AT THIS TIME there are two elections pending in the Caribbean and the more casual commentators are often tempted to assume that the trend established in the more recent contests will automatically inform the outcome of the current contests.
This inclination often manifests itself regarding elections which produce a change of government; hence after Antigua, St Kitts and Guyana, many people presume that Trinidad and St Vincent are foregone conclusions.
Ironically, this “analysis” conveniently ignores the more compelling examples that have gone against this trend such as Dominica and more recently the British Virgin Islands (BVI). In both instances there were compelling theoretical grounds on which the incumbents could have been defeated. In Dominica the Dominica Labour Party was a third-term government and these have traditionally struggled in this region, while in the BVI they have seldom not changed governments; hence the success of Dr Smith’s National Democratic Party broke new ground.
The regional analyst must fully appreciate the benefit of drawing lessons from elections in neighbouring countries; however it is also important to appreciate the distinctions which can often be equally as compelling. The case of the Gonsalves Unity Labour Party (ULP) appears to be one incumbent that is “ripe for the picking”. The ULP has been in office since 2000 and under the leadership of the same individual.
The margin of victory in 2000 was significant and has been eroded in 2005 and 2010, with the latter victory being “razor thin”. The 2015 election will therefore be a fourth-term effort for Prime Minister Gonsalves, who will be attempting to walk on hallowed regional ground which few Caribbean prime ministers have experienced recently. St Lucia’s Anthony and Antigua’s Spenser lost on their third attempts, while Barbados’ Arthur lost on his fourth and St Kitts’ Douglas lost on his fifth.
In many ways Gonsalves is better placed than some of his contemporaries who faced similar circumstances, and of particular interest are the Barbados and St Kitts cases. In the latter instance, the major handicap that Douglas faced was a major schism within his party which has already been compared with a political earthquake. The impact of such schisms ought to be analysed separately; however, it is a major feature of the St Kitts case that created vulnerability.
As we in Barbados learned in 1986 and 1999 the departure of significant personalities from a party can be devastating and in this instance Prime Minister Harris broke new ground by effectively leaving the government, assuming the leadership of the opposition and successfully defeating the man who led him in three elections.
Gonsalves has, however, never been challenged openly within his organisation and as such there is no Harris waiting to emerge, or Don Blackman helping to propel the Barbados Labour Party towards its worst electoral defeat in history. But there are several political personalities of significant interest in St Vincent, such as Ken Boyea who challenged Gonsalves in the past, but has more recently appeared more interested in business than politics. Then there is the notoriously eloquent and distinguished Sir Louis Straker, who was formerly Gonsalves deputy and seemed like a logical successor until he retired from politics in 2010. He is now back on the ULP ticket and presumably reinvigorated, but has thus far expressed no opposition to Gonsalves.
The Barbados comparison requires that one compare the opponents of Arthur in 2008 with that of Gonsalves now. Arthur beat Thompson once before Thompson emerged victorious, while Gonsalves has beaten Eustace three times and the comparative poll numbers tell an interesting story. In 1999 Arthur’s popularity stood at 57 per cent compared with Thompson’s at 11 per cent, while in 2008 when Thompson emerged his popularity was 41 per cent compared with Arthur’s which was at 48 per cent. In the case of St Vincent, Gonsalves’ popularity was 47 per cent in 2010 compared with Eustace’s at 34 per cent, and by 2013 Gonsalves had moved to 61 per cent compared with Eustace 38 per cent, which helps to explain the string of New Democratic Party defeats.
Peter W. Wickham is a political consultant and a director of Caribbean Development Research Services (CADRES). Email: [email protected]
