The Persecution of the Minority Part 2

I sought the feedback of a number of friends I respect regarding Part 1, and the ethical dilemma I face. To recap, I strongly believe in individual liberty and equal rights, as well as have a deep, lifelong belief in Christian principles. When it comes to the acceptance of homosexuals rights to associate and form unions, my ethical principles appear to collide.

Principle 1 is my Christian belief, imperfect as I am in its practice and manifestation. Christ’s example is one of tolerance and attention to the rejected and downtrodden of his society. On more than one occasion, he is seen facing down mobs intent of dishing out natural justice to the perceived sinful. We are familiar with the story of Jesus’ defence from stoning of a woman accused of adultery. ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone’ is regularly quoted in our Christian society.

Principle 2, that of individual freedom, equal rights and access to justice, is deeply held by Jamaicans. Stop by any roadblock, protest or demonstration, and the familiar phrases ring out. ‘Wi have wi rights!’ or ‘Wi want justice!’ Jamaicans become viscerally enraged at instances or depictions of racism or class prejudice. Barack Obama’s achievement of the US presidency was tantamount to a national holiday. We have Mandela Park and Mandela Highway. Marcus Garvey is a National Hero. Martin Luther King Jr is lionized as the great Christian Soldier, fighting for civil rights in the US.

In my mind, it is straightforward to hold Principles 1 and 2 when someone who looks like me is being treated in a hateful and discriminatory fashion. I can identify with the person. In the words of Barack Obama earlier this year regarding a nationally controversial case, ‘If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon Martin’.

Am I willing to extend the same consideration to someone who is not ‘one of us’? At this point, my aversion to homosexuality overrides my proclaimed Principle 2.

Perhaps it is just human to live with the ethical dilemma.

The Persecution of the Minority Part 1

Homosexuals have come increased great public fire of late, mostly so in the aftermath of US President Obama’s personal statement on their right to marriage. The local upsurge in public indignation caused me to think seriously about my own objections to the possibility of gay marriages. It’s a matter of heart versus head.

A democratic society is based on the principle of majority rule. Many constitutions speak of citizen’s rights to the pursuit of happiness. These hallowed documents also speak to freedom from religious, or other forms of, persecution. Finally, the matter of equal protection under the law is a predominant principle.

On the other hand, most (if not all) organized religions on Earth have serious sanctions against homosexual practice. It’s just wrong. No more arguments are needed.

So, in a world such as ours, how are we to stay true to the principle of a free society of individuals pursuing self -actualization, while holding fast to deeply held personal philosophies of wrong and right?

Power Corrupts…Absolutely

‘Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’. Like the wiles of an alluring exotic dancer, power unceasingly beckons to men and women, no matter how pure and humble their beginnings.

There are quite a few new candidates being prepared for nomination in the upcoming General Elections. All are saying that they are coming with fresh, different and altruistic intentions. The young new Prime Minister speaks of ‘transformational leadership’.

Most Jamaicans greet these pronouncements with yawns and, maybe, faint interest. We have been there and done that. The real surprise will be if these candidates actually retain their virginal qualities in the political den of deceipt, corruption and ‘party solidarity’.

One problem lies in our political structure. The Prime Minister’s post is designed to be contingent on party support. Andrew Holness cannot dismiss Mike Henry, as Minister of Transport, for the JDIP affair without losing support of other JLP MPs, putting his position as PM in serious jeopardy. So he must bear with what most see as Henry’s corruption, or charitably, as his inexplicable ignorance. This casts the PM in the morally repugnant position of his actions not being in line with his continually broadcast words.

One candidate, whom I admire personally, said through Twitter that she would bring a fresh approach to problem diagnosis and solution. I am concerned about what she, and other newcomers, will do when faced with the decision of ‘right’ versus ‘the party position’. In Jamaica, these often do not coincide.

When the Americans vigourously debated their new form of Government in the 1780s to 1790s, the guiding principle was how to limit any individual’s control on absolute power. These ‘Founding Fathers’ knew well of the corruptive effects of power. Even today, US politicians try to push the bounds of their Constitution, always trying to reach out the tempting allure of power.

In Jamaica, our politicians only abide by the Constitution when it is in their party’s interest (Dudus and Golding). Any changes to Jamaica’s Constitution must come from the same Parliament that benefits from some of its most vulgar abuses. Our MPs clearly have too much power, and worse are completely unaccountable to the citizenry.

Can we really expect change from this state of affairs? Will politicians willingly give up power? The answer is clear.

Regardless, we, or rather, I, need to think about how Jamaica can overcome this massive obstacle. Without that, we have another 50 years of frustration and disappointment to endure.

Marlon Johnson
St. Ann
mhj007@gmail.com

Central Government Much Too Involved At Local Level

The article ‘Mayor Unhappy with Low Property Tax Compliance’ in Tuesday’s Gleaner raises some serious concerns.

Per the Mayor of Montego Bay, Charles Sinclair, residents’ property taxes are sent to the central government’s Consolidated Fund. Then the various Local Governments, through the Parish Council, apply for disbursements from the Consolidated Fund to fix roads, etc. This is a massive corruption of good governance principles.

I think eighty (80) percent of local taxes should stay in the Parish or town/community in which it was collected. The remaining 20 percent should be put into something like the Equalization Fund for providing infrastructure assistance to poorer towns/communities. It would then be the responsibility of the residents of each area to hold their local government accountable for the collection and judicious use of these funds.

A casual trip anywhere in Jamaica will reveal the terrible state of public infrastructure. Recently, TVJ’s Prime Time News carried a report about a section of local road in Bog Walk that collapsed into a nearby river. The MP for the constituency complained that she had reported the issue to the NWA. The road would be repaired on the NWA’s schedule.

Why should such a pressing local matter be held hostage to the Central Government’s list of priorities? A taxi driver, workers, business people, or school children affected by the road collapse in Bog Walk couldn’t care less in the need to fix a road in Hanover, or in Portland.

Let local taxes stay in the community/Parish. Local governments must retain this funding to deal with their responsibility to improve the infrastructure and provide excellent services for residents.

Government Must Offer More Reasoned Arguments

In response to critiques from the public, I am disappointed to hear poor, infantile reasoning emanating from various Cabinet members.

The Jamaicans for Civil Society Coalition pointed out that MP Shahine Robinson comes with the baggage of her very public dual citizenship trial as well as a massive lawsuit pending. They are concerned about her inclusion in Holness Cabinet. Robinson contends that first matter has been addressed in court, and the second is pending: she believes she can proceed unencumbered. She goes further to express surprise that civil society ‘objects to inclusion of a woman’ in the Cabinet. She claims they had been agitating all along for more women to be involved at that level. Ms. Robinson appears to deliberately muddle the valid legal concerns with a base sexist appeal.

JTA’s objection to the PM’s decision to keep hands-on responsibility for Education is rebuffed by the Minister of Information. The Minister pointed out that Seaga held Finance responsibility throughout his tenure as PM; Manley held Agriculture responsibility for a year. No reasonable argument is advanced to satisfy concerns of the JTA – no explanation of the logic of this decision or what strategy the new PM will employ to keep all the balls in the air.

The Opposition expresses concern about what it sees as ‘waste’ and a ‘self-promoting exercise’ in the Ministry of Tourism’s decision to take out full page advertisements to highlight Jamaica’s recognition at World Travel Awards. The Minister of Tourism fires back that Opposition being ‘mean-spirited’ and hopes for a more cooperative atmosphere in the future. There is no actual explanation of the reasoning for the large ad expenditure, what it was meant to achieve strategically, and whether it did so.

Like it or not, these are among the people charged to lead Jamaica. PM Holness must push his team members to present well reasoned defenses of their actions or positions. Too many weak arguments of misdirection continue to be presented in response to valid public concerns. This needs to change.

PM and Party Leader Roles Not the Same

Our Prime Minister is not directly elected by the people. Constitutionally, the Members of Parliament, as our representatives, pick one of their number to lead the management of our national affairs.

They tell the Governor General who the choice is, and she/he becomes PM. Time is now going to be wasted as Jamaica waits for a JLP party conference to first designate a Party Leader, who will then be de facto PM. That is certainly backwards and unconstitutional!

The current PM is toying with the Constitution by effectively allowing his party’s delegates to pick Jamaica’s new leader. This is a travesty. If the JLP decides to select the new PM (per Parliament’s choice) as leader in their party private activities, that is their business. But we shouldn’t all be held hostage by the JLP’s delegates.

Regarding Mr. Holness, there hasn’t been an investigative assessment in the press of his tenure as Minister of Education. From all indications, much has happened under his watch, and it would be good to learn more about his achievements and challenges there.

Similarly, there has not been much analysis of his work as Member of Parliament for West Central St. Andrew. TVJ and CVM-TV both visited his constituency for feedback from citizens. I do not want to base my assessment of his performance as MP on their reports, but I was dismayed at what I saw on screen.

Per our parliamentary system, Mr. Holness as PM will have virtually unlimited power in Jamaica. Even though he won’t really need to, I would hope to see some evidence that he can temper his approach and work with opposing MPs on national issues. Again, such evidence has not been presented, to my knowledge.

What will Mr. Holness do when faced with roadblocks to his agenda put up by members of his own party? It would be encouraging to hear about instances of fortitude when he has had faced down Members who were determined not to move his way.

At this time, Parliament’s House of Representives (the rightful body) must get together immediately to select a Prime Minister. That person goes to knock on the GG’s door, presents himself for swearing in and, baps, wi done.

Jamaica’s priority is on stability in Jamaica House, not on what happens on Belmont Road. For God’s sake, for Jamaica’s sake, pick a PM and get on with it. It ought to be a very simple process.

That’s the law.

Cronyism in Election Vehicle Policy

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I am outraged by the article titled ‘New policy for election vehicle imports’ in The Sunday Gleaner (October 9, Page A11).

Per the article, some time ago, the two major political parties granted themselves the privilege of importing vehicles at a much lower rate than offered to private citizens or businesses. Further, the privilege only applies to the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and the People’s National Party (PNP), as the policy doesn’t cover ‘minor’ parties.

To a private citizen, this whole thing stinks of cronyism.

Why should these private political groups be treated differently from me, a citizen? The JLP and PNP should be using their private, donated funds to purchase the equipment they need for campaigning. They should pay the standard rates and duties to import their items.

This policy further highlights the almost criminal blurring of the lines between Government and party in Jamaica.

This policy should be discontinued immediately. One rule for everyone – cut out all these unfair and corrupt concessions and loopholes.

Marlon Johnson

mhj_007@hotmail.com