Opinion Polling is not an instrument used extensively or at all in Guyana. Apart from an occasional poll relating to the outcome of elections or the popularity of political leaders, no other significant polling is carried out, except perhaps in connection with academic research. Yet the importance and value of polling has long been established. Polling for business and academic purposes has long been used to test the market or to obtain information. Before a product is introduced in the market, serious businesses conduct one or more polls. When I was a student overseas and a smoker, I participated in a poll in connection with the introduction of a new brand of cigarettes. I was happy to be given a pack of twenty. I saved a few shillings, a lot in those days. Polling also takes place on a wide variety of social and/or academic issues. In Guyana we can get accurate figures about child abuse, domestic violence, divorce rates, the acceptability of political and economic policies intended to be pursued or being pursued and many others. I think that I have made the case about the importance of polling.

The absence of a history of polling, combined with our charged political atmosphere since independence, has resulted in the existence a healthy skepticism among our population about revealing sensitive views and information to strangers. A pollster knocking on one’s door requesting private and confidential information, even of a non-political nature, is likely to be given short shrift. The population is simply not accustomed to this kind of activity and most of them are unaware of its objective, except perhaps polling for political purposes.

Opinion polling in the U.S. and other developed countries are conducted with highly sophisticated techniques and in circumstances where polling is an accepted activity and its purpose is understood. While there might be suspicion, it is certainly not sufficiently grounded to be an obstacle to successful polling. Even in Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago polling on political opinions has reached a high level of sophistication and acceptance, even if the polls are not always accurate.

Some years ago an organisation known by its acronym, NACTA, began political polling in Guyana. Because of its novelty it was some time before the results made an impact. By the time NACTA became known, most of the players had left the group and Vishnu Bisram remained. Of one thing we can be certain. Bisram is a real person and his existence is accepted. Maintaining the name of NACTA is not unusual. Millions of people all over the world use business names or trade names. Some are registered and some are not. Mr. Bisram had clearly intended to continue polling and it was more than sensible to use the name NACTA once his former colleagues had agreed, as they appeared to have done.

By the time Bisram took up polling the name NACTA was known and soon after the name of Vishnu Bisram became known and associated with polling in Guyana. The question has since arisen as to whether he does ‘real’ polling and whether his published results are ‘accurate.’ Even some of my friends have at certain times condemned Bisram’s conclusions, especially when the results do not meet their hopes or expectations. When at other times they do, the criticisms melt away. In response to all of these factors, when asked about Bisram, I reported an incident involving myself some years ago, before I had met Bisram. I met a friend at one of my regular Saturday afternoon ‘outings’ at my village shop. I hadn’t seen him for some time. He pulled me aside and said that Vishnu Bisram is doing a poll and that I was involved in the poll. Upon my further inquiry he told me that a man had stopped by his store and had asked him to fill a questionnaire. Having enquired of the person he learnt that it was a political poll being conducted by Bisram. He readily agreed to fill it. This one story has confirmed my belief that Bisram does ‘real’ polling. I am prepared to give the friend’s name to any credible person who does not want it for a hostile purpose, just to prove his existence.

But there are other indicia. His polling in Guyana has been remarkably accurate. Poll after poll has predicted the election results with varying degrees of accuracy. It may be argued that Guyana’s conditions give rise to the possibility of easy guess work. OK. So what about Trinidad? The so called experts who would have spent the millions and who have outstanding academic records all got it wrong. Only Bisram’s poll said that the Congress of the People led by Winston Doekaran would get no seats and accurately predicted the number of seats the two other parties would get. I recall when the Congress Party of India won the elections before the last, Bisram ran a poll and predicted that it would. Many, if not most, experts concluded from their own polling that the BJP would be returned to power on account of the spectacular economic progress which had been made. I therefore don’t need any proof that Bisram does ‘real’ polling. Bisram has done polling in many countries with outstanding success.

Vishnu Bisram has done pioneering work in Guyana and thus a great service to the political process. He has sensitised a large number of people to the issue of polling, which is far advanced in sister CARICOM countries which I have pointed out above. Were it not for Bisram Guyana would have been lagging far behind. This is why it is so sad to see the mean attacks which are being levelled at him all over the independent press. And no matter what cogent arguments he advances, these unabated attacks continue. Anyone who dares to go to Bisram’s defence is likewise denigrated.

One of the criticisms made against Bisram is that he is not a professional and even if he does polling, they are not professionally done. The first and quick answer is; check the results! It’s the results that count. But there is another answer. Many years ago there was a surgeon at the Georgetown Hospital who performed neuro surgery. It was alleged that he was not a qualified neuro surgeon and public concerns were expressed. I remember when I enquired of Roger Luncheon, he put it this way to me. Before the surgeon came to Guyana (he was a foreigner) 100 percent of all patients with serious head injuries died. Since he began operating, of the 100 percent on which he operated, 40 percent are saved. He asked me whether, with those statistics, the hospital should stop the surgeon from operating. We have the other case of Dick Morris who came to Guyana at the instance of the AFC. He is a professional pollster and allegedly conducted a poll which showed the AFC winning the elections. As a result of the findings of this poll, Bisram was roundly condemned when he did his own. We know the results of the elections.

Despite the attacks on Bisram’s integrity, he has the full support of many people, merely because he has introduced and is popularising a mechanism which other independent people and political parties should adopt. Political parties would find private polling extremely useful in determining policy. I’m not arguing that policies should be determined on the basis of how acceptable they are. Government is often required to adopt and implement policies which are unpopular. The same applies to the Opposition. But polling would assist politicians to understand where, when and how to convince those who are skeptical to support policies which are necessary for the country’s benefit.