#BTColumn – The BLP truly delivered

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the author(s) do not represent the official position of Barbados TODAY.

by Ayo Ololara and Terry Harris

We have carefully listened to the commentary on the recently concluded election by some popular voices and whilst we find some of the perspectives provided to be interesting, much of the discussion was lacking in terms of evidence and seemed to reflect considerable bias.

Thus, we thought perhaps some rudimentary data analysis would help to clear the air surrounding whether the recent election represents a failure of democracy. To the contrary, it is our view that our democracy is alive and well, and what we witnessed on 19 January was democracy at work, and it would serve us well to remember that voting is not the only form of democratic expression.

What is also true is that the DLP must do some serious introspection and revamping in order to regain the confidence of its supporters.

In recent elections, the total number of votes cast in Barbados has remained relatively constant with the mean number of votes for both the BLP and the DLP in all general elections held from 1966 to 2013 (prior to the landslide result in 2018) standing at around 60K odd votes.

Table 1 below provides the BLP and DLP mean and standard deviation of votes for the periods 1966 to 2013 and 1966 to present.

Table 1: Number of Votes

Thus, if we consider that during the 2018 election the BLP and DLP received around 112,955 and 33,551, votes respectively, it should be clear that 2018 was a classic outlier year in terms of votes cast for the BLP (approx.
+4 standard deviations away from the mean) and was also an anomalous year for the DLP (approx. -2 standard deviations away from the mean).

Given this, we argue that 2018 should not be used to guide our expectations in terms of the number of votes likely to be cast for either party going forward. Instead, we argue that one would more rationally expect a reversion to the mean vote given the stationarity of the data series.

Consistent with this expectation, we observe in 2022 a reversion to the mean in terms of votes cast for the BLP of around 77,838. Given the likelihood that the ongoing COVID disruption and the lack of remote voting options available to vulnerable segments of the population (among other factors) have served to somewhat diminished voter turnout, we argue that this result represents an excellent performance by the BLP.

Nevertheless, some commenters have blamed severe voter apathy for the low total voter turnout of approximately 45 per cent. What’s more, as far as critics are concerned, somehow this is either the government’s fault due to some imagined lack of performance on its part and therefore members should be ashamed.

However, the data suggests otherwise and shows that the BLP’s voter turnout in 2022 not only beats the historical average but also exceeds their performance in 2013, which was the closest to a split election result observed in post-independence Barbados (please see Figure 1).

On the other side of the isle, the DLP’s performance is yet to return to the historical average, and it is hard to resist asking the inherent question, ‘But Why Ma’am?!’ To be clear, as it relates to the DLP in 2022, we observe circa 30,273 votes cast in their favour. Looking at the data, this clearly represents a continuation of the anomalous performance in 2018 and suggest that the DLP has been unable to recapture the imagination of their traditional supporters, thereby reverting to their mean vote levels.

To better illustrate these points, we provide the figure below which highlights election results for all general elections held from 1966 to 2022. To recapitulate, we observe a mean reversion pattern for the BLP in 2022 but worsening performance for the DLP in terms of votes cast.

Figure 1: Barbados Election Results (1966 – 2022) One could argue that the DLP ran a campaign that was a reminder of the underperformance the voting public has come to associate them with whilst in government during their last ten-year stretch, and indeed the weakness of their opposition politics over the past three and a half years.

It has also been suggested that they created confusion, distrust, and distaste in many, and citizens became exhausted of their proxies on social and other media constantly attempting to obfuscate while fixating on what many considered to be non-issues. It appears that this hurt more than it helped their image and cause.

In contrast, the BLP ran a cohesive campaign with clear, concise messaging emanating from each platform, and importantly coalesced behind one leader. It could equally be claimed that the issues that the majority of citizens/electorate cared about were being managed well by the sitting Government.

Water had returned to affected communities, education was free again, buses were running regularly and on time, garbage was being collected and the environment was being maintained, homes were being built, tax refunds were being paid, contractors were being employed and the list goes on. Consultation on republican status and other such items were abstract concepts to most. Politics is after all the purest numbers ‘game’.

To be sure, the election result is but a reflection of all this to more or less an extent. Therefore, it is in no way a surprise that the DLP were unable to motivate their base to attend the polls. It is highly plausible that their dismal performance is due to their inability to be ready to face the polls from every strategic standpoint.

Clear messaging, clear leadership, a full slate of sound new candidates, a failure to show remorse for the damage inflicted to the country during the so called “glorious years” of 2008-2018. Some will seek to defend the DLP’s performance by pointing to the fact that most of the DLP candidates were new to electoral politics and needed more time.

However, if we closely inspect this argument its faults become clear as in the race where the parties ran closest, the DLP sat a candidate who represented that constituency for over a decade in prior years while the BLP fielded a completely new candidate and still won.

Moreover, all DLP candidates underperformed in each constituency failing to reach their historical averages.

The evidence of exactly how lacklustre the DLP’s performance was in the recently concluded election cannot be clearer!

Therefore, the idea that this is not a victory that should be celebrated by the BLP or its supporters baffles, since the party clearly got its base out to vote, despite COVID and garnered approximately 31 per cent of the 45 per cent of voters who turned-out.

Therefore, suggesting that a government with that performance, and a renewed mandate from a significant proportion of the voting population should be ashamed, does not compute.

So yes, voter apathy may have played a part in the outcome of the election, but not in the sense that the BLP was unable to motivate its voters, instead their opponent’s base simply did not vote consistent with the historical norm pre-2018.

Voting in two party states takes place along lines of clear demarcations for the most part. It has been suggested that when the base of the DLP party is displeased with the performance of their party, they avoid the polls rather than vote for the BLP —the available evidence is consistent with this story.

Nevertheless, as difficult a task as this will prove to be, we agree that the BLP should attempt to convert as many of those voters as possible especially those of the younger generation. All told, the DLP voter has proven more than once that they will vote with their feet when displeased with their party.

Yet, in such instances a BLP Government must still lead the entire nation with pride, and we should have confidence and faith in our democracy because voting with your feet, or voting at the polls, is still voting.

Submitted By: Ayo Ololara, Political Analyst & Businesswoman; and Terry Harris, PhD, Assistant Professor (Business Analytics and Technology, Big Data Analytics, Research Methods), Durham University. They are the hosts of the local programme Just Politics: Our Worldview. Please feel free to contact them via jpourworldview@gmail.com