Elections Observer Report – political financing

Jun 12, 2020 Editorial

---

Today, in this final coverage of the EU’s Elections Observer Report, a close look is taken at the influential presence in Elections 2020 of what the EU termed “unregulated political finance.” Many in Guyana know that it is unregulated, though not many may know that it is also unlimited in the quantities doled out to one party or the other in the local political arena.
The first thing to be said is that at any time in any place where “unregulated” and unlimited political financing occurs, there is bound to follow a litany of issues that could range from the perverse to the prejudiced to the powerful thrown into already very nasty circumstances. Unregulated and unlimited money facilitates and incites more trouble in a dark place.
Intelligence making the rounds are of many men giving monetary gifts in the hundreds of millions. Unconfirmed reports are of a list of names of prominent commercial interests individually topping even that massive figure. If dozens of men lined up to give billions in total, then much legwork and mischief become possible. As is to be expected, the primary recipients of such unlimited political financing have been the major groups, with the newcomers sharing in the wealth in lesser amounts.
When the levels of spending in extensive newspaper space and expensive television time are partially assembled, the amounts involved in paid advertising have to be astounding. There is the first piece of supporting evidence. The second piece is present in the number of agents recruited to provide support services and get the messages across continuously. And, if those were not enough, a coalition spokesperson went public to air the party’s grievance about suspected collusion between some of its own agents in polling stations and those of the opposition. Like most things in life, money talks, thus this claim should not be readily dismissed.
As if in agreement, this is what the EU’s report had to say: “both major political groupings had significant funds at their disposal.” Those funds made possible the draining death struggle that continues. Armies march on their bellies, move quicker on gasoline, and function more energetically when incentivized. All of that applies in spades when politics with its rich promises of ascension to power is the still richer prize. In a nutshell, there were tankers of money to spread around, and much to spare.
After all the clamour and conflicts over money laundering in this country, and the recognized fearful state where Guyana stands, nobody was talking about, or concerned, or honest enough to question the possible sources of such cash. Businesspeople in the environment swear loudly and insistently that business is slow to poor; their words and postures denounce them as liars and worse. By process of elimination: business is bad, profits are near nonexistent, and skimpy savings are off-limits, therefore, the “unregulated” and unlimited cash financing of Guyana’s elections almost automatically trace to a single source: dark money, aka dirty money.
In this manner, it could be argued that the nation’s governance apparatus, regardless of which group succeeds at the polls, is accordingly contaminated, and already comprised. To retable the associated logic and expectation: campaign financing is not intended to be a one-way street. Instead, it is entered into as a wise investment, with rich returns promised. To be pointed: exponential returns, since so much corruption characterizes professional and political Guyana.
For emphasis: political financing is not charity. Rather, it is spending to get a better tax deal (politically arranged forgiveness or condoned evasions being the routines). Or giving with a mind towards less new regulations, or less enforcement of existing ones. In essence, such actions by agents of the state, be they bureaucratic or political, embody expensive giveaways at the expense of the state treasury and the ordinary taxpayer. Campaign money today makes good things happen tomorrow, when the dust settles over elections turmoil and cash creditors line up to collect what is owed.
The EU in its third priority recommendation advised this fix: “Develop, in a consultative process, effective legislation to regulate political finance, taking the principles of equality, transparency and accountability into account.” The recommendation spoke further to “reasonable limits for campaign expenditure” and “disclosure and reporting requirements” and “establishment of an independent oversight body.”
All that sounds good today and when on paper. In the environment of everyday living post-elections, other forces and interests take charge leading to no progress on this and other things.

---

---