Government faces pushback for 'campaign-style' ads

 

There is pushback to claims by Local Government Minister and Deputy Leader of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), Desmond McKenzie, that the government is not using public funds in its election campaigning.

 

The parliamentary opposition has objected to the use of government resources to fund what it calls "vulgar, self-serving political propaganda disguised as public service announcements".

 

Minister McKenzie, in defending the campaign activities, said the JLP has no need to rely on public funds. 

 

But professor of political and social psychology in the Department of Government at the University of the West Indies, Mona, Christopher Charles, is questioning the timing of the campaign-style ads by the government.

 

"There are some ads from the Office of the Prime Minister, where at the end of the ad, it says 'Brought to you by the Office of the Prime Minister.' The Office of the Prime Minister is a government ministry, headed by the Prime Minister of Jamaica. And so the taxpayer funds should go towards development work, not political campaigning. This is the most active political business cycle I've seen. When we talk about political business cycle, we mean the election year when policies and programmes are rolled out by the government. So if the government was confident or sure about its policy achievements, why the overactive political business cycle, where you now have to be using public funds to announce and to do all kinds of things," he complained.

 

Professor Charles questioned the timing of the campaign-style ads, suggesting that the government has had several years prior to tout its achievements.

 

He was speaking Wednesday on Radio Jamaica's Beyond the Headlines.

 

Meanwhile, watchdog group National Integrity Action (NIA) believes the Electoral Commission of Jamaica (ECJ) has dropped the ball in its response to the government's use of public funds to conduct campaign-style ads.

 

Principal Director Danielle Archer said it is inappropriate for tax dollars to be used to fund these ads. She said the ECJ's response to the issue is cause for concern.

 

"Many Jamaicans think it's vulgar. Many Jamaicans think it's a misuse of funds. And if the ECJ says, oh, I don't see anything wrong with it, then something is wrong with them, and that's a clear indication that they're not here to protect the individuals and the citizenry. They're there to protect the political directorate, and that is unfair.

 

That speaks to a level of accountability that has to be questioned because it's not because you don't see it means you don't question it and you don't ask what's the political undertone? Is it endorsing? Is it [giving] information? What investigation did they conduct to come to that conclusion? Who represents the citizens in this arena? Who referees and ensures that at the end of the day our democracy survives and is strengthened and you don't tell people, this is how the system set?" she contended.