The Tribune

THE Free National Movement (FNM) met last week in conclave to reflect on its terrible general election loss, a second consecutive and crushing defeat. The party will not renew itself nor return to office if it’s not committed to the path of greater unity and collegiality.

The party must be ruthlessly honest about the causes cum sources of disunity and the mindset and quality of leadership required to bring the party “All Together”, the party’s motto, and a perennial theme and guiding principle, chosen by the Founding Fathers.

They appreciated—because of their own political experience—the necessity for unity, in great part because of the history of disunity in the Progressive Liberal Party, out of which they initially became the Free-PLP.

Former UK prime minister Tony Blair, who took Labour to three consecutive electoral victories, pressed for genuine unity over superficial unity. 

Genuine unity brings members together with a coherent direction and shared vision and plans.  He compared superficial unity with being happy in a bus together while going over a cliff.

The goal of a political party is to win elections and to govern in the interests of a country. Unity is a sine qua non or indispensable, essential condition, for winning elections. 

It’s not a matter of kumbaya and members holding hands in loving embrace. Instead it’s the hard work of reconciling differences and personalities sufficiently to present a united front, and machinery required to gain and hold political power. The PLP has often been better at this. 

Unity is demanding work, requiring compromise with individuals and groupings of which one may not be fond. The party should always be bigger than a given leader. 

Still, it requires a strong and unifying figure who has the political and personal maturity to subsume his or her needs to the good of the party. 

Unlike political parties in many countries, neither the FNM nor the PLP tend to be divided philosophically and ideologically on matters of policy. The divisions are mostly over personalities and who enjoys power in the party.

A leader must know when it’s time to step aside in the interest of the party and the nation. Sir Cecil Wallace Whitfield, Sir Kendal Isaacs, and Hubert Ingraham all stepped down as FNM Leader.

The story of Sir Kendal is instructive. He was the quintessential unifying figure, who put the FNM on the road to growth, recovery, and victory. A man of carefully chosen and sometimes few words, he was a tremendous listener. 

In 1976 came a great split in the Opposition, resulting in a rump FNM and the new Bahamian Democratic Party (BDP).

Unable to abide Sir Cecil’s “my way or the highway” attitude, much of the core of the FNM left, forming the Bahamian Democratic Party (BDP). The 1977 results were disastrous for the Opposition. The BDP faction became the Official Opposition.

The FNM faction under the banner of the Free National Movement, led by Sir Cecil, lost a stunning 22 deposits. Had the BDP contested the two seats in Grand Bahama, that the FNM faction won, the latter would probably have been wiped out in the House of Assembly.

The PLP garnered 54.7 percent of the popular vote and 30 seats. The BDP got 26.9 percent of the popular vote and six seats, while the FNM got two seats and 15.6 percent of the popular vote. Voters rarely vote for a party that is not united. 

The seeds for the reunification of the Opposition were planted on election night. The PLP won Delaporte, carrying more votes than the Opposition’s combined tally. 

Still, many thought that a united opposition may have carried the seat, considering its vote and the number of voters who stayed home or were disaffected to a united PLP. Five years later in 1982, the FNM won the seat.

On election night 1977, the Opposition’s two losing candidates in Delaporte, Sir Arthur Foulkes of the BDP and Basil Nicholls of the FNM, started talking reunification over a round of beers.

The Opposition’s turmoil continued after 1977, with another split resulting in the formation of the Social Democratic Party, headed by Norman Solomon, becoming the Official Opposition for a period.

Meanwhile, talks continued between the BDP and the FNM, with reunification coming before the 1982 general election. The party now had to decide on the best person to lead it into the election. That decision was made at the home of the party’s leading Founding Father, Sir Cecil Wallace Whitfield. The question was which individual would improve the party’s electoral fortunes. After considerable and heated debate Sir Cecil stepped aside in favour of Sir Kendal Isaacs.

Sir Kendal was highly intelligent and articulate. He understood our parliamentary system and was an effective voice inside and outside of parliament. 

Given his mild-mannered nature, some thought of him as a conservative by nature. His record proved that he was fundamentally a progressive. He was a leader of the cooperative movement and an economic moderate. He was broadly liberal in his thinking on a range of social, economic, and political matters.

He was also incorruptible, a stark contrast to Sir Lynden and the PLP. Whether they were inclined to vote PLP or FNM, most people though that Sir Kendal had the intellectual depth and ability to serve as prime minister. 

He famously repeated the well-known aphorism that “politics is the art of the possible.” He unified the FNM, making it more appealing.

In 1982 the FNM jumped to 11 seats and by 1987 that number was 16.

The 1987 general election is thought to have been fraudulent on many levels. The irregularities were widespread, including a compromised register of voters. 

Fast-forward to 2026. The mass of voters are dissatisfied with the major parties. Though the PLP’s base continues to mostly hold, it’s not attracting significant numbers of new voters. 

Still, because its base is larger than the FNMs, it’s able to win a walloping number of seats despite its inability to win the majority of voters.

The FNM continues to have many supporters, though its base has diminished, and it continues to haemorrhage support. Still, it has a basis for renewal and victory, including a rich history, a record of governance, a brand, and many talented supporters.

The path to renewal will require ongoing study and analysis. It will require a leader who can be a source of unity, can appeal to voters on an emotional level, and can fulfill Napolean Bonaparte’s understanding of a leader: “The role of the leader is to define reality and give hope.”

The reality of The Bahamas is stark. The nation is collapsing on many levels and various democratic norms are under attack. Inequality is increasing. There is widespread corruption in government.

Most Bahamians want genuine change and hope. As it did in 1992, the FNM can be the deliverer of both. The party however, must get its house united and in order under a leader who can offer a new direction for the FNM and the country.