The political debates organized by the Literary and Debating Society of the Albena Lake Hodge Comprehensive School provided an opportunity for many persons to hear the position of leaders and aspiring leaders on various issues affecting the community. The debates hopefully signal a maturity in our political process where the focus is on issues rather popularity. It is also heartening that the young electorate have taken such a keen interest in the process and have given a clear indication that they wish to raise the level of political discourse. They are not interested in propaganda, empty rhetoric, platitudes and mudslinging. They want to know the agenda of the various parties on education, social development, economic prosperity, international relations and the like. This is not only commendable, but necessary. Those vying for office must also be commended for willingly participating in the debates. In doing so, they have demonstrated respect and appreciation for our youth and readiness to tackle the issues head on.
The debates were well-received by the public. Many persons attended in person and others tuned in via radio. For the last week and a half the debates have been literally “the talk of the town”. Virtually everyone was talking about them and, of course, everyone had their own view of who “won”. I didn’t seek to judge the participants to determine a winner or loser. I was more concerned about whether their responses were well reasoned and grounded in fact. I must say that, generally, most of the candidates acquitted themselves well, but in several instances I was disappointed by some responses.
Take for example the debate with the candidates from District Number 5. On the topic of education, there was a question about the abolition of corporal punishment. The Honourable Edison Baird linked the abolition to the Government’s ability to access funds from the European Union. As the former of Minister of Education, who piloted the Education Bill in the House of Assembly, I would have expected Mr Baird to speak to the merits or demerits of corporal punishment as a method of behaviour control – give his own view on it – rather than making it seem like we had no choice in the matter.
On that same question, I was disappointed with the response of Mr Patrick Hanley but for a different reason. Mr Hanley indicated that in his view the abolition of corporal punishment was a mistake. He was so adamant in his answer that I was left to wonder whether he realized that his statement was an indictment of his own party. It was his party which approved the contents of the Education Bill, abolishing corporal punishment, and was responsible for its passage in the House of Assembly. His answer therefore suggested that either he thought his party had made a mistake, and he was not afraid to declare it publicly, or he still does not fully understand how the legislative process works. Further, Mr Hanley’s response to a question about his continued presence on the Procurement Board was also wanting. Wouldn’t the best and easiest solution to this perceived conflict situation be to simply step down as a member of the Board? From a population of almost fourteen thousand people, there should surely be no difficulty finding a replacement.
On that night as well, the answer of Mrs Evalie Bradley to the question on the minimum wage was equally disappointing. Though a newcomer to the political arena, Mrs Bradley was a former Labour Commissioner and it was therefore expected that of the three candidates she would have had the greatest understanding of, and familiarity with, this issue. However, her answer to the question lacked depth and didn’t address the issue at all.
Additionally, at the party leaders’ debate, I was disappointed to hear Mr Sutcliffe Hodge indicate that “education is over-rated”. Yet, during the same debate, Mr Hodge appeared to take pride in listing his educational accomplishments and at some point also referenced the fact that our young people need to take advantage of opportunities to educate themselves. Knowing Mr Hodge, his statement came as a shock to me, and from all accounts, to many others. It was disheartening that yet another of our country’s potential leaders can make such an irresponsible statement when we should be showing our young people the value of education.
These are just a few examples of some of the disappointing moments in the debates. I flag them to make the point that raising the level of political discourse requires from our candidates a thorough understanding and analysis of the issues, the ability to effectively communicate their position and to exercise prudence and responsibility when making statements. I am sure that despite their wide and varied experiences the candidates have grown from their participation in the debates. Undoubtedly, they would have assessed their own performances and identified areas for improvement. I am hopeful that the debates will continue for years to come and that our political parties or candidates will use them as a platform for increasing public awareness of their national development strategies.
