Dr Bhoen­dra­datt Tewarie

Ten po­lit­i­cal par­ties are con­test­ing for Lo­cal Gov­ern­ment elec­toral seats. PNM is on its own. UNC and NTA are in an ac­com­mo­da­tion and MND and ILP are aligned with them; and one may spec­u­late that, not con­test­ing seats, they might ne­go­ti­ate for al­der­men ap­point­ments.

The EBC stat­ed that the fol­low­ing po­lit­i­cal par­ties have field­ed can­di­dates:

 Move­ment for So­cial Jus­tice (MSJ), Na­tion­al Trans­for­ma­tion Al­liance (NTA), Pro­gres­sive De­mo­c­ra­t­ic Pa­tri­ots (PDP), Pro­gres­sive Em­pow­er­ment Par­ty (PEP), Re-Unit­ed Farm­ers Al­liance, The Na­tion­al Par­ty (TNP),

Trinidad Hu­man­i­ty Cam­paign (THC) and Uni­ty of The Peo­ple (UTP).  

PEP and the Re-Unit­ed Farm­ers Al­liance are al­so in non-com­pet­ing ac­com­mo­da­tion with each oth­er. PDP is al­so on its own. Of these, on­ly the PNM and the two ac­com­mo­da­tions are com­pet­ing for over­all vic­to­ry. The PDP is com­pet­ing for the PoS City Coun­cil and a few in­di­vid­ual seats. And there are at least six in­de­pen­dent can­di­dates. COP is out. 141 elec­toral seats and 14 re­gions are at stake.

Strong vot­er turnout mat­ters be­cause the num­ber of votes cast de­ter­mines the pro­por­tion­ate shar­ing of al­der­men from nom­i­na­tion lists.

The en­ti­ties in­volved in non-com­pet­ing ac­com­mo­da­tions will not be able to pool their votes if they field can­di­dates in the same lo­cal gov­ern­ment en­ti­ty. So any par­ty in ac­com­mo­da­tion will be at a dis­ad­van­tage for the ap­point­ment of al­der­men.

The vot­er turnout for Lo­cal Gov­ern­ment Elec­tions has al­ways been low. In 1961, we had an amaz­ing gen­er­al elec­tion turnout of 88 per cent. We have nev­er had any­thing ap­proach­ing that, since. Gen­er­al elec­tion turnouts are usu­al­ly in the high 50s or low 60s and lo­cal gov­ern­ment just over half of that. In the 2020 gen­er­al elec­tion, the vot­er turnout was 58 per cent. In the 2019 lo­cal gov­ern­ment elec­tion, it was just un­der 35 per cent.

For this 2023 Lo­cal Gov­ern­ment Elec­tions, T&T has 1,092,420 reg­is­tered vot­ers. That means over one mil­lion vot­ers in Trinidad. In the last House of As­sem­bly elec­tion 51,000 peo­ple were on the elec­toral list in To­ba­go.

 Vot­er turnout has a psy­cho­log­i­cal di­men­sion. It de­pends, at least in part,  on mood, en­thu­si­asm, cam­paign mo­ti­va­tion and par­ty or­gan­i­sa­tion in the field on elec­tion day. Peo­ple have to feel strong­ly for some­thing or strong­ly against some­thing for a ro­bust vot­er turnout to hap­pen.

 High-spirit­ed­ness among hard-core or­gan­is­ers in po­lit­i­cal par­ties and en­er­gy un­leashed in the in­di­vid­ual can­di­dates, es­pe­cial­ly new ones, are not nec­es­sar­i­ly a re­flec­tion of the mood of the whole body politic.

Po­lit­i­cal par­ties live for elec­tions. That is their rai­son d’etre. But be­yond that, en­thu­si­asm can be low; mo­ti­va­tion weak; con­vic­tion lack­ing. The Elec­torate may not be able to whip up en­thu­si­asm to vote for lo­cal gov­ern­ment re­form, be­cause in their heart they feel that lit­tle will change.  Nor might they be eas­i­ly sum­moned to vote against the eco­nom­ic hard­ship, in­fra­struc­ture de­te­ri­o­ra­tion and so­cial dis­tress that they are ex­pe­ri­enc­ing, sim­ply be­cause most peo­ple do not think that vot­ing in the Lo­cal Gov­ern­ment Elec­tions will change that re­al­i­ty. Cen­tral Gov­ern­ment poli­cies or de­ci­sions re­main in­tact.

 But there are two very deep cur­rents at play po­lit­i­cal­ly. One is to re­volt against Kei­th Row­ley and to weak­en the PNM for the gen­er­al elec­tion due in 2025, be­cause of a lack of eco­nom­ic re­cov­ery, a gen­er­al lack of gov­ern­ment per­for­mance and de­liv­ery to the cit­i­zen as well as a feel­ing of ne­glect and gov­ern­ment con­tempt.

The sec­ond is a back­lash against Kam­la Per­sad-Bises­sar for the rel­a­tive in­ef­fec­tive­ness of the Op­po­si­tion thrust and for alien­at­ing UNC sup­port, en­cour­ag­ing a tox­ic par­ty cul­ture and for un­will­ing­ness to en­gage or to heed, those who ar­gue for a trans­formed op­po­si­tion al­ter­na­tive that is read­i­ly recog­nised as gov­ern­ment ready

Oth­er than loy­al­ist par­ty sup­port­ers, the ma­jor­i­ty of the cit­i­zen­ry does not con­sid­er ei­ther tra­di­tion­al al­ter­na­tive as at­trac­tive or de­serv­ing. Dis­trust runs deep. That is one of the rea­sons why new par­ties and po­lit­i­cal as­pi­rants have emerged. The PEP/Re-Unit­ed Farm­ers Al­liance is cam­paign­ing in re­bel­lion against the two tra­di­tion­al par­ties as a new op­tion. NTA is new too, but it has made an ac­com­mo­da­tion with the of­fi­cial Op­po­si­tion. The ques­tion is, in our time, do elec­toral al­liances make you stronger or weak­er?

And what about the PNM? Is that par­ty stronger for go­ing it alone or weak­er?

And will its co-op­ta­tion of UNC crossovers strength­en or weak­en it?

It is be­com­ing more dif­fi­cult every day to say what po­lit­i­cal par­ties stand for. Ex­cept that every par­ty wants to win. If you are not in gov­ern­ment, win­ning means get­ting pow­er. If you are the Gov­ern­ment, then win­ning means stay­ing in pow­er. Coali­tions and co-op­ta­tion are seen as win­ning strate­gies.

But peo­ple like to be able to have a clear op­tion and to choose.

I heard an as­tute per­son say re­cent­ly, that peo­ple do not com­pare a po­lit­i­cal leader to the Almighty, they com­pare him/her to the al­ter­na­tive. And that is at the heart of the dilem­ma for many vot­ers.

Where do the peo­ple and their needs and in­ter­ests stand in this con­test be­tween po­lit­i­cal par­ties? What has hap­pened to the pub­lic in­ter­est, pub­lic good and pub­lic ben­e­fit as­pect of pol­i­tics, Par­lia­ment, rep­re­sen­ta­tion­al gov­ern­ment and good gov­er­nance?