Skip to main content

Campaign Funds Scandal: PNP 'getting horn(e)'

 PNP Treasurer, Norman Washington Horne, made a report to the party's NEC which was "leaked" to the media. Horne's report identified challenges faced by the treasury which in his view played a critical role in the  2016 election defeat. These were:

  • Fragmented political leadership, multiple non-cohesive and disjointed campaigns being run by distinct groupings and individual members of the party;
  • Senior members in the government were actively sourcing funds from the private sector for the sole benefit of their personal campaigns;
  • Contributions earmarked for the Treasury were made to senior party members who neither reported or accounted in full, or even in part, for receipt of those donations;
  • The decision not to debate exacerbated the difficulty in raising funds resulting in "a last minute cash investment and infusion into the JLP." 
In sum "there was not one central bank but several  banks; some of which had more resources than the Treasury." Horne's considered position is worthy of note:

"Necessary funding could have been strategically diverted to marginal constituencies, which seemed to have required just a little more financial support to get them over the hump. Had there been a cohesively executed campaign, with the Treasury being the central bank and the recipient of the bulk of the resources, then it is highly likely that we would have won the election and been in government today."

The Horne Report was not accepted by the NEC; ostensibly because the Treasurer was off the island and therefore not available to provide clarification. However, the Report has revealed nothing that was hitherto unknown to political parties. In fact, candidates are often left to fend for themselves with little or no financial assistance coming from the Treasury.

Horne imposed a Friday, July 29, 2016 deadline for those balances to be transferred to the party's central account "so that it can be applied to all outstanding debt and the balance thereof to the budget for running of the Parish Council Election."

Horne's remedy poses more serious issues as the Treasurer would then wield awesome powers and
morph from being the Party's banker into the Chief Financial Officer. Such would be similar to that exercised by a Deputy President. Furthermore, there is considerable doubt surrounding the necessity for the Treasury to be the recipient of the bulk of the funds to underwrite an election victory.

The Real Reason

 In a piece entitled "Whither The PNP?". The Gleaner, Sunday   September 4, 2016 Arnold "Scree" Bertram, noted PNP historian, has shed some light on the real reason for Treasury  experiencing a starvation of funds:

"What is at the heart of what is currently perceived to be a scandal is that for the first time, the leader of the PNP has used her influence to install a treasurer and a general secretary, neither of whom enjoys the level of confidence within the party that such positions require. Private-sector donors know this and have chosen to hand over their contributions to the party officers who they trust rather than those designating themselves as official channels. In addition, very few, if any, of the 63 PNP candidates want either the present general secretary of treasurer to be involved in the receipt and allocation of campaign donations."

Update:
The Office of the Contractor General (OCG) has launched a probe into the PNP campaign-financing scandal


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Declaration" Not "Determination"

Both the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the House of Representatives have conveniently confused calls for declaration of citizenship status by Members of either House with the determination of questions as to membership of either House. The Chief Justice of Jamaica has determined that individuals who have renewed their US passports and travelled thereon are disqualified from being validly elected or appointed as a Member of either House. Proponents of the impotence of the Speaker, in the matter of requiring a declaration by individual members, have sought to rely on Section 44 (1) of the Constitution which states: Any question whether - a. any person has been validly elected or appointed as a member of either House; or b. any member of either House has vacated his seat therein or is required, under the provisions of subsection (3) or subsection (4) of section 41 of this Constitution, to cease to exercise any of his functions as a member, shall be determined by the Supreme Court ...

By-Election Predisposition

Introduction A massive amount of time and resources have been devoted to the issue of the course to be properly taken once a victorious electoral candidate has been found to be "disqualified" under S. 40 of the Constitution of Jamaica. Simply put, the crux of the matter is whether the second place candidate should, without more, be accorded the seat by the court; or that the said election be deemed null and void and a by-election ordered to decide the people's representative. This matter consumed inordinate amounts of energy - judicial and otherwise - due primarily to the silence of the Constitution on what recourse should be adopted in such circumstance. A cardinal tenet of democratic government is that the people must decide their representatives and not a select grouping - no matter their qualification or status. The Constitution of Jamaica fully recognized this imperative even though it expressly delegates the determination of questions as to membership of either Ho...

Communication Error!

Jamaica Gleaner Contributor, Martin Henry has written an interesting article entitled “Victory for the rule of law” published on Sunday, April 20, 2008 . In his last paragraph Henry stated: " A troubled citizen's concerns about the legitimacy of laws passed in the past with the participation of MPs who may have been in Daryl Vaz's dual-allegiance position was published as The Letter of the Day by The Gleaner last Wednesday [April 16]. Lawyer Dr Paul Ashley made a great deal out of the same issue when we both appeared on the TV programme Impact on that same day. The Constitution dissolves these fears in the wisely anticipatory provision of Section 51 (2): "The presence or participation of any person not entitled to be present or to participate in the proceedings of the House shall not invalidate those proceedings." Interpreting legal provisions is an exercise fraught with dangers, especially if one is not acquainted with the rules governing interpretation. Without...