Kristen Gyles | Voters have a dilemma

Another general election, another low voter turnout. Preliminary estimates indicate that 39.5 per cent of the electorate turned up to vote in the 2025 general election.

We had a busy election season and perhaps that is what makes the low voter turnout so shocking for some. For starters, we had four political parties contesting seats in the election, which in itself was thought likely to generate interest amongst some apathetic voters.

Further, straight up until the 11th hour, the list of election promises from the two major political parties kept getting longer and seemed to hit more closely at the heart of what many Jamaicans want. Beyond all that, drone footage from the political rallies for both parties had many Jamaicans believing there were more people at the rallies than people living in Jamaica.

So, the raising of eyebrows in response to the anticlimactic announcement that less than 40 per cent of voters participated in the election is understandable. For context, in 2020, when Jamaica registered its lowest voter turnout of 37.8 percent, we were in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, which is thought to have kept many voters inside their homes on election day, negatively affecting the turnout.

DOESN’T MAKE SENSE

For many, it just doesn’t make sense. After so much excitement on the ground for so many weeks leading up to the election, why did so few choose to actually put their X where their mouth is?

There are several reasons for this, which have been ventilated over the years. However, there is one issue that needs to be discussed a bit more.

On the night of the election, after preliminary results revealed that Portland Eastern Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) candidate Ann-Marie Vaz lost her seat, I noticed a stream of social media commentators querying how she could have lost when she had been working so hard in her constituency. Vaz, at some point during her representation in East Portland attracted to herself the moniker “Action Ann” since she prided herself on getting work done on the ground, including but not limited to road repairs and other infrastructural improvements.

One response was that regardless of the work she has done, too many people in that constituency did not want Dr Andrew Holness as the next Prime Minister. As a result, they voted for the People’s National Party (PNP) candidate. The commentator who gave this opinion is probably correct. Prior to Vaz’s victory in that constituency, Portland Eastern was historically regarded as a PNP safe seat.

This is the problem. Jamaicans are being called upon to participate in elections but must choose between voting for their preferred MP candidate and voting in favour of their preferred Prime Minister. In a constituency where an MP is actively representing their constituents in parliament and attending to their needs, why should they not be rewarded for their hard work and given a chance to continue, regardless of their party leader?

With this kind of structure to our voting system, we will always have freeloaders occupying seats in parliament at the displacement of hard-working representatives. Does that make sense?

RELATED PROBLEM

A related problem became all the more obvious during the few nail-biting minutes on Wednesday night during the ballot count when Paul Buchanan, PNP candidate for St Andrew West Central surpassed Dr Holness, his opponent, for a brief while by a few votes. Could Dr Holness really lose his seat? The simple answer is yes. He could. And then what? Imagine people across the country voting for candidates they know nothing about and have never seen, all in hopes that they will get their Prime Minister of choice, only for this individual of choice to lose his own seat and become ineligible for the Prime Ministerial position.

For reference, only a sitting member of the House of Representatives can serve as the Prime Minister for the country. The individual seeking ascension to this elevated role must therefore ensure their party secures the majority of seats in parliament, and while doing so, ensure they secure their own seat. But why? Can’t political parties present Prime Ministerial candidates for us ordinary Jamaicans to select from?

For years, Jamaicans have made this suggestion but for whatever reason, both major political parties seem unwilling to take on a fulsome reform to our constitution to make it happen. While the previous government administration introduced a bill late last year, to amend our constitution, the amendments only scratch the surface of the suite of desired changes that have been ventilated in the public space and that they themselves had promised.

Besides the obvious challenges to the electoral system that see each voter casting one singular vote, what of the terms limit for Prime Ministers? What of the impeachment legislation? A comprehensive approach to reforming our constitution should contemplate all these adjustments that Jamaicans have been waiting years to see.

Preaching to Jamaicans to “let their voice be heard” or to “exercise their civic duty” won’t move too many persons. Jamaicans need to feel that their vote truly counts for something. What might move more Jamaicans to the polls next time around is a targeted attempt at putting more power in the hands of voters so they can elect a Prime Minister and impeach him or her when they do not perform or fail to hold members of their cabinet accountable. That is true power.

Kristen Gyles is a free-thinking public affairs opinionator. Send feedback to kristengyles@gmail.com and columns@gleanerjm.com