Prime Minister Dr. Hubert Minnis has sent sufficient signals to suggest that he intends to call an early election, perhaps before mid-year.
But instead of the electorate’s focus being directed to what the administration says are its accomplishments to date, attention in recent days has shifted to speculation about Free National Movement (FNM) incumbents being torn from the party’s slate.
This weekend, reports and social media claims that incumbents Peter Turnquest, East Grand Bahama; Dr. Duane Sands, Elizabeth; and Michael Pintard, Marco City, may not be renominated to contest seats in the upcoming general election, prompted fervent discussions and queries about what is true regarding the FNM’s selection of candidates.
How the electorate views the governing party’s candidate process is important.
Voters punish parties that appear to be divided, and they do not like the scent of untowardness in a party’s handling of those who have faithfully served in Parliament during a term.
Given that public sentiment toward the governing party is frigid at best, punishment at the polls may be exceptionally harsh if popular incumbents fail to make the cut.
Over the weekend, a communication by Turnquest went viral on the WhatsApp messenger service, advising colleagues that he was informed by Minnis that he will not receive a nomination for East Grand Bahama, and that he was putting all campaign activities on hold until final confirmation or otherwise, is received from the party’s Central Council, which ratifies election candidates.
When asked by Perspective whether he was disappointed by Minnis’ communication to him, Turnquest said, “I’m not yet ready to comment on that. As you know, this is a process. A position has been put, as I would have indicated to my colleagues and I don’t know how that message got out; it wasn’t intended to be out.
“But Council will decide whenever they meet, whether that is a ratified position, and at that time, I may have a comment, but at the moment, it’s premature.”
We understand that executives of the FNM’s East Grand Bahama association have formally expressed concerns internally, regarding a lack of consultation with the association on the fate of their incumbent.
Association chairman Dereck King declined comment when contacted, indicating that due to the fluid nature of the matter, he did not wish to go on the record at this time.
When we contacted Sands, he refuted social media claims that he received the same phone call from the party’s leader as did Turnquest, and sought to respond to such claims by posting photos of his and his team door-to-door campaign work occurring at the same time the online claims emerged.
Incumbent MP for Garden Hills Brensil Rolle was not given the nod for his constituency, and following the party’s announcement of a new standard-bearer, told The Nassau Guardian that he had not yet had the opportunity to advise his constituents of his retirement.
That statement raised a question of whether Rolle knew before the party’s ratification announcement that he would not be renominated, since conventional wisdom suggests that an incumbent who has decided to retire from frontline politics, would advise his constituents beforehand of the same.
On Grand Bahama, public sentiment about Michael Pintard’s quality of representation is generally favorable, and in response to social media speculation that left him inundated with phone calls this weekend, Pintard told us, “I fully expect to be the standard bearer come next election in Marco City.
“I’m busy working on initiatives that will improve the quality of people’s lives and I’m not preoccupied with an election. When that time comes, I’ll turn my attention to that.”
Distraction is the thief of time and opportunity in politics, and this weekend certainly provided more than enough distraction for incumbents and new candidates alike.
Sunday evening, Minnis issued a statement on the party’s candidate selection process and the need for “ongoing renewal of the FNM”, saying, “The party is grateful for the service of all incumbents who are moving on. They have been instrumental in helping our administration advance policies to empower Bahamians.
“There will be much public speculation as decisions are made as to who will and who will not run. Out of respect and courtesy, our party will first privately inform those incumbents who will not be nominated again before we make public announcements.”
This statement, written in the future tense, perhaps adds to speculation, because it raises the question of how many more FNM incumbents currently believe they will be the standard bearer, but are about to be told otherwise.
Of course, both major political parties have the right to decide not to run an incumbent, but the way the process is handled opens a party up to untamed speculation and criticism, not to mention dissension in the ranks, should party members adopt the view that an incumbent supported by his or her constituency association, has been treated unfairly.
A year is an
eternity in politics
British conservative politician R. A. Butler once said, “a week is a long time in politics”.
Should the prime minister call an election around the time period many speculate, he would be surrendering as much as a full year of the five-year mandate overwhelmingly granted to him and his party by the Bahamian electorate.
As with a specter of disunity in one’s party, crafting a campaign message that asks for five more years while choosing not to fulfill one’s original five-year mandate, has ramifications.
Already, the talk on the ground is that the government is seeking to hold an election prior to the tabling of the 2021/2022 fiscal budget, because that budget could contain taxes and public sector scale backs, which could all but annihilate its subsequent chances at the polls.
But if voters buy into the possibility of a harsh austerity budget on the horizon, the FNM would be hard pressed to mount a campaign that successfully responds to the allegation that a vote for the FNM is a vote for higher taxes and job losses that Bahamians would be stuck with for another five-year term.
If an early election is called, a legitimate question is why the government would have opted to forfeit what could have been an additional year’s worth of effort to make good on its campaign pledges — the majority of which that have yet to be fulfilled.
After all, those pledges make up a party’s trust charter with the electorate, and if most of the charter is unfulfilled, what legitimate basis does a party have to ask for a fresh mandate?
On the heels of being ratified to contest Freetown once again, the FNM’s standard bearer Dionisio D’Aguilar told reporters, “I think the Free National Movement and myself are the best candidates to deliver on our promises.”
The published declarations of the plans of political parties contain hundreds of general and specific pledges, and in the case of the FNM’s Manifesto, several core pledges are made that become the cornerstone of the party’s campaign.
In its 2017 manifesto, 11 such core pledges were made including the seminal pledges of introducing term limits for prime ministers; introducing a recall system for non-performing MPs; establishing the Office of Ombudsman; establishing fixed election dates and pursuing a constitutional amendment to create an independent boundaries commission; amending the Public Disclosure Act to include campaign finance reform, and ensuring the timely submission of all mandated reports to the House of Assembly.
None of these seminal pledges have been fulfilled, to date.
Potentially surrendering a full year of governance at a time when critical questions remain about the administration’s plan to lead the country out of the COVID-19 crisis, sends a signal to voters that the administration has no confidence in its ability to convincingly lay out that plan and chart a road to progress, in the time remaining in its term.
It also sends a signal that the party is scared to lose the election, and is willing to take its chances with catching the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and other parties off guard, than with giving the Bahamian people five years worth of work for the five-year mandate it was entrusted with.
If that signal is true, the salient question then becomes, why should the Bahamian people trust the administration with another five years, if the administration does not trust its own ability to adequately complete its current five-year mandate?
The post Trust on trial appeared first on The Nassau Guardian.
source https://thenassauguardian.com/trust-on-trial/
No comments:
Post a Comment