Bruce Golding in thoughtful response to a questions posed by a member of the Gleaner's Editors Forum last Friday. - File

Bruce Golding, who returned to the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) which he had abandoned seven years ago, told Gleaner editors about the negotiations which ended with his return to the party; about the National Democratic Movement (NDM) which he left behind; and his own future in the JLP. He was speaking at Gleaner's Editors Forum at the company's North Street offices last Friday.

ON THE NDM'S RESPONSE TO HIS PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS WITH THE JLP

I HAVE every confidence in the officers of the Movement and we would discuss it at that level but I certainly wouldn't take an issue like discussions with the Jamaica Labour Party to an open executive meeting which involves 30-odd or 40-odd people because no doubt somebody from The Gleaner would be calling me the following day to ask me for a comment on the matter. That would be the end of those discussions. If you are handling discussions that are delicate and sensitive, a front page story in The Gleaner doesn't assist at all.

ABOUT HIS CREDIBILITY AND ATTRACTING JLP VOTES

There is no question that one would have to look at that. And I hope it does get some vote. I would be very embarrassed if it didn't. I think the real question you are asking is the question of trust and I know that is the question and I know I have put my credibility on the line and I know that that is an issue that is going to impact on the minds of people.

ON THE NEGATIVE VIEW OF MR. SEAGA AS LEADER

That is a factor you know, that is something that the party has had to deal with, that's a challenge to the party. Every leader has a problem, perhaps Mr. Seaga more than others. That is an issue.

POSITION IF JLP STICKS TO WESTMINSTER MODEL

Part of the undertaking that has been given is that notwithstanding what position the JLP takes, the JLP is committed to ensuring that it (separation of powers) is one of the options that will be put on the ballot in a referendum. This is to be held within two years of winning the election. Which means that issue is not finally settled at the JLP party level. That issue will eventually have to be settled by the people or if it is an option that is put before the people I would expect that the JLP would not seek to stifle the expression of views among those of its members who support that particular cause, particularly because this is going to be presented to the people as an option.

BUT IF THIS COMMITMENT DOES NOT HOLD

That's yet another crossroad.

ON JLP OFFERS WITH NDM

The discussions that Wayne and Chris had with Mr. Seaga included the possibility that if the NDM were prepared to become part of this collaboration (his return to the JLP), that there will be room within the parliamentary structure for some representatives of the NDM which will have had to include Mrs. Bennett as the President. That should the JLP form the government that they (key NDM members) would be considered for appropriate appointment within the government. When that was discussed with Hyacinth (I'm not sure whether this was her preliminary response or whether this was a subsequent response of the NDM). Her position was 'No!'.

What she would be prepared to entertain would be the withdrawal of JLP candidates in a number of constituencies and for the JLP to support those NDM candidates in those constituencies. That matter was never put to the Labour Party because we (myself, Wayne and Chris) did not consider that there were, (as of now) NDM candidates who have the quality of organisation on the ground within the constituency to support that sort of thing. Therefore, I didn't want to sort of pursue something like that that I knew wouldn't be acceptable.

THERE HAVE BEEN TALKS WITH THE JLP FROM TIME TO TIME

Let me explain how these have come about because again that needs some clarification. Sometimes there are casual contacts that are made, these are not done deliberately. Two people will 'buck up' in the lobby of some hotel somewhere and they exchange some information. On occasions though, if the source from which that information came is a source I thought would be reflecting the views of the leadership of the party, it is a matter that I would discuss at a close level, on the level of leadership.

To say now look, what's your view of this? Is this something we should pursue? On some occasions I won't go down that road because that person is not somebody whom you can rely on. On occasions they may say, well let's hear what they have to say. On some occasions I might say well talk to them again and see what sort of proposals, you know our position, you know the principles that we are pushing, it is a question of whether or not the JLP would be prepared to embrace those principles. And if I got a response that suggested there was a basis on which that matter should proceed any further, I would involve the officers of the Movement, which would have included the whole office of four, 13 of them and that would determine whether any further discussion would go. If it got to a point where it seemed as if it was serious, then it would go to the executive.

I remember on one occasion, I believe it was toward the end of 1998 or '99, it got to such a point where I thought it was necessary to involve the National Council, there were very strong views that were expressed -- some very strong views in favour, some very strong views against -- and I remember at that meeting which was conveyed at the Jamaica Conference Centre I indicated that I was not prepared to pursue the discussion unless I had a very clear mandate from the National Council. The matter was put to a vote and the vote taken. I cannot remember the exact figure, but my recollection is that it was 85 to one in favour. So for Brascoe Lee to give the impression as he has that these discussions were taking place without the knowledge of officers of the Movement and without the involvement of the executive is not true. What is true to say is that in every one of those discussions Brascoe Lee was opposed to the idea, that is true, but for him to suggest that they were going on without his knowledge is not true. What he is referring to are the discussions that will take place because of some casual contact that is made somewhere.

ON HAEMORRHAGING WITHIN THE NDM

I don't know. I gather, there have been one and two people who have indicated that they were leaving, but I don't know, I don't think that there will be much further haemorrhaging. I think whatever haemorrhaging will take place, has taken place long before my departure.

ON GARRISONS AND TRIBALISM

Well one of the understandings that we have arrived at speaks very clearly to pursuing initiatives to eliminate, as far as possible, tribalism and garrison culture and in order to do that we need to ensure the implementation of the appropriate recommendations.

Those recommendations just sit in three powerful reports on a desk somewhere. That is a commitment that has been given and that is something that has to be pursued. Again if it comes to the kind of guarantees on which you could borrow money from the bank, what you have secured is a commitment, a statement with some specific undertaking to do what has been recommended in those three reports, the Wolfe Report, the Report from the Committee on Tribalism and the National Committee on Crime.