafigura affair, no matter how it ends, is a serious indictment of Jamaican politics, not simply of the PNP.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In this country, as in every other, no matter who signs the cheques, the people eventually and inevitably are the ones who pay. Let me explain by an analogy with radio broadcasting. Most people believe that radio broadcasting is a free good, like rain. In fact, the taxpayer/consumer pays at least twice for everything heard on radio.
The advertisements are paid for in the cost of the advertised product and the advertising budgets are subsidised by the taxpayer/consumer in the form of income tax allowances.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Similarly, the people who finance political parties do not do it as charitable work, but because they expect some form of return on the money they have invested in the parties. These returns may not be direct benefits to the financier, but may simply result in a friendlier and more profitable atmosphere in which he can operate.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Despite all the hooha, it is clear that all political parties in Jamaican history must have been financed by somebody, and those that survive have been the most successful in attracting contributions.
In the case of the PNP, the group structure does provide some fairly predictable cash for the party, but not enough for the party to survive. The JLP, without any group structure, is forced to rely even more substantially on
<SPAN class=Subheadline>Common Sense</SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>John Maxwell
Sunday, October 15, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P class=StoryText align=justify>More than 40 years ago, when I was editor of Public Opinion, I happened to be present on two occasions when my paper was formally, ritually and publicly torn to shreds. One was in Parliament, when the minister of education, Mr Edwin Allen, tore the latest edition of the paper into small shreds as he attacked me for criticising the prime minister, Sir Alexander Bustamante.<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=5 width=157 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>
</TD></TR><TR><TD><SPAN class=Description>John Maxwell </SPAN></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><P class=StoryText align=justify>A few weeks later, I happened to be present at a meeting of the PNP's National Executive Council (to which I had been elected at the Party's conference) as the leader of the PNP, Mr Norman Manley, ripped the paper into two or three pieces as he denounced "the editor" for my alleged snobbery. The reason was my description of the PNP KSA council as "small men doing small things".<P class=StoryText align=justify>I am reasonably certain that Mr Manley knew perfectly well that when I referred to 'small men' I was referring not to class, but to the petty behaviour of the councillors. He had to say something because I had offended one of the most powerful men in the party, the former mayor and party strongman, Frank Spaulding.<P class=StoryText align=justify>I remember all this because as I watched events unfold over the past two or three weeks, I wondered what Mr Manley would have made of the PNP's recent misfortunes.<P class=StoryText align=justify>He would not, I am certain, have tolerated the behaviour of any minister who managed to bring the party into discredit, as several of them have done recently. He would, I am sure, have used the opportunity to clean house, ruthlessly.<P class=StoryText align=justify>The fact that Mrs Simpson Miller has not done that is probably due to the fact that unlike Norman Manley, she does not yet enjoy the unchallenged authority he did. But it is a missed opportunity because had she fired two more ministers she would have put her authority beyond dispute - at least for the present.The Trafigura affair, no matter how it ends, is a serious indictment of Jamaican politics, not simply of the PNP.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In this country, as in every other, no matter who signs the cheques, the people eventually and inevitably are the ones who pay. Let me explain by an analogy with radio broadcasting. Most people believe that radio broadcasting is a free good, like rain. In fact, the taxpayer/consumer pays at least twice for everything heard on radio.
The advertisements are paid for in the cost of the advertised product and the advertising budgets are subsidised by the taxpayer/consumer in the form of income tax allowances.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Similarly, the people who finance political parties do not do it as charitable work, but because they expect some form of return on the money they have invested in the parties. These returns may not be direct benefits to the financier, but may simply result in a friendlier and more profitable atmosphere in which he can operate.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Despite all the hooha, it is clear that all political parties in Jamaican history must have been financed by somebody, and those that survive have been the most successful in attracting contributions.
In the case of the PNP, the group structure does provide some fairly predictable cash for the party, but not enough for the party to survive. The JLP, without any group structure, is forced to rely even more substantially on