Do political manifestos matter?

MANIFESTOS ARE designed to illuminate the desired path a government would take to address developmental issues as an integral part of the democratic process. Indeed, it is the primary document that can be used to identify the differences in vision and mission of political parties that wish to govern a country.

This explains why the unveiling of a manifesto is usually done with much fanfare, even though, to many, it remains largely an intellectual document. That erudite United Kingdom justice, Lord Denning, famously said that manifestos cannot be taken as gospel or signed and agreed bonds. So manifestos are not legally binding.

Then whose job is it to hold the political parties accountable for their unfulfilled promises? Thankfully, the media has been doing just that in the current national political debates. Journalists have been asking about the grandiose unfulfilled promises – some repeated each election cycle but never delivered. These questions have stirred robust discussions on the value of a manifesto.

Do people really vote based on manifesto promises? There is anecdotal evidence that what a manifesto promises can have a decisive impact on an election. Recall the 2016 general election, when the then opposition Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) presented its Prosperity Manifesto, promising to relieve persons earning below J$1.5 million of income-tax burden.

This headline-grabbing promise was a costly initiative, but it captured the imagination of the electorate. Many believe that this ‘1.5’, as it came to be known, tipped the ballot in favour of the JLP in 2016. It was a promise that had to be kept, and, critics will say, to the detriment of other, more deserving investments.

The average citizen wants to get an education, secure a job that pays a liveable wage, have a roof over their head, have access to healthcare, and be safe in the pursuit of happiness. In acknowledgement of this reality, every party seeking to form government focuses on how to improve housing, education, health, and security and move more people out of poverty. In varying forms, they present what they see as the best agenda for socio-economic reform.

DIVERSE IDEAS

We are not privy to the process of drafting a manifesto, but we imagine that the document is crafted with input from influencers such as trade unions, women’s groups, youth, and others who are affiliated with the party to ensure inclusion and diverse ideas. This may explain why something about, say, the disabled community is stuck into a section but is often overlooked thereafter.

What is true is that these grandiose promises usually require huge sums of money. Most times, the parties cannot say how they will fund these costly pre-election commitments, leaving the impression that new taxes would be levied to pay for the promised improvements.

In the 2020 debates, when journalists question about broken promises, the current crop of politicians deflect the questions and merrily go on to make more promises. The People’s National Party (PNP) says it will build 70,000 houses in five years if elected. As yet, we have no idea where these houses will be built or who will occupy them. We hear no talk about infrastructure support and the access to utilities for these homes, water being foremost on the list. The JLP promises to build 30,000 houses – more realistic, perhaps, but the proposal is still lacking in details.

Something needs to change, we submit. Political manifestos should be released in good time to allow for deep scrutiny. We believe, also, that independent professionals, regulatory bodies, and civil society should be asked to review and scrutinise manifestos, and their findings should include costings and assessments to add heft to our political debates. This is when we can move to truly hold our politicians’ feet to the fire.

As we draw closer to decision time, many will be trying to determine which is the party they can depend on to curb corruption, guarantee transparency, and improve the quality of people’s lives. If democracy is not about these ideals, then it has to be labelled as a pretence.