The one who adapts his policy to the times prospers, and likewise that the one whose policy clashes with the demands of the times does not. - Niccolo Machiavelli

We have less than a year before we fully embark upon "the silly season" of the political campaign in advance of the general election, which many believe has never ended, but has morphed into a perennial campaign. We therefore thought it would be instructive to discuss the concepts of politics versus policy. This is especially important against a backdrop of what will become a public discussion of the policies and politics of the various parties that will contest the general election next year, or possibly sooner. Therefore, this week we would like to Consider this... Just what is the difference between politics and policy?

Policy versus politics: What is the difference?
The word "policy" was derived from the Latin word "politia" and refers to "the course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, a political party or an individual". Policy is all about plans and proposals to address specific issues. It normally connotes a "rule of behavior". Policy is where the change happens, and does not necessarily need to relate to politics at all times.

Politics, on the other hand, is the art and science of government. Politics refers to public life and affairs that center around the activities concerned with the acquisition or exercise of authority or government. Politics is necessary to implement policies that could potentially alter the lives of individuals for the better.

Politics involves an organizational process. It is about the theory and practice of government, the profession of government and the differences between governing groups or political parties. In short, we can think about policy as a plan or course of action that embraces the general goals of a political party or government, whereas politics pertains to the methodology by which those policies or goals are implemented.

Examples
For example, a political party or government might propose a policy to make universal health care available to its citizens as a right, whether or not those citizens can afford it. The politics of such a goal might involve political decisions to either subsidize (that is, for the government to pay for such a service) or to tax its citizens, or both, in order to implement that policy. Similarly, a political party or government might propose and support a policy to introduce either a personal or corporate tax in order to raise public revenue.

The politics related to such decisions include a consideration of who should be taxed, what tax rate should be applied and to whom, and whether to grant exemptions and deductions to persons below certain income thresholds. Political decisions are often tempered by a politician's perception of what the likely outcome will be to his policies at the polls, rather than what is in the best long-term interest of the Commonwealth.

Making tough decisions

It is generally easy to develop or formulate policies that affect the electorate. The real difficulty lies in the practical application or implementation of such policies. Politicians are motivated or driven by a short-term horizon. They think in five-year cycles, the short term rather than the long term, primarily because they are motivated by actions that will benefit them in time for the next election cycle. Instead, we believe that policy formulation should entail a long-term perspective, driven by a consideration of how we develop policies that will benefit the nation in the long term, even if in the short term such policies might cost votes on election day.

Using the income tax example that we mentioned earlier, notwithstanding the benefits that might arise from the implementation of an income tax in the long term, politicians frequently ask: What will such a decision cost in terms of votes in the next election? Accordingly, tough decisions are deferred because of the amount of political currency that might be spent in doing the right thing. Likewise, drawing on the policy of universal healthcare that we also discussed earlier, politicians attempt to calculate whether they should defer doing the right thing in the short term because the cost is too great in terms of voter support in the short term.

There is a natural propensity to proverbially "kick the can down the street" and let the next administration deal with the issue and the potentially negative fallout at the polls. Therefore, making tough decisions that have long-term benefits for the greater number of our citizens is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.

From politics to policy
The challenge for the development of prudent public policy is to do the right thing now, despite the potential negative voter support in the short term. We have repeatedly observed that insufficient consideration is given to the long-term benefits of a policy. Additionally, policies are often formulated without comprehensively, methodically and systematically weighing the costs of such policies, and anticipating the ultimate benefits that will result from them.

The other trap that public policymakers occasionally fall into is that public policies are formulated without sufficient empirical data to support the appropriateness of such policies. All too often, greater emphasis is placed on the political considerations, reactions and fallout of decisions that affect public policy.

Conclusion
We are at the crossroads of developing policies that would have long-term implications for national development. Whether we are considering the sale of precious national assets, the granting of concessions or the disposition of Crown land to foreign investors, it is vitally important to determine whether disposing of such valuable assets in the short term will encumber the future of unborn Bahamians for generations to come.
We must critically reassess how we progress from politics to policy.

o Philip C. Galanis is the managing partner of HLB Galanis and Co., Chartered Accountants, Forensic & Litigation Support Services. He served 15 years in Parliament. Please send your comments to pgalanis@gmail.com.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian