Commentary by Capil Bissoon
PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad – The People’s National Movement (PNM) has, despite a legal challenge from the United National Congress (UNC), won the September 7th General Elections and while there must be disappointment among the rank and file, the time has come for the UNC to face some realities.
First on the agenda is the fact that the 23/18 score could have been much worse. Two years ago the UNC suffered a series of crushing defeats – Tobago House of Assembly (THA) elections losing every seat; the Chaguanas West bye-election losing every polling division; the St Joseph constituency bye-election; and the local government elections.
In this context, and given the trajectory of past defeats during the last administration, a 33/3 type scenario which the PNM faced in 1986 after George Chambers demitted office was not beyond the realm of possibilities.
The loss also provides the UNC the opportunity to do some intense soul searching in terms of developing a 21st century party structure. My information is that there are no viable UNC party groups operating in any constituency even while the party was in government. Former chairman of the party Jack Warner established 41 party groups in Chaguanas West alone and that was in part the basis for his electoral success in 2013. He did not do so, perhaps deliberately, in the 40 others.
Compare that with the PNM, which, as far as I know, has functioning party groups in almost every constituency even while in opposition and even where sitting MPs did not exist. That structure provides a formidable election campaign machinery that operates almost instinctively once elections are called.
Press conferences after regular PNM general council meetings have become a feature of our lives. This is not the case on the other side.
The absence of a strong viable party structure, which founder Basdeo Panday bequeathed to the UNC since he liked to be in total control, means that strong individuals in the party, including sitting MPs, especially if they hold powerful ministries and are financially well resourced, have too much power in decision making. They can if they choose undermine the leadership and advance personal ambitions. It is vitally important for the UNC to work out a consensually agreed upon power relationship between the leader, the party, financiers, and lastly the MPs especially when the party is in government.
If this is not done quickly the party will continue to be a victim of internecine struggles, personal agendas, inordinate power of financiers and lack a clearly understood pathway for dealing with issues like succession planning, development of a functioning election campaign machinery, and involvement of the rank and file in party decision making.
The party also needs to develop an overarching philosophy, which authentically derives from its history, is consensually developed and serves to differentiate it from others especially the PNM.
To my mind the PNM is the party of big government and built into its DNA is the belief that government can solve most of the problems which citizens face. It is PNM that introduced the welfare state concept complete with DWED as it was then called, “perspectives for a new society” to control the commanding heights of the economy in the interest of the citizenry and the then Carnival Development Committee to control carnival.
The UNC on the other hand because of its sugar cane history and the fact that for most of our independence was not in government (and therefore was not in a position to offer largesse to supporters) comes out of a more self-reliant, entrepreneurial tradition.
The UNC therefore ought to be the party of small government where stress should be placed on individual initiative with a facilitative state bureaucracy. This is the kind of overarching philosophy that the UNC needs to guide its plans, policies and programs in and out of government.
I see the PNM as akin to the Democratic Party in the US while the UNC should have a character more in line with that of the Republican Party.
But these are matters for the party to decide. It seems that it would be more fruitful and productive for the party to take this time off, as Patrick Manning did in 1986 when he faced a 33/3 situation, to introspect, plan and build formidable party structure.
As the party begins its period of introspection it has on the table a legal challenge to the September 7th elections with regards to the EBC’s decision to extend polls by one hour on polling day. I understand that on purely legal grounds the party has a more than even chance of winning. Let us see where that goes.
ADVERTISEMENT
