by Sir Arthur Foulkes
The captains and the kings (and nowadays the warrior queens) may leave the convention floor but they do not depart. In fact, one of the purposes of a national convention is to help get the captains and the troops all fired up to do battle in the wider political arena. This is particularly important before a general election.
It is not likely that there will be an early general election despite the predictions. Even so, both major political parties will be watching each other closely to see if one will attempt to pull off a special convention to launch its platform and introduce candidates.
The 2007 encounter can go as late as the middle of the year, and the later it goes the more likely the parties will be to stage such events.
But chances are that neither will go to the great expense of a regular week-long convention. The captains on both sides probably feel that their productions were great successes, and with some justification. They know too that they have some formidable obstacles ahead.
The high point of the FNM’s convention was without doubt the triumphant return of former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham to the leadership. Former PLP Senator Edison Key provided a big boost by openly declaring his allegiance to the opposition party.
For the PLP, the return of former CDR Leader Dr. Bernard Nottage to the fold was undoubtedly the high point even though it was a little disappointing to hear him declare that his act was ordained by God.
Dr. Nottage’s decision was, in a broader sense, a good one for Bahamian politics. Splinter parties are going nowhere and are generally a waste of potential talent. Dr. Nottage’s former CDR colleagues should now choose sides.
After the tumult, the shouting and the heady moments, the leadership of both parties will, if they are wise, reflect on the significant hurdles which confront them.
* * *
Hubert Ingraham has some serious fence-mending to do if he hopes to command the full and enthusiastic support of all FNM members and supporters. After all, the manner of his return was not exactly designed to inspire confidence and respect.
If the process of healing and confidence-building is to be successful, some of Mr. Ingraham’s supporters will have to stop aggravating matters by blaming FNMs for the disastrous defeat of 2002. It is a bit much to expect FNMs to swallow that.
It was not the “meanspiritedness” of rank and file FNMs which brought about the defeat, as suggested by Punch columnist The Scribe. It was the fault of the government and Mr. Ingraham must accept the major share of the blame for that. He had been Prime Minister for 10 years and right up to election day.
Mr. Ingraham was a great success as a political director and he and his government achieved wonders for the Bahamian people. But they made some mistakes, and because you do good does not mean you are free to treat the people with disrespect. Most notable among these mistakes was the way constitutional amendments were proposed and pursued, and Mr. Ingraham was directly responsible for that.
The days when people fell in line and followed the leader no matter what are over. Accountability, transparency and taking responsibility are now indispensable. A little humility also helps. Lynden Pindling took a long time to absorb this and he and his party were taught a bitter lesson in the end.
* * *
Perry Christie has more than his hands full. In addition to the multitude of problems facing the government in the country, the return of Dr. Nottage presents its own challenges for the internal dynamics of the PLP.
It is significant that Mr. Christie did not arrange it so that he could call Dr. Nottage to make his grand entrance while he was speaking Friday night. He was apparently not even in the hall when Dr. Nottage entered.
It is significant, too, that Dr. Nottage should say that the person most responsible for getting him to return was Trade and Industry Minister Leslie Miller. Mr. Miller is the most unruly member of Mr. Christie’s cabinet and has at times displayed utter contempt for the Prime Minister, the cabinet and the rules governing ministerial conduct.
Also, Mr. Miller was among those who supported Dr. Nottage in the nasty leadership fight which led to Mr. Christie’s ascendancy and Dr. Nottage’s bolting the party.
One of the things Mr. Christie is being roundly criticized for by friend and foe is his apparent unwillingness or inability to deal with errant ministers like Mr. Miller. Now, Mr. Miller’s hands would seem to be considerably strengthened by the return of his powerful friend to the party and, no doubt, to the cabinet.
Mr. Christie keeps insisting that he will lead the PLP into the next general elections but there are several hurdles he has to overcome in this regard.
One is a shift of the power balance in the party around the popular Dr. Nottage, and the absence of Sir Lynden Pindling to protect him in the councils of the party. Some see Dr. Nottage as towering over Mr. Christie in the competence department.
Then there are the lean and hungry ones in the party who have been nursing a desire to take over from Mr. Christie. One went so far as to declare his ambition after Mr. Christie’s illness.
Others have not been so clumsy but nevertheless see themselves as leaders in the not too distant future. The more astute ones have been doing what they are supposed to do and that is work and show loyalty and discipline. But all of those who remained faithful to the party and to the leader are now likely to feel a little agitated. This can be a further challenge for Mr. Christie.
Mr. Christie’s greatest problem is, of course, his health. His family and his doctors will no doubt give him good advice based on his own personal welfare. But the health or illness of a prime minister is a matter for the nation as well, and people are still concerned about it.
It may be that Mr. Christie intends to stand down before the election but will not say so now, and that would be understandable. Maybe that is why a proposed amendment to the Prime Minister’s Pension Act seeks to qualify him to receive a full pension after four years.
If he does stand down after four years, that will allow his party to elect a new leader and prime minister who can be in office for a year before leading his party into the general election. That is the way it is usually done in the parliamentary system of government.
The Canadians did it just recently. The British have done it before and, from all accounts, Prime Minister Tony Blair intends to step aside so his party can elect Chancellor Gordon Brown. What the FNM did in the run-up to the last election was a mistake.
* * *
I missed most of Mr. Christie’s convention speech but I am told that he quoted some passages from my last column to attack FNM Leader Hubert Ingraham.
Mr. Christie would do well to look at my comments about the noble art of politics and reflect on the record of some in his own party who have indulged in brazen character assassination, false allegations, abuse of conventions and boorish behaviour.
Comments