Who better represents whom.

[Reggaedoc]

I have been observing Jamaican representative politics for a long period of time, and have not been able to discern whether constituents are better represented by MPs who are originally from within, or without the areas they represent. I know P. Charles is originally from St. Thomas and represented the people from that parish very effectively in the old days. How does that compare to his representation of his current constituent in Clarendon, or St. Elizabeth. Vaz is from St. Andrew, and seems to be doing a reasonably good job in representing his west Portland constituents. Dr. Donald Rhodd is originally from Portland, and he seems to be a terrible representative of the people from whom he came. He continues to be a backbencher after many years, and the development of E. Portland seems to be the most stymied of any constituency in the country. Babsy Grange is from Kingston, or St. Anderw and represents her St. Catherine constituency very poorly, as per the citizens themselves. This despite her high profile, and dynamic personality. There are many more examples, but can anyone point to a general pattern?

[Assasin]

Not all Dr.Rhodd's fault although I am not impressed with him.

[Reggaedoc]

I think you might be right. He is probably far brighter than Vaz, probably more honest, but lacks a dynamic personality. In the end the people suffer. Bad roads etc.

[Assasin]

Vaz have way more passion and drive for constituency development.
Some a di roads etc. inna East Portland are way above any MP payscale but Rhodd could do more to foster development.

[Hortical]

I am not sure it matters whether the elected official is from the area they represent in parish councils or in parliament in Jamaica. The most important ting is effective representation and being responsive to dem constituents.

Mi prefer the yankee model whey yuh represent the place whey yuh live....

[1of1]

gaurd di place weh yuh live