PERILS OF POPULIST PROMISES: EVALUATING, ENSURING ACCOUNTABILITY

ELECTIONS HAVE a familiar plot. We are witnessing a spectacle where political parties make grand promises, deliver little. Unrealistic promises, irrational freebies, undeliverable sops have become increasingly prevalent. Unfortunately, they are gaining significant traction.

- Vikas Singh

The trend has captivated both the imagination and attention of voters. Many poor voters find it difficult to 'reject' the offers. Poverty depletes, even breaks their will, despondency sets in, decision fatigue is common. For the deprived and the poor, a rupee today is more than a hundred rupees tomorrow. Most vote hoping that the manifesto pledges will be diligently carried out and delivered.

The Mirage of Manifestos

However, it has become evident that these manifestos primarily serve as tools to attract voters rather than a genuine commitment to delivering on their promises. The bitter truth remains that election manifestos, meant to serve as a blueprint for governance, often exist solely on paper, lacking any substantive impact in practice. Sops and rag-tag welfare schemes are the currency to buy' votes. Half-baked and badly implemented welfare schemes in any case benefit only the endowed.

Political parties know they can 'escape' accountability. Most do. In a complex, often high pitched and shrill electoral milieu it is difficult for voters to untwine and disentangle who, and at what level of government is responsible for which welfare scheme. Post elections they resort to brazen excuses, such as lack of consensus, and funds, to justify their failure to deliver.

Sops and freebies hamper and overshadow long-term progress and economic stability. They also distract from addressing the underlying challenges of governance, welfare, and sustainable development. They benefit the endowed. It is dangerous.