Recep Dal of Yenidüzen has done a fine job of reporting on the election-related spending carried out in a rush by the UBP-DP-YDP Government—and, in the last month, by the UBP-DP Government in a reduced capacity.
Irregular appointments, exceptional citizenship grants, the issuing of firearms licences, mining operation permits, high-level appointments and so on…
I believe that the irregular and unethical practices carried out in a rush before the election with the intention of securing votes, and the same practices carried out during their time in power (how much of a ‘government’ they actually were is debatable) with the intention of prolonging their time in office, no longer yield the expected votes and support.
***
When we look at the irregular and unethical practices listed in the article in question—for example, high-level appointments—yes, it is conceivable that those appointed to such posts would work for the appointing Party within the relevant department, carry out the task of gathering votes for it, and prioritise the interests of people affiliated with that Party.
But what about the reactions of those outside that Party who are awaiting that post… or, even those within the Party who are awaiting the same post but have not been appointed?! Won’t this cause two votes—or, even more—to be lost?
In other words, such appointments can create more disgruntled people alongside those who are satisfied.
***
What about exceptional citizenship grants, then… In 2026, exceptional citizenship was granted to 397 people. In other words, the Council of Ministers sat down and granted exceptional citizenship according to its own criteria—or, perhaps according to the criteria of others!
Since citizenship is granted in accordance with procedure and the law, and given that those awaiting these citizenship grants do not have votes, negative votes will not be reflected in the ballot box; however, the interactions of these people within society are now so widespread that this interaction is bound to be reflected in the ballot box.
On the other hand, it does not take much to understand that those who are already uncomfortable with the changing demographic structure are even more upset by the granting of these exceptional citizenships.
In other words, whilst you are preoccupied with granting 400 citizenships to secure votes, you are also effectively sanctioning the loss of hundreds of votes, including those from your own party members.
***
As for partisan appointments: I believe that if you make one such appointment, you open the door to the loss of ten votes; if you make ten appointments, you open the door to the loss of a hundred votes.
Perhaps in the past, there were high expectations regarding these partisan appointments, so votes would hold steady whilst you waited for your turn; however, the Public Service Commission Examinations seem to have reduced these expectations to a minimum.
Despite this, partisan appointments can still be made irregularly, but the numbers are much lower than before.
***
As for the new quarry licence mentioned in the news, I do not believe it will bring in any votes beyond those of the licence holder. There is such a strong backlash against this incident that revoking the licence might even help the government recoup the votes it has lost. Mind you, the pockmarked appearance of Pentadaktylos might well prevent this expectation from being met. At the end of the day, you might just have to settle for saying, “Well, we’ve certainly done a miserable job, haven’t we!”
According to yesterday’s news, the permit has already been revoked following negative assessments from the relevant authorities… However, it would not be wrong to say that the votes lost during this process are gone for good.
***
I’m not entirely sure whether the distribution of rural plots, unlike other issues, could actually lead to a shift in the vote, because we’re an emotional society. Even though we know the plots are once again being distributed along party lines, we might be more inclined to view this positively, thinking, “Perhaps the young people will be able to own a home to live in.”
***
Firearm licences, however, are a real headache for both the government and our security.
It is claimed that licences are issued for ‘security’ reasons. Well, perhaps the safety of the person carrying the gun is ensured, but what about the rest of society? How can we be guaranteed that the barrel of that gun won’t be turned on us? Could an increase in the number of people walking around with guns on their belts in the high street, or at the market really be a positive development?
Perhaps the argument could be made that ‘the gun will be kept locked away at home’, but the person who has obtained that licence often takes great pleasure in carrying the gun on their person… I cannot say whether they have a licence or not, but we now see people with guns on their person right in the midst of our daily lives, right beside us.
***
Ultimately, I would like to reiterate that these election campaign investments are no longer actions that win votes as they once did, but rather ones that cost votes. Moreover, when we consider the incidents of bribery, corruption, fake diplomas and favouritism that have come to light during this government’s term, it would be incorrect to say that the pre-election frenzy will benefit the UBP, DP and YDP as intended.
Just look at the September 2026 poll conducted by Centre for Migration, Identity and Rights Studies: the CTP is well ahead. According to the results, the CTP is on course to secure 47.28 per cent of the vote, whilst the UBP stands at 21.72 per cent. The YDP and DP, meanwhile, cannot even clear the electoral threshold.
Source: IT SEEMS TO HAVE BACKFIRED…
