Five-Year Election Campaigns

As campaigning intensifies for the next general election in T&T more citizens should be paying closer attention to at least three distinct features of the process amid desperate but fading tribal cleavages.

As an aside: I think the contest will come later rather than sooner, despite prevailing speculation. I also subscribe to the concept of a fixed date.

To be clear, politics’ ethnic characteristics persist. But try polling the younger cohorts and you will be surprised at the extent to which the Gen Z bunch (about 40 percent of the population), together with the traditionally independent segments, care a rat’s … ears about old narratives of ethnic superiority.

Yet, leading politicians and their closeted strategists, continue to believe that triggering such fading emotions in political messaging can earn their parties heightened favour and fervour.

However, follow the process as closely as you can on social media, and some traditional media and public spaces, and you will recognise the relatively small circle of devotees taking/employing this bait.

Anyway, what are these “features” of the process of electioneering in T&T I am talking about? Bear in mind, today’s offering is not from any “political analyst” whose ad hoc intuitions based on personal preference seem to bear more weight than actual research.

Number one. As I’ve indicated earlier, a fixed date for general elections should be a constitutional requirement. This will cut out an entire tier of harmful political gamesmanship, and level the playing field for all. Incumbency, though heavy on implicit liabilities, could do without the additional asset of foreknowledge.

Number two has to do with the way political parties organise themselves for the selection of candidates and leadership positions. This is an internal process in which individual organisations need to ensure that democracy prevails and is characterised by a heavy measure of due diligence.

Now that we are gradually, but certainly, escaping the clutches of blind tribal loyalty, electorates are less and less likely to opt for odious (crapaud?) selections that result from leadership edicts. Relatedly, games should also not be played when it comes to matters such as party leadership. Ferdie Ferreira makes the crucial point about Dr Rowley’s teasing language regarding his continued leadership of the party.

Back in September 1973, there was an even less ambiguous declaration by late Prime Minister, Dr Eric Williams, which turned out to be an effective hoax that cost the party substantial political capital, the support of key stalwart Karl Hudson-Phillips (who had expressed an interest in the position), and eventually led to the rejuvenated coalescing of disparate forces opposed to PNM rule. Follow the politics between 1976 and 1986 and you will see what I mean.

A not entirely dissimilar fiasco emerged following the succession of Winston Dookeran as leader of the UNC replacing Basdeo Panday in 2005, the ensuing shenanigans of 2007 (an election year which deserves an entire book) and the bewildering (and controversial) events culminating in Panday’s loss to Kamla Persad-Bissessar at internal elections in 2010.

True, within four months the party went on to authoritatively dominate the PP coalition in government between 2010 and 2015, but not without continuing fissures – some of which persist in diverse ways to this day.

So, yes, point number two essentially has to do with internal democratic practices among the respective political organisations. This has little relevance, though, if the organisation in question was born at a press conference, has shady internal elections and processes, and persists almost solely in the form of regular social and mainstream media dispatches.

Then come plans and programmes, the most important, but least considered parts. It does not seem to matter that election manifestoes are among the final campaign products to be delivered. Practising politicians and strategists have said to me it is all cosmetics, though the secret engine rooms often comprise costly imported and indigenous experts and strategists. In the end, they lead to little thought and action by those in charge.

Even when offered, there is little of substance regarding issues of human rights, policy direction on migration, LGBTQI discrimination, the rights of children, wage equality (in a state-dominated economy), the “energy transition” and our oil and gas economy, nutrition security, and management of the climate crisis, to cite a few examples.

The development experts and activists can add a dozen more key features and neglected policy areas. But these are mine, for now. Seek them out in the forthcoming manifestoes and on the hustings. Ask your candidate about them. Five-year election campaigns can deliver much more. They currently do not.