On Thursday, January 30, I terminated my 13-year public sector job and embarked on a candidacy run in the highly anticipated General Election set for February 18. I am super low-key and a bit of a recluse, but when the spirit calls you to step outside of your comfort zone and serve, you answer — or else!

I worked as a parliamentary draftsman and I loved it. It is meticulous, rabbit-hole-diving nerd work – synthesising vast amounts of information on any particular subject and translating clear, sound policy into law in order to solve a problem or introduce a new initiative. Paring down complex issues into easily accessible legislation is extremely gratifying. Except when policy decisions are neither clear nor sound.

It is important to note that there will always be local, national-level and industry-specific legislative needs that are largely self-driven, but do require an organised and responsive government to facilitate. For example: a marine board notice to inform of a round-the-island boat race or ensuring that Bermuda’s protection of endangered species is in keeping with international requirements, or ensuring that the legislative framework supporting our primary economic pillar remains robust.

My concerns do not extend to these types of self-functioning mechanisms — except in the instance that the governance machine is politically driven to the point of dysfunction, making efforts to meet even these less politically charged mandates much more difficult than they need to be.

Broken systems, broken promises

My criticism is largely with how we resolve the core issues facing the average Bermuda citizen who wonders, “How and why is Bermuda becoming a harder place to live in, be healthy in, raise happy, healthy children in, receive a good education in, own and maintain a home in, pay for basic amenities in, retire in, care for ageing loved ones in, stay alive in, and thrive in?”

If after decades we still don’t know the answers to these questions, but find more and more people asking them, then that is a serious indictment on any ruling government —past or present — that has had multiple chances to provide answers and comprehensive solutions.

I recall when policies were well thought out, emerging from consultation and informed by data, white papers and green papers were produced distilling the issues and etching a clear path from problem to potential solution. But with the pressure to be political magic-makers and to quickly quell growing frustrations, policies are now often ill-conceived, rushed and then legislated with little stakeholder input — and are almost never reported on in terms of implementation or outcome. With every proposed policy, at least three questions should be asked and answered:

1, On what information or data are you operating?

2, Who will be impacted and have they been consulted?

3, How will you measure success?

At election time, policy platforms are likely not assessed for feasibility, are unlikely to have been fully considered by relevant stakeholders, may contain aspects that need to be considered against the Bermuda Constitution or international obligations, and likely have little to no empirical data to support them. This is normal, by the way, starting out. Some may be promising ideas that emerged from canvassing the public.

But problems arise when trying to make good on political promises to institute such policies in the absence of any further analysis or consultation. Pushing through half-baked policies often produces unfavourable results that are extremely costly — if subject to legal challenge — stresses the existing system for additional support, and diverts energy and resources from other critical but less politically charged projects. Insert whatever inexplicable issue here that went so wrong and it is probably a result of this tragically flawed process.

Strong infrastructure good outcomes

My primary aim is to advocate for increased investment — time, energy and money — in people, infrastructure and systems to ensure greater problem mapping, policy development and implementation. This approach will be crucial for the success of any well-meaning platform initiative. It will ensure the effective outcomes that taxpayers desperately want and will ultimately pay for, and would still enable politicians to pat themselves on the back. So critical is this single issue that it prompted me to make the shift to election candidacy so that I can freely and independently convey this to the public.

Independent candidates are uniquely positioned to advocate for such improvements and may even push for audits of previous and existing government initiatives. A more robust infrastructure that provides for accountability, consultation and transparency will be necessary to help move any good idea from policy development through to implementation and success. Independent candidates have a legitimate role to play in moving the needle towards the change that so many want to see. They are an acknowledgement that MPs are elected to represent their constituents’ collective interests and are an unbiased voice for the people as opposed to an agent for a party with a mandate to govern over the people.

On February 18, it is hoped that the best candidates will be elected — candidates who, with or without a party, will advocate for people over party and for real solutions over party rhetoric. After all, any other approach seems an unfortunate waste of 36 seats in the House of Assembly — and of taxpayer money.

• Lauren Francis is the independent candidate for Warwick South East (Constituency 24) in the next General Election. Her platform can be found atwww.laurenfrancisbda.com

• Comments are closed on political content until February 19 to stem the flow of purposefully inflammatory and litigious comments during the General Election cycle. Users who introduce extreme partisan comments into other news content will be given a two-week timeout