NACTA, agent of PNM? Ridiculous!

THE EDITOR: Recently, NACTA has come under attack from opposition politicians for its latest tracking poll findings showing the ruling PNM routing the UNC in the upcoming July 14 elections. NACTA was vilified by the UNC leadership who described the NACTA surveys as politically motivated to benefit the ruling PNM. There is no truth in that accusation and instead of attacking the messenger of bad news for the UNC, the leadership should have used the message (findings) to redirect and reorganise the campaign in order to retain seats the poll is showing the UNC will lose.

There is no problem with the UNC leadership critiquing the NACTA polls but to describe the organisation as an agent of the PNM is absolutely ridiculous. It should be noted that when the findings of the NACTA polls showed the UNC ahead in previous elections, the polling organisation was not described as an agent of the PNM. The UNC should be reminded that NACTA has had a history of accuracy in its poll findings. NACTA predicted a tie for the 1995 elections while other polling outfits predicted a PNM victory; that prediction did not make NACTA a PNM agent. In 2000, NACTA predicted a UNC victory while another polling organisation gave a close race with an edge to the PNM. In 2001, NACTA predicted a tie while another polling group gave the PNM a victory. In 2002, NACTA predicted a PNM victory. The NACTA pre-election findings mirrored the actual outcome of the elections as did its predictions for elections in Guyana in 1992, 1997 elections and 2001.

It should be noted that NACTA’s findings were also accurate in India and New York. In developed countries like the US when politicians are asked about polls which show them behind in popular support, they don’t attack the pollsters. Instead, they put a positive spin on the support shown by the polls. For example, they would say they are working harder to win over the public or their own internal polls show a much closer race or they are underdogs who will create the biggest upset (come from behind victory) on election day. And indeed the UNC could create an upset in a few seats if they refocus their campaign to win over uninterested voters instead of attacking the polling organisation which has been merely trying to educate the public about the importance of polls and helping to further institutionalise it in Trinidad and the Caribbean region. It is not easy for any political party to accept it is not doing well in an election. Thus, it is understandable that the UNC is not pleased with NACTA polls showing the party doing badly in the elections. It is very difficult for the UNC to accept that its popular support has fallen to less than 40 percent after a superb showing of 54 percent just three years ago. But instead of attacking NACTA, the UNC should engage in a serious internal analysis of why support is falling so rapidly.

The UNC leadership should recognise that polling is an essential component of the democratic process that is used to determine a candidate’s (or a party’s) political support in elections, to gauge support for a particular government policy initiative or programme or to find out how people feel towards a particular issue, subject or product. A poll is more or less an accurate indicator of the electoral portrait of a nation, provided they are done objectively and scientifically. Objectively conducted polls, not conditioned by racial biases of the pollster or his or her own party preference, would correctly predict the outcome of elections as in the US, Canada, India and England and the NACTA’s polls. NACTA’s polls are not intended to influence the outcome of an election by steering financial contributions or voters towards the party or candidate who is leading in the poll thereby widening his/her margin in follow up polling or in the election. NACTA’s polls are not geared towards creating a bandwagon effect for any party.

The purpose of NACTA’s polls is to inform citizens how well their party or candidates are doing ahead of an election. It also gives the losing party or candidate a chance to change campaign strategies with the hope of reversing political fortune. Political parties and candidates for office are known to doubt the findings of polls. Thus, in many countries they conduct their own polls to determine their strengths and weaknesses and then channel resources in the weak areas. For example, the Republican and Democratic parties  in the US are known to carry out weekly tracking polls to determine their strength in Presidential and Congressional elections and to address their weakness among certain groups of voters. Since the party does not like the findings of the NACTA polls, it is encouraged to commission its own polls.

VISHNU BISRAM
Director, NACTA Polling