First Published On:Monday, March 28, 2011 in the Tribune newspaper.
MY mother’s favourite cousin is someone she calls, “the most conceited person she ever knew.” He was a larger than life man who practised regularly what he called his “killer smile.” Legend has it he would stand in front of the mirror and practise his swagger. He would stroke his chin and tune up his smile, the one that would “kill the ladies.”
This little bit of family history is relevant only in as much as I am reminded of my cousin sometimes when people speak about Branville McCartney, member of parliament for Bamboo Town. Last year he resigned from the high profile job of Minister of State for Immigration in Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham’s Cabinet. Just last week he resigned from the Free National Movement altogether. His seemingly rash actions have some puzzled, as they know he has obvious intentions to claim the top political prize.
When I jog my brain to decode his possible political strategy, I am sometimes tempted to believe those who say he has no strategy; that his actions are directed by a kind of narcissism.
Mr McCartney himself admits there is a perception of him as a “show-boater” or a “grandstander.” I am not sure if he would add pretty-boy to the list, but he at least admits there are those who believe him to be a “young upstart,” not yet qualified to lead.
This is what he has to say about that: “God may not call the most qualified, but he qualifies those whom he calls.” If that is not evidence of narcissism I do not know what is, albeit I accept the statement as true. I am always weary of people, especially politicians, who anoint themselves by the words of God.
If Mr McCartney were Sarah Palin, I would be swayed by the temptation to dismiss him completely. Alas he is not, and I will spare him the insult of prolonging the comparison. So what is Branville McCartney up to and does he have his calculations configured all wrong?
Some insiders claim he resigned from the FNM to form a new party that is amassing enough strength to field notable Bahamian candidates in every constituency in the next general election. Sources say there will be an announcement in the days to come. The as of now nameless third party, is allegedly seeking to capture a sufficient number of seats to force a coalition government that would be led by Mr McCartney.
Ambitious
If this were the case, Mr McCartney would certainly be proving a timeless truth that youthful energy is ambitious. Leader of the opposition Perry Christie alluded to this plan in his presentation in the House of Assembly last week. He wished Mr McCartney well and offered these words of advice: “It is a very difficult business.”
The trick to becoming prime minister is securing the majority support of members in the House of Assembly. That is why the notion of representation has become such a farce. In reality, the person elected as a representative of a constituency, does not go to the House of Assembly to represent the people of that constituency. That person goes to the House in order to secure the right of their party to govern. Theoretically, it is one and the same. In this case, the theory is far from the reality.
In light of the third party talk, I could not help but wonder what advice people who have been there and done that would have for Mr McCartney. It is a liberating feeling to break free from the grips of any oppressive system. Unfortunately, in many cases, that peace is only the eye of the storm.
Persons close to the Coalition for Democratic Reform (CDR), for example, tell me Bernard Nottage, member of parliament for Bain Town, experienced a feeling of exhilaration after leaving the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), but having been a student of Bahamian political history, he always questioned the viability of a third party. In fact, it was never his intention to form and join a third party when he left the PLP. Sources tell me he was swayed into “giving it a go” by the people around him who shared his political views and his passion for governance and who themselves believed it was the best way to go. I understand Dr Nottage made his scepticism known.
Apparently, after Dr Nottage left the PLP, he engaged like minded friends and political allies in private sessions to discuss their political philosophies and their vision for the Bahamas: political therapy, if you will. He did not have a clearly crafted political strategy that would fulfil his original aspiration to lead the PLP and ultimately the country.
As word spread about their talks, the group, who thought of themselves as revolutionaries, in as much as they were passionate, strong-willed and aggressive in the defence of their vision, opened the doors to other like-minded thinkers. There was initial talk of forming a civic body or pressure group, but the idea of a third party and Dr Nottage’s eventual leadership of it only grew out of that process.
“The years he spent with the development of the CDR were perhaps some of the most productive years of his political life in terms of enabling him to look at the country and think about how it should be developed and the policies that would enable it to greatly improve the quality of life for Bahamians. It was an exhilarating time. It was a liberating time,” said a source close to the matter.
As rewarding as the CDR experience was for Dr Nottage, his decision to follow a different course had other consequences that were sometimes “quite nasty and quite offensive.”
“It is not an easy road for people who find themselves in that position. They are always under a microscope by those whom they have been associated with formerly and those whom they become associated with,” said an observer.
Emotions
I can only imagine how tense and fiery the political environment is for Mr McCartney right now with the combination of emotions spiraling around him: anger, resentment, disappointment, spite, scepticism, envy, embarrassment, lack of faith and trust. Stew those emotions together and it makes for an explosive pot.
Assuming Mr McCartney is not playing snap politics with his life, I am sure he expects to find that pot of stew cooking in the kitchen and must be prepared to accept it. If he was looking for “comfort and universal acceptance” he would have played his role and stayed where he was.
There is no doubt, however, that despite the cordial smiles and the public show of civility, politics is unforgiving and politicians are dogged about their ideals.
“A lot of time when you make the decision you cannot think it through to the end. You look at the positive side of what you are doing. The fact that you are free to pursue the vision you truly believe in; to seek out like minded people and try to do things in a positive way. It is all very positive, but then there are things that happen along the way,” said a political source.
“When you make the decision you feel a sense of relief, but then you come upon so many obstructions and so many hurdles. You get situations when people are with you almost to the end and when the time comes, the same people who were encouraging you are not there,” he said.
Former CDR stalwarts believe it is not impossible to create a viable third party, if you have the stamina, the money, all of the other ingredients and you are in it for the long term. But they feel any short or medium term objective to realise a shift in power is premature thinking.
“Ultimately you have to look at the population and the core support of both parties. It is impossible to be successful unless you can attract large portions of the core from the dominant political parties. The swing vote at best may be as much as 25 to 30 per cent. The vote getting stakes: that is really your problem,” said a political commentator.
“We initially thought we had quite a lot of support from across the spectrum; from people who supported both the PLP and FNM, independents, as well as business people and people who just wanted change,” said a CDR source. So did the Bahamas Democratic Movement (BDM), which after eleven years, two general elections and one by-election, has yet to create a meaningful shift in voting demographics.
The reality is, independent or third party candidates usually have momentum until election time rolls around. Then voters, who approach voting with a paternalistic outlook, begin seriously contemplating the question what he or she can actually do for me if they win. Any candidate outside of the governing party or the main opposition party would have a hard time answering that question satisfactorily, and would ultimately have a hard time swinging votes.
Some say Mr McCartney has what it takes, but it will take him about 15 years of substantial and sustained effort. These same people, however, wonder whether Mr McCartney’s recent jumpiness – resigning here and there – is an indication of a kind of impatience and lack of maturity.
I do not think third party candidates have any hope of winning seats in the next general election: it is too important a contest for the FNM and PLP. That would not stop me personally from voting for one if I thought they were superior to the FNM or PLP candidate. It would not be a hard task to accomplish in my constituency. But I am not the best prototype, because I could see myself filing a protest vote in the next election anyway, by writing in “none of the above.”
So I hear the claims circulating about Mr McCartney’s new party, but I think it is possible that this could just be the side show. There are some who believe Mr McCartney’s real plan is to borrow a move from the play book of someone closer to home: the arch-nemesis, Hubiggity himself.
After all, the old party switcharoo was Ingraham’s ticket to power. In 1986 when Hubert Ingraham was expelled from the PLP, he was a two-time member of parliament and a former member of cabinet. Mr Ingraham had served as Minister of Housing and National Insurance in the government led by Sir Lynden Pindling. This is not unlike McCartney, who is a one-time MP and a former cabinet minister.
Some claim Sir Lynden was grooming Ingraham for leadership of the PLP, but those plans were derailed when in 1984, in the midst of a Commission of Inquiry into illegal drug-trafficking and government corruption, Ingraham refused to tow the line. Whether Mr McCartney was ever on Ingraham’s shortlist is unclear, because most observers believe Ingraham is grooming freshman senator Duane Sands for leadership of the FNM now that he has entered the political arena.
Unlike in the case of Mr Ingraham, Mr Christie, and Dr Nottage, who all resigned from the PLP for substantive reasons, the arguments presented by Mr McCartney for resignation seem so inconsequential and are simply naïve. From his public pronouncements, it appears that his rift with the FNM is based on a personal feud with Mr Ingraham; perhaps because he was rebuked for his refusal to tow the line and wait his turn. Two lions cannot live in one pride, so perhaps Ingraham saw a spark of his own spirit in Mr McCartney. Either way, I think it is plausible that had Mr McCartney lasted out his term in cabinet, and stuck with the party until the next general election the leadership could have been his for the taking.
Let us say for argument’s sake that Mr Ingraham won the next election and stepped down before the end of his term in order to hand over the leadership to his endorsed candidate Dr Sands. I think Mr McCartney
would still have had a realistic shot to vie for the FNM’s leadership had he challenged Dr Sands. He would have been popular enough and seasoned enough to give Dr Sands a decent run for his money.
Of course, the possibility of this scenario is now history and Dr Sands, if he wins a seat in the next general election and I suppose does little to upset Mr Ingraham, will probably be guaranteed the leadership post.
In the next general election Mr McCartney is almost certainly going to run as an independent, if not under some third party affiliation. And he is probably banking on the PLP losing. He wants the PLP to be driven into desperation so he can walk into the party in Hollywood style as “the great white hope.”
Even with momentum appearing to trend in the PLP’s favour that could happen. In five decades of politics, Perry Christie, MP for Centreville, has yet to beat Ingraham in an election. Insiders say, every time Ingraham trounces Christie, his ego grows tenfold, and it is a feeling he loves and thrives on. They say Mr Christie’s self esteem never survived the thought that he had to metaphorically swim through his vomit to secure his place back in the PLP. On the race track Mr Christie wins hands down, but in politics the odds are just not in his favour.
The PLP feels Mr Christie should be given another shot at leadership. I will not debate the prudency of that. I will say I am not confident Mr Christie is going to overcome the image that he deals in dreams and the image that he is no substitute for his former business partner, political colleague and friend. He has a lot working against him, from his political history and beyond. I think it is telling that people claim his nickname in school was “lord bull”, referring in part to his propensity to talk a good talk.
The PLP’s strategy is to paint the FNM as the party of roadwork, but they should not underestimate how much people like new highways and smooth roads to get around on. The FNM should not underestimate how much of an annoyance and inconvenience too much road work can be, especially when it is poorly managed. They should pray it is all complete by the time election rolls around. But the fact that the PLP is still banking on the feel good strategy of selling national pride will probably only feed into the FNM’s portrayal of the party as useless in matters of governance.
Only time will tell the PLP’s fate, and whether or not they will be spurred into desperation. For Ingraham, the facts show that after leaving the PLP in 1986, he was successful in securing his seat as an independent in the 1987 general election and by the next election he had become leader of the FNM, succeeding Sir Cecil Wallace-Whitfield. As a freshman leader he ended the 25-year power hold of Sir Lynden, winning the 1992 election for the FNM. Matching that feat could be Mr McCartney’s aspiration.
There was resentment amongst FNM stalwarts when Ingraham was tipped for the party’s leadership; however, there was a feeling of hopelessness in the party having been on an 18 year losing streak. Sir Orville Turnquest was the leader apparent and there is still great debate and speculation about why and under what terms he stepped aside to pave the way for Ingraham. The ungracious observers amongst us would believe the tall tale that he cut a deal with Ingraham that would secure his son, Tommy Turnquest, MP for Mount Moriah, a spot at the top.
The fact is: the FNM had an existing tradition of letting outsiders in, because such was their genesis, as a motley group of outsiders. The FNM was essentially a coalition party, having been formed by a merger of the Free PLP, former members of the disbanded United Bahamian Party (UBP) and some members of the National Democratic Party. Even today, the FNM is considered to be a party of factions, with no one faction having the absolute ability to exert its authority over the other.
The faction stemming from the likes of Sir Roland Symonette and Sir Geoffrey Johnstone, for example, is different from the faction stemming from the likes of Sir Cecil Wallace Whitfield and Sir Arthur Foulkes.
When the FNM was faced with the ultimate prospect of the 1992 election it decided that Ingraham was the best person to lead them to victory. He was seen as rebellious enough and principled enough to stand up to Sir Lynden; and being fresh out of the PLP, he was seen as someone who could eat into the party’s base.
Theoretically, a similar golden opportunity could be presented to Mr McCartney in the PLP, but in reality, securing the leadership of the PLP is nothing like securing the leadership of the FNM. Political observers say, the PLP has a dynasty culture and without the seal of one of the royal families, all bets are off. On a quick scan of the opposition side in the House, you will observe the dynastic legacy of many PLP royals: Glenys Hanna Martin, who is the daughter of AD Hanna; Frank Smith, who is the nephew of George Smith and son-in-law of Frankie Wilson; Melanie Griffith, who is the daughter of Telator Strachan. In the Senate there is Allyson Maynard Gibson, who is the daughter of Sir Clement Maynard.
The PLP is not fond of outsiders or “hurry come ups.” Some say the original core of people who were around the great untouchable Sir Lynden himself, continue to exert influence even today, and that has created a culture in which the hierarchy is respected. One observer said, so much so that “long service often means a great deal more than who is best.”
So what are the chances the party could be driven into accepting an outsider like Mr McCartney? I can hear the chorus of PLP stalwarts now. They are saying, “not a chance.”
Clearly, if the PLP loses the next general election, Mr Christie’s political death certificate will be signed, sealed and delivered, and a leadership battle will ensue. Dr Nottage might dream of seizing the moment he was denied by the “arm twisting of Sir Lynden” in 1997, but that is doubtful. Not to dismiss Obie Wilchcome, MP for West End and Bimini, who I believe has the ambition, but the most obvious prospect for leadership of the PLP is Philip “Brave” Davis, MP for Cat Island, Rum Cay and San Salvador, and he definitely has the itch.
Mr McCartney would have a lot to contend with in “Brave” Davis. This is a man who spent many years as a law partner of both Hubert Ingraham and Perry Christie, learning I am sure the crudest tricks of the trade. After all, he is probably the shrewdest trial lawyer in the country. He is not someone who would step aside after a backdoor negotiation. He is going to take you to the street corner and fight. And in a match up against Mr McCartney and “Brave” in a PLP arena, my bets would be on “Brave,” particularly if it were my life’s savings.
With all of this having been said, some believe Mr McCartney has made one fatal and fundamental miscalculation. His Bamboo Town seat, once as secure as a treetop nest of a chickcharney, is no longer even his for the taking. I do not agree, but my voice is only one in the cacophony of sounds.
Historically, there have only been a handful of MPs elected by running on independent platforms, and only one of them, Whitney Bastian, former South Andros MP, made it past the gates with candidates fielded by both the FNM and PLP. In the cases of Ingraham and Christie, there were no FNM contenders. In the cases of Larry Cartwright, Tennyson Wells and Pierre Dupuch, there were no PLP contenders.
What Mr McCartney should do is cut a deal with the PLP so his only competition in Bamboo Town is an FNM candidate. From the looks of it the PLP are not interested. They claim they are not giving the FNM or Mr Cartney a “free ride”. The PLP said it is fielding a candidate in Bamboo Town – which would be the first time in two general elections.
So when all is said and done, if Mr McCartney’s dream is to be prime minister, the road ahead is neither firm nor sure. Unless he feels actualized by his night time slumber, he is going to have to a pull a genie out of the lamp. The question of his suitability to lead is irrelevant because this is a discussion of political strategy. Do I think there are any doors left for Mr McCartney that will open to the ultimate seat of political power? No. Does it matter to me either way? No. Does it matter to him? I don’t know.
I highly respect anyone who is willing to follow an ethical and honest path that represents their truth, but such a life is easily befuddled with egotism.
It takes courage to live in the light of one’s destiny; and it takes deep roots, whether spiritual or otherwise, not to be thrown off course.
Mr McCartney claims he is doing what he feels is in the best interest of his conscience and the people of the Bahamas.
Who could wrong him for that?
If I were not such a Pan-Africanist I might be inspired.
However, foolhardy his ambitions may seem, if I were him, I would not be deterred and I am confident he is not. He should just be aware: living in truth takes sacrifice, and if his political calculations are wrong, he better be prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice.
Whatever his strategy is, it might just carry him into the wilderness of politics and make him politically irrelevant.
If his sense of self worth is not entrapped in his dream of being prime minister, then he should be A-okay.