Vote on fundamental issues

TOMORROW, people across the land will vote in local government elections. By now, most people will have decided who to vote for, although there may remain a few who are undecided.

The standout feature of the electioneering, so far, has been attempts to make the poll about conscience, historical loyalty and ideological solidarity, and less about municipal issues.

Municipal elections are, fundamentally, about things like rubbish collection, the supply of electricity and water, community safety and public transport, and the general provision of a range of public goods and services. For any range or reasons, some political parties are better at it than others.

At election time decisions about who to vote for are, or at least ought to be, based on a record of actual provision of goods and services, and the abilities that are part of actual governance. In other words, if people are happy or satisfied with the delivery of goods and services of the past several years, it is reasonable to expect them to vote for incumbents.

If they are dissatisfied – if citizens cannot walk the streets in safety, if they receive an intermittent supply of water or electricity, or if sewerage systems are broken – they may vote for political parties that make the best promises, coupled with some record of successful public administration and governance. When contestation is over personalities, or notions of deep historical or ideological loyalties and solidarities, it becomes irrelevant whether elected officials have the actual abilities to run local government.

Glossing the work of Amartya Sen, the Indian economist and philosopher, with particular reference to public policy and actual delivery of services, the government can play a powerful role in removing obstacles in people’s lives and increasing the capabilities of citizens to live full lives. This places the government in a direct relationship with what drives freedom, economic activity, progressive social change and transformation, justice and equity, which are some of the main markers of prosperity.

Put simply, local government can provide resources which would enable the functioning of society and, thereby, strengthening the ability of people to live full lives. Conversely, when the government fails to provide resources, there is a knock-on effect on the functioning of society and undermines the capability of people to live full lives.

Municipal elections are, therefore, about the daily lives of people, where and under what conditions they live, work, play, raise their children, care for the elderly and protect the marginalised. It is not about ideological solidarity.

It would be foolish to deny that, in general, affiliation is a factor when making political decisions, but this has to be weighed up against evidence and knowledge. Citizens must have full access to knowledge and information (which are, in themselves, public goods) to elect governments that will address the most biting concerns of society – especially poverty.

Poverty, across a range of indices, amounts to the deprivation in the capability of citizens to live fuller and better lives. The government’s role in development – the elimination of poverty, lowering inequality, improving access to healthcare and education, among many others – amounts to the expansion of capabilities.

There is a piece of advice I used to share with students on the eve of their final exams. I would tell them that there was nothing to be gained from trying to cram everything you have learnt over the past seminar or year into your head on the day before an exam.

If you have not paid attention all year, I would say, and if you have not read the prescribed literature, attended lectures and seminars or you have not shared perspectives with friends and your teachers, you certainly will not do it all within the hours before an exam. It is too late.

Of course, this does not always get the desired effect on the day. There is, always, the hope that students would take heed, and be more studious and attentive over the semesters or years that follow, that they would not throw caution to the wind and simply rely on their wits, hunches and passions to make decisions that are life-changing. In some small way, I want to believe, elections are similar.

Citizens cast their votes based on hopes, fears, beliefs, values, perception or loyalty, but there is always, or at least there ought to always be, a more knowledge-based reason for voting.

This knowledge-based voting ought to include fairly objective evidence of past performance on the part of the candidate and (based on this evidence) what reasonable expectations are for future performance.

Municipal elections are about how taxes are spent on things like trash collection, public safety, infrastructure maintenance, water and electricity supply, sewerage and drainage.

It is not about who owns Nelson Mandela’s image rights, or what colour your overalls are, nor is it about who draws the crowd and who plays the loudest.

‘ Local government can provide resources which would enable the functioning of society and, thereby, strengthening the ability of people to live full lives