The upcoming election will be a competition to see which political party can spend the most by showering voters with promises and election sweeteners.

The Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) has launched its campaign by announcing its Cost-of-Living Allowance (COLA) policy. It will provide $500 per person per year for the next five years, at a total cost of $110 million annually. Pensions will also increase, resulting in an additional $68m in costs. (More about this later.) The Fa’atuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi Party (FAST) has yet to announce its plan. Still, it may raise its $1m vote-enticement project from the last election to $1.5m or $2m. And what will Prime Minister Fiamē’s recently launched Samoa Uniting Party (SUP) offer voters that will match FAST and HRPP’s? Bits and pieces of Minister Olo’s idled regional airport as a souvenir, perhaps.

Whether smaller parties can entice voters with financial incentives is uncertain. Nevertheless, it’s election time. So, it doesn’t matter what or how many promises one makes or how much they will cost as long as they help one’s party win seats, while making voters feel that they are getting money in their pockets. But will the money promised reach them? (Some voters are still complaining that they never received a cent’s worth of benefit from the FAST government's $1m. project.) In countries like New Zealand and Australia, you know you will get it. And because your household is just you and your children, and no chiefs or faife’au waiting to syphon it off for fa’alavelave or fa’amativa, all the money is spent on you and your immediate family.   

HRPP’s promised Cost-of-Living Allowance (COLA) of $500 per person per year for the next five years and the increase in pensioners’ payment look more like a counter to FAST's $1m project. Under COLA, the bigger a family is, the more money they’ll get. Scammers are now busy trying to figure out how to increase their household size to receive more COLA. Resurrect the dead or apply for birth certificates for their pets? Don’t be surprised if this happens. Additionally, some couples who, in the past, considered limiting their family to two or three may now be thinking about having more children to capitalise on COLA. In part, it's a type of baby bonus scheme - the more children you have, the more COLA you get!

While this policy’s intention is noble, in that it provides financial assistance directly to the needy, applying it uniformly to all at a flat rate may not be the most efficient way of using taxpayers’ money. Better-off families may not need it, and are happy to see their entitlements go to those who are less fortunate. Having recipients means-tested ensures that only those who need this help get it. Those who don’t need it can choose to have theirs donated to organisations like the National Kidney Foundation to fund more dialysis equipment and improve their service. The number of our people suffering from kidney failure continues to increase. Alternatively, use it to establish a mental health service (or hospital), as mental health is one of our growing concerns. (By listening to the language some people use, including politicians who feed us misinformation and untruths, and observing their behaviour, you’ll know straightaway that they are well past the committed stage.)

Nevertheless, the question that needs to be asked is where the money to fund all these promises is coming from, considering that our economy has stagnated. Taxpayers in donor countries like New Zealand and Australia may not be pleased to see their aid money, which was donated to provide budget support for strengthening our economy and improving our education and health systems, being used to pay for electioneering.

Targeting the cost of living and economic development is fine, but equally important is also for those who wish to wield political power to give voters a vision of how they will repair our society’s social and moral fabric, which is in tatters. Methamphetamine drugs are everywhere, and sexual assaults and domestic violence have risen rapidly in the last decade. So is homicide. Similarly, burglary and disrespect for others and their property have led some property owners and some employers to prefer hiring foreigners over our people.   

At the election, I would rather vote for a politician who presents me with their vision of how they will work to ensure that my grandchildren grow up in a safe and healthy environment, with fewer crimes, and be led by non-corrupt leaders.