Tweet
What if the general elections result in a tie?
Geof Brown
Friday, May 18, 2007
My regular readers should know that I will not be around for the next month, being in faraway Ghana. The general elections may well be announced before my return. Speculation about the possible results and their implications was beginning to surface on my departure from the island.
Not surprisingly, in view of the recent opinion polls, pundits have begun to look at the likelihood of a tie between the governing PNP and the Opposition JLP. Since this a real possibility, it is hardly idle to throw in this column's two cents' worth, albeit from a considerable distance. First, how likely is that result, second, how could it work, and third what could be the implications for the nation - for those who are governed?
As the opinion polls now stand, a tie in the elections is a distinct possibility. That does not mean a 50-50 per cent tie necessarily, but one in which a difference of one or two seats would effectively reduce the winning party's majority to a crippled function. Something of this precarious functioning is illustrated in the Democratic majority in the United States Senate, where the illness of one member of the majority wipes out its razor-thin majority advantage. Thus, although the majority of the American populace is strongly against the war in Iraq, the Democratic congress is unable to override a presidential veto of its relevant legislative bill which would reflect the majority of the people's wishes in the matter.
Although the opinion polls suggest a functioning tie in the results of the coming elections, such a possibility is by no means a foregone conclusion. When the campaign begins in earnest, the respective strengths of the PNP leader Portia Simpson Miller and JLP leader Bruce Golding are going to spell the prospects for victory. Of late, Bruce is looking more like a politician who can stir masses, while Portia is looking more like a politician who can make stirring speeches. Witness the recent budget debate performances of the latter and the pre-campaign crowd-pleasing performances of the former. Although it has always been taken for granted that the charisma of Portia would override the technical competence of Golding, he is seeming to develop some measure of mass appeal.
Now that Portia has added public-speaking competence to her continuing popularity with the majority of the masses, we are promised a real match-up between herself and Bruce. When the public debates come into play, it will be a matter of great interest to see in which direction the scales will tip to enhance the fortunes of one over the other. The bunch of goodies unleashed in the budget presentation of the PM will be matched against the record of a government in power for 18 years. The Opposition will be put to the test of demonstrating how it will find the money for the extensive programmes and projects it laid out in the recent budget debate. Unless one or both can meet the challenges posed by the government's record on one hand and the elaborate Opposition promises on the other, the status of the opinion polls will no doubt remain and most likely guarantee a tie.
If the tie does take place, how would it work? If it is a dead-even tie, the governor-general would face an unenviable task. He would be called to exercise judgment as to which person as prime minister would command majority support in the House of Representatives. With the parties having equal numbers of seats, he might want to use the majority of votes cast for either party as his guide. Or he could follow the example of the Australian governor-general who nearly caused a constitutional crisis when he apparently favoured one party in a partisan way. We are not likely to see a half and half power sharing, where for half-term one of the leaders is PM followed by the Opposition leader as PM in the succeeding half. That was done in one jurisdiction, I forget where. Our version of the Westminster system encourages competition rather than collaboration.
By the same token, we are not likely to see a "let's sit down and work out an equity arrangement" between the two major political leaders. More likely would be some kind of provocation for an early re-election. However, the implications for the governed would see a real boon. For whichever party governs, it would be forced to run a tight ship. Even in a near 50-50 tie, a close result would inevitably sharpen the efficiency of the government and a drastic reduction in party favouritism and possible corruption. Each party would necessarily be on its best behaviour in the hope of prevailing as the majority party the next time around.
On the face of things at the moment, we are in for interesting times in the politics of our nation.
browngeof@hotmail.com
Geof Brown
Friday, May 18, 2007
My regular readers should know that I will not be around for the next month, being in faraway Ghana. The general elections may well be announced before my return. Speculation about the possible results and their implications was beginning to surface on my departure from the island.
Not surprisingly, in view of the recent opinion polls, pundits have begun to look at the likelihood of a tie between the governing PNP and the Opposition JLP. Since this a real possibility, it is hardly idle to throw in this column's two cents' worth, albeit from a considerable distance. First, how likely is that result, second, how could it work, and third what could be the implications for the nation - for those who are governed?
As the opinion polls now stand, a tie in the elections is a distinct possibility. That does not mean a 50-50 per cent tie necessarily, but one in which a difference of one or two seats would effectively reduce the winning party's majority to a crippled function. Something of this precarious functioning is illustrated in the Democratic majority in the United States Senate, where the illness of one member of the majority wipes out its razor-thin majority advantage. Thus, although the majority of the American populace is strongly against the war in Iraq, the Democratic congress is unable to override a presidential veto of its relevant legislative bill which would reflect the majority of the people's wishes in the matter.
Although the opinion polls suggest a functioning tie in the results of the coming elections, such a possibility is by no means a foregone conclusion. When the campaign begins in earnest, the respective strengths of the PNP leader Portia Simpson Miller and JLP leader Bruce Golding are going to spell the prospects for victory. Of late, Bruce is looking more like a politician who can stir masses, while Portia is looking more like a politician who can make stirring speeches. Witness the recent budget debate performances of the latter and the pre-campaign crowd-pleasing performances of the former. Although it has always been taken for granted that the charisma of Portia would override the technical competence of Golding, he is seeming to develop some measure of mass appeal.
Now that Portia has added public-speaking competence to her continuing popularity with the majority of the masses, we are promised a real match-up between herself and Bruce. When the public debates come into play, it will be a matter of great interest to see in which direction the scales will tip to enhance the fortunes of one over the other. The bunch of goodies unleashed in the budget presentation of the PM will be matched against the record of a government in power for 18 years. The Opposition will be put to the test of demonstrating how it will find the money for the extensive programmes and projects it laid out in the recent budget debate. Unless one or both can meet the challenges posed by the government's record on one hand and the elaborate Opposition promises on the other, the status of the opinion polls will no doubt remain and most likely guarantee a tie.
If the tie does take place, how would it work? If it is a dead-even tie, the governor-general would face an unenviable task. He would be called to exercise judgment as to which person as prime minister would command majority support in the House of Representatives. With the parties having equal numbers of seats, he might want to use the majority of votes cast for either party as his guide. Or he could follow the example of the Australian governor-general who nearly caused a constitutional crisis when he apparently favoured one party in a partisan way. We are not likely to see a half and half power sharing, where for half-term one of the leaders is PM followed by the Opposition leader as PM in the succeeding half. That was done in one jurisdiction, I forget where. Our version of the Westminster system encourages competition rather than collaboration.
By the same token, we are not likely to see a "let's sit down and work out an equity arrangement" between the two major political leaders. More likely would be some kind of provocation for an early re-election. However, the implications for the governed would see a real boon. For whichever party governs, it would be forced to run a tight ship. Even in a near 50-50 tie, a close result would inevitably sharpen the efficiency of the government and a drastic reduction in party favouritism and possible corruption. Each party would necessarily be on its best behaviour in the hope of prevailing as the majority party the next time around.
On the face of things at the moment, we are in for interesting times in the politics of our nation.
browngeof@hotmail.com