Editorial | What do constituents want?

What do constituents expect from their elective representatives? This question comes at a pivotal moment of heightened focus on the quality of representation expected of elected officials, in light of the massive salary increases they have given themselves.

There was a time when all the common problems encountered by community members were brought to the doorsteps of their member of parliament (MP). We are not suggesting that this was necessarily the most efficient way to conduct constituency business.

Back in the ‘60s, people trusted their elected representatives to help them navigate challenges by finding solutions which would ultimately lead to improvement in their lives. In those days, the MP, who would likely live in the constituency, served everyone; he or she would write letters of recommendation, give guidance on how to prepare documents required for migration, for academic advancement, for jobs, land titles, bank loans and various other assistance as needed.

MPs went to Parliament to fight for their constituents via private member’s motion, because they operated as the direct conduit from the community to the House of Representatives. There was no job description back then, but representatives seemed to have understood that they were elected to serve their constituents and their work included being watchdogs over government agencies and departments, as well as the utility companies.

TIMES HAVE CHANGED

But times have changed. For one thing, MPs rarely live in the constituencies they represent. Small problems, largely to do with delivery of everyday services, have festered into big problems and they continue to bubble; and when the citizens can take it no more, they resort to demonstrations and protests. Calling in the media to expose conditions that threaten public health and the environment has replaced the idea of taking the problem to the political representative.

Stories of neglect and indifference surface almost daily. In the last month there were protests over raw sewage polluting a St Catherine community – seemingly prompted by the foul, lingering stench, residents called the media. Then in Portland last month, water woes pushed people onto the streets, and one woman summed the situation in this statement: “We are on our own …nobody at all but Almighty God alone.” From time to time, other protests over badly scoured and impassable roads, due to lack of maintenance, have been featured in the media.

Looking backwards, we see a town like Mandeville. It was a pristine, lush place and the envy of most parish capitals. Its attractiveness was attributed to exceptional local-level political leadership and bauxite money pouring into the community. Today, Mandeville has become a broken-down, garbage-infested place like other townships such as Santa Cruz, Christiana, Savanna-la-Mar and Brown’s Town. Bustling crowds wrestling with waste, debris, and vehicular traffic are common features of these towns.

MUCH EASIER

And to think, technology has made it so much easier for people to communicate these days. Political representatives can be in constant touch with their constituents via social media link at the click of a button or through a website. They have opportunities to educate their constituents and to help to resolve their problems.

What constituents want is transparent, honest representation which results in problems being addressed in a timely manner. Recently conducted opinion polls confirm that an overwhelming number of Jamaicans do not believe either the Government or the Opposition is performing up to par in their respective roles.

Despite this poor performance appraisal, politicians feel justified in awarding themselves a massive pay increase. Any surprise that there is a backlash?