I am attracted to the approach taken by former Senate President Floyd Morris in subjecting the two candidates vying for the presidency of the People’s National Party (PNP) to a SWOT analysis. This is a good starting point if we are to eliminate negativity about candidates in this or any other election, and try to establish a more objective basis on which to make our decision.

It is a good lesson for both the PNP and the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) if they are to preserve unity and allow the electorate to make the choice as to which party is best to govern, by playing to their strengths and not their weaknesses. The benefit to us from this approach is a more robust governance structure with a discerning electorate able to focus on those issues which matter most to their well-being and the future of Jamaica.

All of us, whether we are delegates or not, should have an interest in the upcoming PNP presidential election. We want the best of both political parties to be showcased; this is not a race to the bottom, it is the defining of a democracy that represents the best this country has to offer. The one winner in all this would be Jamaica.

In the September 3 General Election, it was clear from commentaries and analyses that an overwhelming victory by one party over another was not in the best interest of Jamaica. In a post-COVID era, the nation can ill-afford a lopsided Parliament as we struggle to find the best policies and programmes to ensure the country can recover stronger over the next five to 10 years. A solid Opposition is a good recipe for expanding the economic pie and ensuring equity in the distribution of its benefits.

The PNP has been a divided party for more than a decade. Its own analysis indicated that were it united it would have won the 2016 General Election. The disunity was patently obvious in the 2020 General Election — 127,679 fewer people voted for the PNP in 2020 as against 2016. Disunity is seen as the central cause.

Following on Dr Morris’ SWOT analysis, I want to construct a matrix to see how the candidates fare in an objective and balanced assessment. First, let me lay out the criteria I believe any political party should consider in choosing its leader. The weight attributed to each criterion will be influenced by the prevailing set of circumstances.

The three issues in this contest are: (i) party political history; (ii) characteristics of leadership; and (iii) experience around governance. The candidates’ knowledge of, and working experience in their political party has to be a consideration. We would want to know that the candidates understand the structures of the party and have served in leadership over time. This is important, but for the PNP it cannot be the most crucial. I give this 10 per cent.

The second criterion is the characteristics of leadership. This means the ability to unite, to generate consensus around issues, to motivate and to endear commitment and loyalty. This I give the weight of 60 per cent.

The third factor is experience. This is experience in governance and business. The leadership race is not only about winning, it is about governing a society and building a nation. This is given the weight of 30 per cent.

Using this model, I will be playing upon the strengths of both candidates.

Lisa Hanna has had a longer run inside the PNP, she is a four-term MP, and served as both chairman of the party’s Region 1 and treasurer of the party. Mark Golding, on the other hand, has been MP for two full terms and treasurer of the party. In assessing both candidates on this, I would give the following scores:

Political Experience

Weighted Score (10)

Mark Golding 6

Lisa Hanna 9

Regarding characteristics of leadership, there can be no electoral contest — whether politics, union or otherwise — without division. Division is a natural corollary of contest. What is most important is the ability and capacity of the leader to begin to mend fences immediately after victory. Both Lisa and Mark inherited divisions within their respective constituencies. To Mark’s credit he has been able to resolve those differences, at best contain them so they are not issues affecting the unity of the constituency. Whatever the source or cause of South East St Ann’s division, Lisa has not been able to contain it. If anything it seems to have worsened to the point where charges of anti-party behaviour had surfaced. This is not a condemnation of Lisa, it is a bearing on her leadership style and skills, which she has admitted may not have been the most engaging in the past.

Characteristics of Leadership Weighted Score (60)

Mark Golding 50

Lisa Hanna 30

The third factor is experience. Both served one term as minister. Lisa showed a ready grasp of her portfolio, was very engaging and down to earth. She would no doubt have learnt from those years about the workings of government and the bureaucratic challenges the leader has to face.

Mark, on the other hand, has a wider experience in business and politics. He was outstanding as a minister ensuring that the country met the conditionalities set by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in building out its legislative framework, as well as his service as chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, and Leader of Opposition Business in the Senate. My score would be as follows:

Experience Weighted Score (30)

Mark Golding 20

Lisa Hanna 15

With a pass mark of 50 per cent, both candidates have proven themselves to be suitable for the post of PNP president. The candidate with the higher score is Mark Golding at 76, and Lisa at 54 would certainly make a good deputy.

Danny Roberts, CD, JP is a senior lecturer and head of the Hugh Shearer Labour Studies Institute, The UWI Open Campus. He can be reached at strebord02@gmail.com

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/opinion/the-matrix-for-deciding-the-next-pnp-president_206733?profile=1013