Following yesterday’s heated debate sparked by my post Dr. Lawrence Mwelwa writes…
THE DANGERS OF COMMERCIALIZATION OF POLITICS PART 1 – Dr. Lawrence Mwelwa
The role of money in politics and elections is a major issue for those trying to support sustainable democratic development across the world.
This wisdom I have also seen under the sun, and it seemed great to me: There was a little city with few men in it; and a great king came against it, besieged it, and built great snares around it. Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city. Yet no one remembered that same poor man.
Then I said: “Wisdom is better than strength. Nevertheless, the poor man’s wisdom is despised, And his words are not heard. Words of the wise, spoken quietly, should be heard Rather than the shout of a ruler of fools. Wisdom is better than weapons of war; But one sinner destroys much good.” Ecclesiastes 9:13-18 NKJV
There are many wise poor people, who with their wisdom can deliver their cities from poverty but their own poverty has kept them outside parliament. Politics and democracy cost money. The nationwide debate that we expect to see in a parliamentary election campaign cannot take place without resources. It takes money to sustain political parties that can unite groups of citizens around shared platforms that form the basis of the election contest.
Individual candidates who run for election need adequate funds to be able to get their arguments across to voters. Money may not guarantee electoral success, but it is rare that electoral success comes to those with very little money.
However, when the cost of politics and elections becomes so high that the investment that candidates and their supporters need to secure election is beyond the means of the vast majority of citizens, then fears grow about corruption, about exclusion from the political process, and about the quality of democracy.
The approach I have taken on this subject is to focus on the root cause which follows: the high cost of politics and not just on the symptoms of corruption that flow from it.
Cost of parliamentary politics
It finds that the costs faced by aspiring MPs are high – not just to conduct their election campaign, but before that to secure their place on the ballot paper. The adoption process at party level is complicated. Those who succeed and are elected to parliament face further costs throughout their term of office. Some of these costs arise from their constituents’ general expectation that their MPs, as prominent figures in the community, should provide financial support to those they represent. However, much of the demand is bound up with the expectation of repayment. Individuals who voted for the MP expect payment in return, usually on or before Election Day itself. Those who regard themselves as having helped the MP get elected may make continuing and sometimes very significant demands for repayment.
Local supporters may expect one-off or ongoing payments, in cash or in kind. Wealthy backers, on the other hand, may look for very significant returns on their investment in an MP – including favourable treatment, the award of lucrative contracts, political protection, and so on. In these circumstances, an MP may face unknown demands at any point after election day, as their backers call in what they regard as their debts. Without change in the costs of becoming an MP, it is difficult to see how this culture of corruption can be tackled.
If they decide to seek re-election, the whole cycle begins again. MPs who plan to run again must spend a good deal of time while in office raising funds for their re-election campaign. Faced with this prospect, incumbent parliamentarians – especially those in government – may be sorely tempted to supplement those efforts and reduce the cost to themselves, by misusing the public resources they control to subsidise their re-election campaign. Further to secure funds and support from wealthy sponsors – and by using those funds, together with their power and influence, they make things harder for their potential opponents at the next election.
To be continued..