'A run-off election between the top two candidates is likely'
Over the past six months, in the build-up to Namibia's 27 November elections, Namibians have spent far too much time talking about who will win, and nowhere near enough looking into the manner in which an 'upset' would change the country.
Perhaps this is due to an unwillingness to believe that an upset will occur, or perhaps it is an unwillingness to recognise that the political system in the country, and the material outcomes it delivers for the public at large, matter and should matter to all Namibians.
Problems of unemployment, social inequality, housing, access to services, foreign policy and beyond, are national problems.
As much as some of us wish to be left alone as individuals, the reality is that even if nothing else, our political and legal system bind us all together.
Thankfully, however, for the vast majority of Namibians it is a lot more than just the political and legal systems that bind us together.
IGNORANCE
Despite the efforts of small groups that seek to divide us, to most Namibians it is unconscionable that within our nation, children go to bed without sufficient food or a roof over their heads, that grandmothers don't have access to basic medical care, that young people graduate without hope of a job, and that wealth and prosperity is a mere dream for so many.
However, similarly, most Namibians do not really know how to get in the ring and fight for change. Politics is a no-go for many, as it is painted as unpatriotic to suggest that a certain policy proposal may cause more harm than good, and that being even vaguely critical of the status quo is somehow sacrilegious, as if the status quo is working well and only naysayers and the inherently bearish can find even mild signs of failure.
Moreover, a perception (probably reality) exists that criticising the status quo, however well intended, will be treated harshly by the powers that be, and in a heavily regulated economy, those powers are both plentiful, and plenty powerful.
And so, while many do see the challenges our country faces - close to 50% unemployment, a third of the population living in shacks, half the population without access to electricity - most keep their head down. It is but a few of us fools that tilt at policy windmills to try and change things for the better.
The sane put on their blinkers and play the game, languish in the status quo, or at best quietly start or operate businesses and create jobs - an enormous and thankless challenge in this hyper-overregulated and strangulating business environment.
But even if one casts aside the altruism and care for fellow man espoused above (I do not recommend this, but let's do the thought experiment), a generally underperforming economy with high levels of unemployment, poverty and inequality is not a stable environment.
There is an old saying that explains that the people you should fear are those with nothing and everything to lose. With close to 50% of the population unemployed, many for decades, we certainly have a lot of Namibians with nothing to lose. Thus, why anyone is surprised when radical demagogues get support for radical reform promises, however unrealistic, is the real question.
LACK OF DIALOGUE
A common issue in Namibia is that we lack places of dialogue and engagement.
Development is nuanced, and a lack of trust and engagement is all too common. Add to this that dissent is equated to disloyalty or worse, and you have a recipe for failure.
So we look for ways, but sometimes inefficient and not always constructive ways, of debating in the public square.
I, like many, am guilty of the 280-character social media battles, which massively constrain the ability to discuss nuance.
Rent-control debates are a relevant example here.
I have disagreed with members of parliament on this on Twitter (I am too old to call it X), as it is an economically illiterate "solution" to a real problem.
However, this disagreement can easily be misinterpreted to suggest that one doesn't see or care about the underlying problem - this couldn't be further from the truth.
High property prices (rental and ownership) are largely driven by supply-side issues, with the main issue being access to serviced land, and addressing this underlying issue will address a large portion of the problem.
Another consideration, however, and all roads tend to lead back to this, is unemployment.
It doesn't matter how cheap houses are - if you have no income, they will be unaffordable. Both of these are issues we have been very public about, and recommended real solutions to, for literally decades.
The very same applies to my engagements with Job [Amupanda].
While I have no time for his racial lens and outdated political ideology, I appreciate that he shines a light into a number of the county's darkest areas, areas which need be illuminated in the public and policymaker's minds.
The issues he identifies around housing, corruption, education and inequality, are real issues and need to be addressed.
However, where we fundamentally disagree is on the method of resolve - the solutions. In this regard, I can be unequivocal in saying that the solution to these real problems is not an omnipotent government ruled by an autocrat - that model has been tried and has failed, repeatedly.
SOLUTION
The solution to most of these problems is a highly focused government that provides a small number of specific services well, and a flourishing entrepreneurial sector creating jobs and paying tax.
Not state mega-projects, as these have a record of failure the world over. In this regard, government should support all business activity, but purely through provision of public infrastructure, a good business climate and enabling/catalytic measures.
Being dependent on one or two sectors, hand-picked by a subset of the (perhaps smart) people in the country, will always be limiting.
Hydrogen is a great example of this.
The great exception I take with green hydrogen is simply that its proponents have created a distraction by pretending they will create far more jobs than they will.
The example I give is this: if a friend tells you they will bring the meat for a braai, you stop thinking about it because someone else has it covered. If they pitch up with no meat, you have a problem.
The green hydrogen crowd has promised us meat (jobs), and now pitched up with nothing but yesterday's salad. Thus, it is far more sensible to have a large number of contributors to the national pot, than to focus on one to two chosen contributors.
MULTI-PARTY DEMOCRACY
But enough of why our political system matters, and on-to the 'upset'. Any sensible assessment of Namibia's socio-economic data makes it clear that Namibia, like most of the region, is headed for a more legitimate multi-party democracy.
In South Africa, the ANC has fallen below 50% in the National Assembly, while in Botswana, 58 years of Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) rule have just come to a peaceful end.
Our nationally representative polling on Namibia, the only such polling that exists, has repeatedly shown that Swapo will fall well below 50% in the National Assembly election, possibly as low as 35%, and that Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah will likely be marginally less popular than the party, meaning a run-off election between the top two candidates is likely.
A run-off will be a first for the country, and based on our data, would result in significant changes.
Firstly, a large portion of those that voted for candidates that didn't make it through the first round will shift their vote to Itula (the other front runner).
Secondly, so too would a number of first-round Nandi-Ndaitwah supporters, especially if her first-round result is weak. While we can't be sure why this is, and can only backfill the data, it makes sense to us that a number of voters are, like elsewhere in the world, voting against the status quo.
At the same time, a number of those that appear to support the status quo are likely to be more loyal to the powerbase than they are to a party or candidate, and thus a clear change in majority direction will likely result in a significant swing in "powerbase supporters" to Itula.
We don't see much, beyond election interference (which we see as unlikely but not impossible), that can change this at this point, as most voters seem to have made up their minds as to where to place their cross.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
As a result, the relevant question is not how to avoid or change this outcome (given the socioeconomic issues in the country, it is hard to see why you would want to if not for self-serving reasons alone), but how do we make a new dispensation work and how do we use this change to improve the lives of all Namibians, especially those most left behind.
'INSURMOUNTABLE CHALLENGE'
Frankly, for a nation with a small population and plentiful resources, to turn things around is not an insurmountable challenge. It does, however, require some unity and interest in the common good.
Politicians will need to work across the political aisle with a focus on the nation first, but businesses and the government too will have to improve their working relationship, as will government and the public.
In this regard, there's a long overdue admission needed from the government that every job creator and every taxpayer is a national asset, and their contributions to making Namibia a better place are vital.
The business sector needs to raise its head and stop being apologist for all the good we do, but at the same time develop a spine and stop pretending that bad policy isn't bad, or isn't our problem, for fear of reprisal. At the same time, we should (obviously) conduct our business ethically, and call out bad actors amongst ourselves, while helping new businesses to establish and thrive.
Finally, as hard as it is to hear, some patience is needed from young people who have been left behind for so long.
Turning the ship in the right direction can be done and done quickly, but reaching the destination will take a bit of time.
However, shortcuts to utopia never actually lead there, and there is a legitimate road to walk to ensure a successful Namibia for all.
The key message, however, remains that Namibia has many challenges, and to put one's head in the sand and hope that others address them, is no solution.
Change is coming, and all Namibians should be looking to use this change to better the country.
We all have a role to play.
- Rowland Brown is the co-founder of Cirrus Capital.
