THE political parties appear to be putting less emphasis on manifestos this election cycle. The PPP released a “mini manifesto” some weeks ago that offered a synopsis of its plans should it get into office. On Friday last the APNU+AFC Coalition formally launched its manifesto, but it was quick to point out that it is not a traditional manifesto, replete with promises. But, at the end of the day, it is difficult to imagine an election campaign in which the manifesto is not central; like the open-air public meeting, the manifesto is integral to the electoral process

True, some people have questioned the usefulness of manifestos and there are some valid reasons for wanting to de-emphasise it. Chief among these is the fact that it is not usually read by voters and that there is no causal relationship between the quality of a manifesto and a party’s popularity. But it is in the manifesto that one finds a written record of the party’s plans and it is the manifesto that gives the public a sense of the party’s vision for the country. While it is not read by the vast majority of voters, in the end the pundits tend to judge a party’s tenure in office by its manifesto.

The manifesto is still important for parties that are seeking re-election and those in opposition with a possibility of winning. It is especially important at critical junctures in the country’s evolution; Guyana is at such a critical juncture. With the oil and gas economy upon us, it is important that citizens know of the parties’ plans for this new dispensation. Given the robust debate over the spending priorities in such an economy, it is imperative that the contestants be explicit about their plans beyond the rhetoric at the various public events.

While there are several parties in the race, the populace is particularly interested in the plans of the two major formations. It is for that reason that the APNU+AFC’s launch of its manifesto this past Friday should be of interest. After all, the Coalition has been in office for the last five years and if incumbency comes with built-in advantages, it is not out of place to envisage it as the frontrunner. The Coalition has used its mega-rallies over the last month to drop hints about its policy agenda should it be returned to office, but the written manifesto allows for a comprehensive perusal of that agenda.

President Granger, the Coalition’s leader, stressed that the manifesto was less about campaign promises and more about realistic policies aimed at development rather than wooing votes. As he put it, “ There’s always a temptation for people to over promise because some of them know they can’t win anyway, so you might as well promise. But we have been very realistic; we have been in government and we’ve brought our experience to bear on crafting this manifesto. We will do what we promise to do; we will perform and not merely promise.”

This is an interesting observation as it lifts the manifesto to a new level of importance; it is more than a document that enumerates or itemises promises. Prime ministerial candidate Khemraj Ramjattan, drove home that point when he described it as a “contract” with the Guyanese people. According to him, the manifesto is ““a contract with the people,” which will ensure that revenue streams go to infrastructure, security, health, education and more. “It’s our contract with the people. Put us back in government and these are the things that we’re going to do and, certainly with the revenue streams, we are going to get it done.”
A contract, of course, suggests an agreement between two parties—in this case between a political party and citizens. The notion of a social contract has always been part of electoral politics, but to hear a group of parties explicitly articulate it is most refreshing. It is taking participatory democracy to another level. Surely, the political party seeking office holds the major responsibility here, but the people are tasked with the responsibility of oversight of the government.

Another observation that is noteworthy is the fact that the Coalition’s manifesto arose out of consultation among its constituent parties. This is always a complex undertaking, given the ideological diversity among the parties. The president drew attention to this process as he sought to underscore the seriousness of the document. According to him, the process took more time than is usually the case because of extensive consultations: “That took a bit of time because we had to merge the views of the five parties in the APNU with those of the AFC…this paved the way for the Manifesto Committee to continue its work, but we had the foresight to embed in the core principles and the Cummingsburg Accord, the elements which would be contained in the manifesto…“It was a deliberate process and you’ll see today the culmination of that process. It was not something hasty; not a flash in the pan, but something that we’ve worked on for over six years by six different parties.”
With two weeks to go before election day, many voters may have already made up their minds. But for those still on the hunt for a home, the manifesto may well be the document to help in that critical decision-making process.