While the overall outcome of the Trinidad and Tobago election was discussed last week, there are some localised outcomes that warrant attention and will be the focus this week. As was the case with the national analysis, the analytical tool is similar and the outcomes are presented diagrammatically.
The initial focus to the far left of the appended chart is the outcome in Tobago West and Siparia which represent the PNM’s best and worst performances, respectively. The outstanding improvement is largely explained by the fact that Tobago has historically been a relatively safe zone for the PNM and those are the seats which haemorrhage most in a year with an unfavourable swing (2010) and benefit most from a favourable swing (2015).
The outcome in 2010 where the PNM lost both seats in Tobago was historic and clearly the population there has returned to form now with this 2015 outcome. The Siparia result is also easily explainable and consistent with the fact that this is former prime minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s seat and one expects that a leader’s seat will always be more resilient; hence the PNM will struggle there most.
In Trinidad and Tobago there is considerable interest in the so-called “marginals” since these are the most sensitive to the national swing and the average level of PNM support, along with the average swing in these five constituencies is presented.
Clearly these zones are still marginal; however the performance of the PNM in these places is entirely consistent with the national mood. This reality lends support to the suggestion that the outcome in Trinidad was entirely a national conversation and not a result of localised peculiarities, which is entirely different to the case of Barbados.
Arguably the PP would have performed much better had their strategy been more localised and not focused on the national scenario of Persad-Bissessar versus Rowley. In the case of Barbados it is arguable that the DLP prevailed partially because the “BLP-Arthur” focus was not countered by a “DLP-Stuart” focus, but instead by a localised campaign in 30 constituencies, and provides much food for thought.
The impact of the former FIFA vice- president Jack Warner is revealed in Chaguanas East where he failed to win his seat. His loss was predicable; however, it was also clear that his objective in the pursuing the seat was less to win, but to damage the UNC and perhaps hand the seat the PNM.
Warner’s vote haul, which amounted to 27 per cent, was insufficient to hand the seat to the PNM, although it did effectively facilitate a PNM’s swing of six per cent which was greater than most other UNC strongholds.
It is therefore clear that Warner did have some impact on UNC support in Chaguanas East, but it was insufficient to split the UNC vote and hand the seat to the PNM.
The performance of Independent candidates is always of interest largely because no independent has won a seat in any Caribbean country in recent times and one wonders about their objectives.
In this instance several independents contested, and all of them lost their deposits; however, one in Tobago East polled close to 2 000 votes, which was nine per cent of all votes cast and would be a historic performance.
Although the impact did little to alter the course of the national or Tobago outcome, it represented a personal triumph for the candidate Watson Duke who is also president of the TT Public Service Association which has 12 000 members, which is similar to the quantity of people who voted in Tobago East.
The final noteworthy localised outcome is that of Mayaro which was formerly represented by Winston “Gypsy” Peters who abandoned the UNC on the eve of the election after being replaced. The combination of Gypsy’s rejection and his support for the PNM, along with the fact that the UNC candidate had no time there to make a personal appeal, presented the PNM with the best opportunity for success in many years.
In the end the UNC prevailed and Peters’ defection did not even help the PNM to gain a swing there that was similar to the national 12 per cent.
The fact that the PNM’s performance there was less outstanding than its marginal performance and only slightly better than its performance in strongholds again confirms that this was effectively a national election which resisted any sensitivity to localised factors.
Peter W. Wickham ([email protected]) is a political consultant and a director of Caribbean Development Research Services (CADRES).
