Tweet
JLP in turmoil
Insiders say there's a plot to oust Holness, deputy leaders
BY VERNON DAVIDSON Executive editor — publications davidsonv@jamaicaobserver.com
Sunday, November 18, 2012
JAMAICA Labour Party (JLP) insiders yesterday said the court injunction filed by Everald Warmington on Friday to block the reinstatement of three of its four deputy leaders was part of a grand plot to wrest total control of the Opposition party.
According to the JLP sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, there are a number of individuals in the party who have their eyes on the leadership and wish to oust Andrew Holness, who took over the top job late last year after the resignation of Bruce Golding and led the party to a crushing general election defeat in December.
(Left) Desmond McKenzie. Audley Shaw.
1/2
"There are a few people with ambitions and they perceive Andrew as being weak, without any backbone and testosterone, [a leader] who tries to please everybody and won't take a stand; and they feel that if they control sufficient positions within the party they can take him out in a more decisive way," said one party insider.
On the eve of its scaled-down 69th annual conference, scheduled for today in Kingston, the JLP was rocked by the injunction filed in the Supreme Court.
Warmington, the controversial member of parliament for St Catherine South West, was contending that only deputy leader James Robertson was duly nominated.
The three deputy leaders targeted by Warmington's injunction are Audley Shaw, Christopher Tufton, and Desmond McKenzie.
Warmington was reported to have withdrawn the injunction yesterday. However, the JLP insiders who spoke to the Jamaica Observer questioned his motives, as, they said, all the leadership positions are in breach of the party's constitution.
According to one of the sources, the party's operations manual, which is legitimised by the constitution, states that members who are nominated for any post are required to be processed and approved by the selection committee.
"The truth is that none of the five positions — the leader and four deputies — that will come up for this conference have gone to the selection committee for processing and approval," said the insider. "Therefore, if one is to strictly interpret the rules of the constitution and operations manual, one could not be selective in just identifying the three deputy leaders who, because the constituencies that nominated them, were not registered as at March, and therefore had a technical breach. If you're going to cite a breach in that, you would also have to cite a breach in the selection committee not convening to consider all posts in the party."
The source said that there were other breaches of the constitution and gave as an example, the failure of constituency executives to meet monthly and send minutes of their meetings to the party secretariat.
"So, if Warmington's intention was to take a principled position in the interest of party constitution and operation, then he would have to extend the breaches that he has identified well beyond what he has brought to the Supreme Court," the source said.
The party insider accused Warmington of bringing the party into disrepute and charged that the move against Shaw, Tufton and McKenzie was "part of a grand scheme to fight for control of the party".
"Warmington is not standing for principle, he is pursuing an agenda that is tied into sinister motives," another insider charged, adding that the injunction has upset delegates.
Yesterday, the Sunday Observer was unable to contact Warmington for a comment as his phone went to voicemail.
When the newspaper contacted Shaw, he acknowledged that a number of breaches of the party's constitution existed.
"If you're looking for breaches of the constitution they're all over the place, and the breaches affect every leadership position in the party at the national and the constituency levels," Shaw said. "We therefore need to commit ourselves as a party to look at that."
Shaw, too, questioned Warmington's motives and shared the view that his position was not founded on principle.
"It cannot be a principled position that he is taking, because he, being such a keen watcher of everything, must be aware of these widescale breaches that exist all over the place. So if it is not a principled position, which is my conclusion, then it has to be some political opportunism at work here," said Shaw.
He said that, while Warmington has withdrawn the injunction, he wanted to warn against any attempt today to delay the election of the deputy leaders.
"I am telling the country and the party I will withdraw my name from any nomination for deputy leader if the elections tomorrow are put off," Shaw said yesterday. "I am firm in my position. I was nominated by the area council, there was no other nomination."
"The last time we started to take the party to court we stayed in the political wilderness for 18 long years and the people of the country suffered for it from mismanagement; we can't go back there," Shaw added. His reference was to the bitter leadership squabbles involving former leader Edward Seaga that dogged the party from the late 1990s to the early 2000s.
Yesterday, when the Sunday Observer contacted Tufton, he described the situation as unfortunate, and said it highlighted the need for the party to examine itself internally to ensure that the structures and rules that guide it are realistic, in the first instance, and are adhered to.
"It's unfortunate that an issue such as this could not be dealt with internally, rather, we end up in grandstanding, and now there are serious questions as to people's motives for taking this position, and it definitely speaks to the need for party discipline. If the party doesn't stand up for something it is not going to be viewed by the people of Jamaica as being a viable option, because it is not setting a good example of leadership and good governance," Tufton said.
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/...#ixzz2CbKz9TsY
Insiders say there's a plot to oust Holness, deputy leaders
BY VERNON DAVIDSON Executive editor — publications davidsonv@jamaicaobserver.com
Sunday, November 18, 2012
JAMAICA Labour Party (JLP) insiders yesterday said the court injunction filed by Everald Warmington on Friday to block the reinstatement of three of its four deputy leaders was part of a grand plot to wrest total control of the Opposition party.
According to the JLP sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, there are a number of individuals in the party who have their eyes on the leadership and wish to oust Andrew Holness, who took over the top job late last year after the resignation of Bruce Golding and led the party to a crushing general election defeat in December.
(Left) Desmond McKenzie. Audley Shaw.
1/2
"There are a few people with ambitions and they perceive Andrew as being weak, without any backbone and testosterone, [a leader] who tries to please everybody and won't take a stand; and they feel that if they control sufficient positions within the party they can take him out in a more decisive way," said one party insider.
On the eve of its scaled-down 69th annual conference, scheduled for today in Kingston, the JLP was rocked by the injunction filed in the Supreme Court.
Warmington, the controversial member of parliament for St Catherine South West, was contending that only deputy leader James Robertson was duly nominated.
The three deputy leaders targeted by Warmington's injunction are Audley Shaw, Christopher Tufton, and Desmond McKenzie.
Warmington was reported to have withdrawn the injunction yesterday. However, the JLP insiders who spoke to the Jamaica Observer questioned his motives, as, they said, all the leadership positions are in breach of the party's constitution.
According to one of the sources, the party's operations manual, which is legitimised by the constitution, states that members who are nominated for any post are required to be processed and approved by the selection committee.
"The truth is that none of the five positions — the leader and four deputies — that will come up for this conference have gone to the selection committee for processing and approval," said the insider. "Therefore, if one is to strictly interpret the rules of the constitution and operations manual, one could not be selective in just identifying the three deputy leaders who, because the constituencies that nominated them, were not registered as at March, and therefore had a technical breach. If you're going to cite a breach in that, you would also have to cite a breach in the selection committee not convening to consider all posts in the party."
The source said that there were other breaches of the constitution and gave as an example, the failure of constituency executives to meet monthly and send minutes of their meetings to the party secretariat.
"So, if Warmington's intention was to take a principled position in the interest of party constitution and operation, then he would have to extend the breaches that he has identified well beyond what he has brought to the Supreme Court," the source said.
The party insider accused Warmington of bringing the party into disrepute and charged that the move against Shaw, Tufton and McKenzie was "part of a grand scheme to fight for control of the party".
"Warmington is not standing for principle, he is pursuing an agenda that is tied into sinister motives," another insider charged, adding that the injunction has upset delegates.
Yesterday, the Sunday Observer was unable to contact Warmington for a comment as his phone went to voicemail.
When the newspaper contacted Shaw, he acknowledged that a number of breaches of the party's constitution existed.
"If you're looking for breaches of the constitution they're all over the place, and the breaches affect every leadership position in the party at the national and the constituency levels," Shaw said. "We therefore need to commit ourselves as a party to look at that."
Shaw, too, questioned Warmington's motives and shared the view that his position was not founded on principle.
"It cannot be a principled position that he is taking, because he, being such a keen watcher of everything, must be aware of these widescale breaches that exist all over the place. So if it is not a principled position, which is my conclusion, then it has to be some political opportunism at work here," said Shaw.
He said that, while Warmington has withdrawn the injunction, he wanted to warn against any attempt today to delay the election of the deputy leaders.
"I am telling the country and the party I will withdraw my name from any nomination for deputy leader if the elections tomorrow are put off," Shaw said yesterday. "I am firm in my position. I was nominated by the area council, there was no other nomination."
"The last time we started to take the party to court we stayed in the political wilderness for 18 long years and the people of the country suffered for it from mismanagement; we can't go back there," Shaw added. His reference was to the bitter leadership squabbles involving former leader Edward Seaga that dogged the party from the late 1990s to the early 2000s.
Yesterday, when the Sunday Observer contacted Tufton, he described the situation as unfortunate, and said it highlighted the need for the party to examine itself internally to ensure that the structures and rules that guide it are realistic, in the first instance, and are adhered to.
"It's unfortunate that an issue such as this could not be dealt with internally, rather, we end up in grandstanding, and now there are serious questions as to people's motives for taking this position, and it definitely speaks to the need for party discipline. If the party doesn't stand up for something it is not going to be viewed by the people of Jamaica as being a viable option, because it is not setting a good example of leadership and good governance," Tufton said.
Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/...#ixzz2CbKz9TsY
Comment