Should MPs live in their constituencies?

INTENSE CRITICISM of political representation across the island has triggered a debate on whether members of parliament should reside in their constituencies, a move one public commentator says is worthy of legislative exploration.

Only one of the 14-member parliamentary Opposition caucus currently lives in the constituency he represents in Parliament, although others are said to have some form of residence in their respective seats, People's National Party (PNP) General Secretary Dr Dayton Campbell has acknowledged.

The governing Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) did not respond to a Gleaner request for the ratio of MPs living in their constituencies versus those who do not.

The Electoral Office of Jamaica said it could not provide information confirming the number of MPs living among constituents because the data could be “misleading”.

Director of Elections Glasspole Brown explained that during the nomination period, candidates are required to provide mailing addresses that may or may not be where they reside.

Additionally, he noted that changes are likely to have occurred with some MPs since the last address provided for nomination ahead of the September 2020 polls to elect the current members of the Lower House.

Unlike councillors, who are required by law to live in the parish in which the division they represent at the municipal level falls, there is no mandate for MPs to do so.

For candidates seeking to represent the PNP, there is no requirement among the criteria set out to represent the party, although there are “obvious benefits” to a candidate who is local, Campbell said in a Gleaner interview last Monday.

Those benefits include a better understanding of the issues affecting the constituency and a deeper relationship with constituents, he said, which often emerge to play a key role in campaigns.

Still, Campbell said some candidates foreign to the constituency may equally be able to understand the needs of the people they are seeking to serve.

He noted that it is not difficult to identify the issues affecting the constituency, but said instead that the disposition of the political representative will determine how they fare. It becomes a matter of whether they impose their position on constituents or engage in a consultative process, the former St Ann North Western MP said.

“Even if you're from the area, you are from one part of a constituency which is likely to have several districts and communities. So, you will still need to lend yourself to some amount of consultation with the residents so you can find out what their needs are,” he said.

Campbell, who has served for two terms in the House, said that he relied on the Social Development Commission to keep tabs on the pressing needs in the constituency and he prioritised them according to the available resources.

“What we look at is viability, whether or not your views align with the views of the party,” said Campbell.

“Once you lend yourself to those issues, when you go into the constituency, you should be able to get the issues that are affecting the people and be able to make the necessary representation on their behalf.

“So it's not [a requirement], and if you look across the length and breadth of Jamaica, I would say probably nine out of 10 of the members of parliament don't actually come from or reside in the constituencies that they [represent],” he added.

What is important, chairman of the JLP's Public Relations Committee Robert Morgan said, is that persons seeking to represent areas “have a deep interest in representing people”.

Morgan, a first-term MP born and raised in Clarendon North Central, which he represents in Parliament, said that fact was an advantage for him.

Despite this, he told The Gleaner that outside candidates who have other ties to the area and may develop relationships with constituents should not be excluded from the process simply because they do not live there.

But what of candidates with no affiliation being parachuted into a constituency sometimes only weeks and even days before an election?

Morgan said, historically, there have been times when challenges emerged in selecting candidates and a political party may, at the last minute, be “forced” to field a candidate.

“But I have not seen this as an intention. You want your candidate to have as much time as possible so that they can build relationships … . I don't know that that is a great negative against them. I have seen MPs on both sides, for some reason or another, who were caused to be candidates at the last minute, and they were successful and the people in the communities have expressed satisfaction on both sides as to the work they have done,” Morgan said.

At the same time, he noted the difficulties faced by rural MPs who reside in their constituencies and have miles to travel to get to the capital city for parliamentary sittings and committee meetings.

“There's a significant cost that comes with that,” he said, offering only that “a large number” of JLP MPs live in their constituencies.

... Enough reasons to examine merit

Executive director of the Jamaica Accountability Meter Portal, Jeanette Calder, noted that setting a criterion for elected representative that limits their eligibility based on either living in the constituency or at a minimum owning a residence there, is worthy of the Parliament's and the country's consideration.

Calder said that the topic is a recurring cry with every resurgence of the promised reform, and is sufficient reason to examine its merit.

“The thinking is, should the needs of our parliamentarians be coupled to those they represent, it would improve the quantity, quality and tenacity of their representation in the House,” she said.

Calder also argued that the recommendation strikes directly at perpetual complaints about disappearing acts, once fingers are inked in the MP's favour.

She noted, however, the primary counter-argument on record, where there is the MP's concern for over-exposure to citizens who, at times, fail to demonstrate mindfulness for boundaries that, in turn, burdens both the MP's privacy and pocket.

“Assuming the citizen's argument to be reasonable and the MP's fear to be real, such a criterion could result in some parliamentarians withdrawing their candidacy for the job.

“However, it is quite possible that Jamaicans who are already domiciled and demonstrably functioning as leaders in the constituencies would contemplate expanding their care and capacities to parliamentary representation.

“Our democracy has been one of experimentation since 1962, where some constitutional provisions work and others don't. This idea has enough merit for Jamaica to subject it to the petri dish and to weigh the results,” she said.

Danielle Archer, head of the National Integrity Action, pointed to some jurisdictions where political representatives are required to live in their constituencies for at least six months.

She, too, noted the benefits to residents of having their political representatives live among them in the form of accessibility and shared experience.

“Ultimately, what you want from your member of parliament is that they are present, that they know what is happening in the communities and, among other things, that they are available for consultation,” said Archer.

“Being a member of parliament means you represent both sides – both Ps, all Ps. Do you know the people or do you just come down to have two days in your MP office or constituency office or do you treat them as the same?” she questioned.

Archer said it is important to look at the structure of the management of the MPs within the constituencies.

She said that their level of efficiency and effectiveness has a lot to do with the strength of governance.

“If the governance is strong, then the requirement of saying you must live there may be different because, ultimately, what people want is accessibility, for MPs to know the nuances of the communities and effectively represent,” she said.

kimone.francis@gleanerjm.com