Wednesday, May 11, 2011

It would be miraculous if Branville McCartney’s Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party won the next general election

Third party political influence

thenassauguardian editorial




Branville McCartney is set to unveil his Democratic National Alliance (DNA) party tomorrow night. McCartney is taking the leap and challenging the two main parties at the next general election. At this stage, despite claims by unnamed sources via the media, it is unclear if McCartney will field a full slate of candidates or if he will focus his attempt on competitive swing seats.

It would be miraculous if McCartney’s party won the next election. A victory for the DNA would be winning three to six seats. Such a victory would establish the organization as a real party. If McCartney wins his seat and is the only DNA member in the House of Assembly, that should still be considered a victory of sorts for the fledgling party.

But even if Bran and his candidates all lose the constituency races they enter, they can still influence the election another way.

Thus far, the two main political parties have not released manifestos. We do not know what their plans are for the mandate they seek. If McCartney comes out tomorrow or soon after with a manifesto with ideas on how to tackle the major problems facing the country, and these ideas are sensible, he could force the major parties to also take a stand on these issues.

For example, it seems as if there are more illegal number houses in New Providence that food stores. Thus far, the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and Free National Movement (FNM) have ignored the issue. Over the last few years the number bosses have come out of the shadows. They have logos on their businesses, they advertise and one has even made a public donation to a government agency.

Clearly a final solution to this issue is needed. If Bahamians want to gamble, then gambling should be legalized. If it is determined that gambling will remain illegal, the number houses should be shut down. The FNM promises a referendum on the issue if elected. The PLP has no comment on the controversial issue thus far. To put it simply: neither has a position.

This is not leadership.

Crime is another issue. In fact, it is likely the major issue of concern for Bahamians. Yet, both major parties say crime is not a political issue. That is a stupid conclusion. All major issues facing a people are political. Governments are elected to address the problems of the time. If a party has no ideas regarding the major issue of concern for a people it should not offer itself as a potential government.

As we have mentioned before, McCartney must be patient if he is serious about creating a party that one day could win an election.

The PLP was formed in 1953 mostly by a group of white and light-skinned black Bahamians. The party was taken over by others and rebranded as a black nationalist party. That PLP finally won a general election, under the electoral rules of the day, in 1967.

The FNM was formed in 1971. It battled the PLP for more than two decades before finally winning a general election in 1992.

McCartney may fail this time, and he may fail miserably. If he is truly concerned about The Bahamas, and is not just pursuing vain ambition, he should use this campaign to demonstrate that he has solutions to the major problems facing Bahamians.

Such a campaign should force the major parties to also take clear actionable positions on major issues too. In the political marketplace of The Bahamas there is a duopoly. A serious third option could cause there to be competition in the marketplace of ideas. This is needed. Bahamians want to know what will be done about the shantytown problem that particularly affects New Providence and Abaco. We do not just want to hear, “Well, that’s just the way it is and always will be.”

It is all but certain that the PLP or FNM will form the next government of The Bahamas. The problem is that both parties have become stale and unimaginative. A little provocation by a third party would be a good thing. Hopefully it would make the parties focus on transformative governance again rather than maintaining the status quo.

5/11/2011

thenassauguardian editorial