Red Rackham

🔘 COMMENTARY: The PM's wild swing Prime Minister Andrew Holness came to the wicket on Tuesday like a number 9 batsman on a pitch that did not favour spin. His wild swing at reporters suggesting they were attempting to amplify certain narratives received applause—quite the surprise at a government press conference. The Prime Minister was addressing his country 364 days after Hurricane Melissa, the Category Five cyclone that hit Jamaica. He also used the event to pay tribute to those who did not survive the storm, commiserate with those still hurting and announce government belt-tightening to divert more resources to help the victims. But here's the crux. Elaborating on the ban on non-essential official overseas travel, the Prime Minister declared that he had to send a strong signal after seeing a "substantial" travel bill. "I said, 'I wonder if these people realize that there are still people without roofs'," he told the gathering. He further explained that it seemed like the government was moving on and was not sensitive to the fact that not everyone was in a position to do the same. So, a year after the October disaster, the PM announced the government was making a further $9.6 billion available under the ROOFS Programme to help another 50,000 people who had yet to receive support to rebuild their houses. He gave his government a "ticky" for the storm preparation and the immediate relief phases but conceded his disappointment with the pace of the recovery phase, which began in January this year. Yet when reporters contextualise the realities expressed by the still-hurting victims, the chief servant suggests they are resurrecting or perpetuating narratives. Reporters are not going to be among the applauding throng, Prime Minister. You should not expect that. They will amplify the waning cries of the weather-worn people of Culloden, Westmoreland; Slipe, St. Elizabeth; Burnside, Hanover; and Zion, Trelawny. That the government is now allocating almost the same amount initially set aside under the ROOFS programme shows that the need remains stark. No one expected things to be perfect a year after the storm. But you cannot acknowledge the suffering of thousands, then dismiss their lived experiences as partisan narratives when reporters bring those realities into sharp focus. You cannot expect euphemisms and pretty speeches from journalists whose duty is to tell it as the victims live it. And you certainly cannot applaud yourself for acknowledging the pain while swinging wildly at those who dare to ask questions of you.