The dating of the next general election in Barbados typifies the decision making style of the ruling Democratic Labour Party (DLP) – unhurried and with a predictable conformism to the letter of the law with diminished political instinct.
With CLICO, Al Barrack, or Alexandra, non-action legitimized through legal cover has been the dominant response.
This obviousness in decision making has robbed the Government of the advantage of “surprise” in its undertakings, as currently obtains with the dating of the election. Thus, with previous opportunities for an “early” election now missed, we are into a normal election period leading up to the January/February five-year mark of the last election and the first sitting of the current Parliament.
The DLP has therefore squandered its election dating advantage. It is no accident that the Opposition has started the process of public meetings long before any official bell ringing. The Government, true to form, is yet to get off the blocks.
It is perhaps this habit of tardiness and the tendency to act within the outermost legal limits, which has fed public expectation of an April election, which if actualized, will have meant the Government’s utilizing of the 90 days after the formal five years provided in the Constitution.
However, quite apart from the non-political legal reflexive weaknesses in Prime Minister Freundel Stuart, there are several reasons why it is not in the DLP’s interest to delay until April.
First, the DLP runs the risk of appearing to be holding on to power for its own sake. In a context of economic difficulty whose resolution requires the settling of political questions, this will be perceived negatively. The party will be seen as unethically overstaying its welcome, since the 90-day option ought only to be used in extenuating, and not in ordinary, circumstances.
Secondly, the DLP should not appear too frightened to face the people, or ashamed of its record or doubtful of its own re-election message. A similar perception will be conveyed if the option of a short, 21-one day campaign is adopted, as is more likely with a late election, since this conveys the image of a party seeking to reduce its exposure to public scrutiny.
Thirdly, there is no clearer sign of disaffection than a public eager for an election and a Government desperately seeking to delay one. The longer the wait, the greater the public’s impatience and the least noble the Government appears.
The Government, however, will likely continue to tiptoe to the election, hoping for an event to improve its standing. Also, it is occupying office as a material fact, and will not move until constitutionally mandated to do so.
Whilst this “bird in the hand” philosophy may bring short term reward to present office holders, it may have long term negative consequences for the future political success of the DLP as a whole.
• Tennyson Joseph is a political scientist at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, specializing in regional affairs. Email [email protected]
