Nom­i­na­tion Day, June 26, has passed. One hun­dred and four­ty-one elec­toral dis­tricts in Trinidad’s 14 mu­nic­i­pal cor­po­ra­tion elec­toral ar­eas are “up for grabs”. Cur­rent­ly, the PNM and the UNC each con­trols sev­en of a to­tal of 14 dis­tricts. The Elec­tions and Bound­aries Com­mis­sion has con­firmed that ten po­lit­i­cal par­ties have pre­sent­ed can­di­dates. Three hun­dred and sev­en­ty-three can­di­dates, in­clud­ing six in­de­pen­dents, will con­test the Au­gust 14 Lo­cal Gov­ern­ment Elec­tions in T&T.

In 2019 on­ly 34.49 per cent of the elec­torate came out to vote. In a group dis­cus­sion re­cent­ly, dur­ing which I was en­cour­ag­ing peo­ple to ex­er­cise their fran­chise on Au­gust 14, some peo­ple in the group stat­ed that they are not go­ing to vote.

One woman said: “To be hon­est, I don’t trust any of the par­ties. It seems that once peo­ple get elect­ed, they hard­ly live up to the promis­es they made dur­ing the cam­paign.” An­oth­er said: “What’s the use. It will just be the same old same-old. My vote won’t make a dif­fer­ence!” Re­search shows that some rea­sons giv­en by in­di­vid­u­als for not vot­ing are: po­lit­i­cal dis­il­lu­sion­ment; ap­a­thy; a lack of trust ei­ther in the can­di­dates, the process, the out­comes, the track record of po­lit­i­cal par­ties and so on.

Charles Thomas Munger, an Amer­i­can busi­ness­man, in­vestor, and phil­an­thropist, has said: “The high­est form a civil­i­sa­tion can reach is cor­rect­ly trust­ing one an­oth­er.” Sad­ly, trust among T&T’s cit­i­zen­ry re­mains elu­sive. In many ways we re­main frag­ment­ed and po­larised. In the IDB book: Trust, the key to so­cial co­he­sion and growth in Latin Amer­i­ca and the Caribbean (Jan­u­ary 2022), we read: “Trust is the most press­ing and yet least dis­cussed prob­lem con­fronting Latin Amer­i­ca and the Caribbean. Whether in oth­ers, in gov­ern­ment, or in firms, trust is low­er in the re­gion than any­where else in the world. The eco­nom­ic and po­lit­i­cal con­se­quences of mis­trust rip­ple through so­ci­ety. It sup­press­es growth and in­no­va­tion: in­vest­ment, en­tre­pre­neur­ship, and em­ploy­ment all flour­ish when firms and gov­ern­ment, work­ers and em­ploy­ers, banks and bor­row­ers, and con­sumers and pro­duc­ers trust each oth­er.

“Trust in­side pri­vate and pub­lic sec­tor or­gan­i­sa­tions is es­sen­tial for col­lab­o­ra­tion and in­no­va­tion. Mis­trust dis­torts de­mo­c­ra­t­ic de­ci­sion-mak­ing. It keeps cit­i­zens from de­mand­ing bet­ter pub­lic ser­vices and in­fra­struc­ture, from join­ing with oth­ers to con­trol cor­rup­tion, and from mak­ing the col­lec­tive sac­ri­fices that leave every­one bet­ter off. The good news is that gov­ern­ments can in­crease cit­i­zen trust with clear­er promis­es of what cit­i­zens can ex­pect from them, pub­lic sec­tor re­forms that en­able them to keep their promis­es, and in­sti­tu­tion­al re­forms that strength­en the com­mit­ments that cit­i­zens make to each oth­er.”

The book “guides de­ci­sion-mak­ers as they in­cor­po­rate trust and so­cial co­he­sion in­to the com­pre­hen­sive re­forms need­ed to ad­dress the re­gion’s most per­ni­cious chal­lenges.” Mis­trust is an ob­sta­cle to in­clu­sive growth. There­fore, the IDB states that trust should be made a goal of pub­lic pol­i­cy. And since Gov­ern­ments “can in­form and em­pow­er,” the IDB en­cour­ages gov­ern­ments “to make promis­es, ful­fil promis­es, and com­mu­ni­cate both to cit­i­zens”.

How many of the 373 can­di­dates have a clear un­der­stand­ing of the prin­ci­ples of good gov­er­nance and the pos­i­tive ef­fects of good lo­cal gov­er­nance? I urge those on the cam­paign trail to de­sist from back-bit­ing, name-call­ing, ru­mour mon­ger­ing, and char­ac­ter as­sas­si­na­tion. Peo­ple want to hear your views on is­sues that af­fect their dai­ly lives. Any crit­i­cism of oth­er po­lit­i­cal par­ties should fo­cus on poli­cies and pro­grammes, past record and work.

I am the Sec­re­tary of the Coun­cil for Re­spon­si­ble Po­lit­i­cal Be­hav­iour. The Coun­cil’s Chair­man is Dr Bish­nu Ra­goonath. In a re­cent me­dia re­lease, the coun­cil re­it­er­at­ed its call for po­lit­i­cal par­ties to ad­here to the Code of Eth­i­cal Po­lit­i­cal Con­duct. (See the Coun­cil’s web­site: www.po­lit­i­calethic­stt.org for the Code).

Cit­i­zens are “savvy” enough to know when you are evad­ing key is­sues, or when you make un­re­al­is­tic promis­es, or when, from your in­ter­ac­tions with them, it is clear that you are not au fait with the du­ties and re­spon­si­bil­i­ties of a Coun­cil­lor. Please LIS­TEN to the views and con­cerns of those whom you seek to rep­re­sent. If you are to im­prove the qual­i­ty of life of the com­mu­ni­ty, it is im­per­a­tive that you put peo­ple at the cen­tre of your cam­paign. Com­mit to be “Ser­vant Lead­ers” who have in­tegri­ty and are em­pa­thet­ic, ac­ces­si­ble, ap­proach­able, re­spect­ful, at­ten­tive, hard-work­ing, de­pend­able, and hum­ble. Can­di­dates, if you wish to strength­en our democ­ra­cy, re­flect on whether you have these qual­i­ties. May you all have lis­ten­ing ears; al­ways choose in­tegri­ty. And vot­ers, ex­er­cise your fran­chise!