Of the 22 countries where democracy has existed continuously since 1950, 18 have parliamentary governments - Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Costa Rica, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and the UK. France has a hybrid system and Switzerland a plural executive. Only Costa Rica and the US have presidential governments.

Between 1973 and 1989 democratic institutions were introduced in 53 countries. Robert Dahl found that parliamentary systems proved more than twice as likely to survive as presidential ones. Bruce Ackerman, another Yale professor, looked at 30 countries that adopted the American system and found that all of them suffered breakdowns at some time.

Some claim that the US system lessens tribalism. But as the Nov. 18^th Economist said in discussing the recent election “Seymour Martin Lipset, a sociologist, argues that partisanship is worse in American politics than in any other mature democracy. The legislative gridlock in Washington, the impeachment saga and now the recriminations of the past week all seem to bear him out.”

It certainly was eye opening to see Gore Democrats and Bush Republicans angrily charging each other with ‘vote counting fraud’ and ‘trying to steal the election’. Even theoretically unbiased officials and judges repeatedly gave party line rulings. Naked political warfare is ugly in every system. But then, better lawsuits than bullets.

Still, the separation of powers model has worked wonderfully in the US. But as Dahl states in ‘On Democracy’ “The American system is exceedingly complicated and would probably not work nearly as well in any other country. In any case, it has not been widely copied. Probably it should not be.” Clearly only deluded ideological extremists could advocate an American presidential model for Jamaica.

When he resigned recently in disgust Danny Melville condemned “a system that rewards mediocrity”. But Audley Shaw was right – it is the people who run it, not the system that is at fault. Corrupt and inept politicians will ruin a country no matter what form of government it has. To quote Robert Dahl again “If the underlying conditions are highly favourable, stability is likely with almost any constitution… If the underlying conditions are highly unfavourable, no constitution will save democracy.’

Yet independent Jamaica, while not quite a failure, has undoubtedly been a woeful under performer. It has provided excellent health care and a reasonable education system. But is not produced a decent standard of living or maintained a reasonable degree of safety for its citizens. And corruption is threatening to undermine the entire fabric of our society.

Of course the PNP and JLP are both to blame for Jamaica’s problems. Look at the hypocritical posturing of the Prime Minister and Opposition Leader over the corruption issue. Both announced themselves in favour of changing the Parliament (Integrity of Members) Act to allow the Integrity Commission to table its findings in Parliament.

As it now stands the Commission can only report non-compliance to the Prime Minister, the Opposition Leader, the Senate Leader and the House Speaker. Yet no actions have been taken against non-compliant MPs since the 1970s. So after having continually ignored reports given to them – for seven years in Mr. Patterson’s case and over twenty in Mr. Seaga’s – both men are now making grandstanding pronouncements in favour of non-compliant MP’s being exposed. Apparently they take Jamaicans for fools.

And some people say they are right. But if the Jamaican people were really fools this country would not have experienced nearly 40 years of continuous democracy. Yet they could have been wiser. For too often voters here have delivered one sided mandates. The last time the opposition won even half as many seats as the government was in 1967.

Is it mere coincidence that independent Jamaica’s greatest period of growth came in the 1962-1972 period?

Democracy’s magic does not rest in parliamentary or presidential systems. It lies in the fact that governments must perform or be replaced. It is the knowledge that they have to put up or they will be shipped out that makes democratic governments on the whole more honest and hard working than any alternative.

This is why democracy seldom functions well without a strong opposition and why massive mandates generally produce arrogant and mediocre governments. Electorates that grant lengthy spells of unchallenged power are only asking for corruption and inefficiency.

Perhaps Jamaicans have gotten the quality of governance they deserve. After all only 48% of eligible voters here actually cast a ballot in the last general elections. And a people too lazy to vote have no right to complain when they get a government too lazy to govern properly.

When forced to choose the lesser of two evils a populace’s wisest course is surely to give no party a decisive majority and hope that the winner will do its best to govern properly for fear of being quickly voted out. For my money the best possible result for Jamaica in the next election would be a less than ten seat majority, no matter which party wins.

Of course ‘the electorate’ is a many headed beast, and the process by which a populace decides how much power to give each side is the most mysterious aspect of democracy. But an electorate that looks at a broad spectrum of issues is less likely to give large ‘follow the herd’ mandates. If Jamaicans want better government, they need to become better informed about issues and not just mindlessly vote for the biggest serving of curry goat and white rum. It is not only those at the top who are responsible for the nation’s predicament.

Allowing voters to cast separate ballots for Prime Minister and Member of Parliament, as is done in Israel, might lessen our tendency to give lopsided majorities. Opponents of this idea claim it might lead to political gridlock, but it certainly deserves serious consideration. And polls do show a majority of Jamaicans in favour of this proposal.

Jamaica does indeed have a rotten system that needs changing. For an eighth consecutive one sided parliament will almost certainly mean the continuation of the miserable slide of the past twenty eight years. But it is not in the power of politicians or intellectuals to prevent it. In the end only the Jamaican people can elect a strong opposition. changkob@hotmail.com