For most people, their lives don't change when a new government takes power. Let me put that another way: their lives don't change noticeably. They still have to go to work, their day-to-day problems still exist and the only noticeable changes are the faces of the new ministers on television. When the government doesn't change then even this small change in the faces of the ministers (X is moved to Y Ministry and Z is brought in to replace him/her) is hardly noticeable.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that except for a very, very small minority, life goes on much as it did before.
However, (you knew a 'but' was coming, didn't you?) all this changes when some sort of crisis hits (a war, a crash of the economy, a pandemic, etc.). Then people start to look more carefully at who they voted for and to think about whether or not the 'other side' might have managed the crisis better. The longer the crisis goes on and the more people that are adversely affected by it the more unpopular the regime will become.
Sometimes the government makes the wrong decisions, either through inadvertence or because of incompetence, but whatever the reason you will never get a politician admitting that he/she made a mistake. Instead they will jump through hoops to try and prove that it (whatever 'it' is) was the fault of others, especially their political enemies whom they had defeated at the polls.
It has always been a source of great wonder for me as to why, when things have not gone according to plan, that we as an electorate do not hold the government's feet to the proverbial fire and insist on getting answers to the hard questions that are not asked - much less answered. Instead, if you have voted for X party and they are in power, you usually accept blindly whatever stories they might tell. And, of course, if you voted for Y party you will believe even the most outrageous things and call the X party dishonest and corrupt. But you ain't gonna get answers to those pressing questions that need to be answered.
Don't believe me? Check out the political news over the last 10 years. Except for the names and a few other changes the stories are the same. For example, a young lady called Reshmi Ramnarine gets appointed to a high level post for which she obviously had no experience for. And a few days ago another very young lady got appointed as this country's ambassador to China. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that she has absolutely no diplomatic experience, but she is now our country's ambassador to China - a VERY important diplomatic post. It is interesting that the Opposition hasn't made s similar fuss as was made over Ms. Ramnarine's appointment. But that is another story again.
But (and you knew that there had to be another 'but') we are now in the middle of a huge health crisis with this COVID-19 pandemic. Apart from the dangers to the personal health of persons the present Government's response has effectively decimated the economy. There was a debate in Parliament a few days ago on whether a State of Emergency (SOE) (first introduced at the beginning of May) should be extended to the end of November. As a concerned citizen I had hoped that both the Government AND the Opposition would have used the opportunity to educate the population as to the actual science and whether or not it is still necessary to have an SOE, for example, whether or not it is still necessary to keep in person dining banned in restaurants, and so on. I had hoped that whatever their political leanings BOTH sides would realize that the population is reeling under the threat of this virus and people have lost/ are losing their jobs as a result. On top of that more than a thousand people are reported to have died. So to talk about it being serious is more than mere hyperbole.
Put another way, what I saw in Parliament was a lot of 'grandstanding' on both sides with nobody seemingly concerned about the citizens who are catching hell. The Government's attitude seemed to be 'this is what we are doing and if you don't like it get to hell out of here'. And the Opposition's stance was 'we don't like it, you haven't convinced us, but we are going to play it safe and abstain so if by chance what you are doing actually works then we can say that we didn't vote for the extension because you didn't answer our questions. And if it doesn't work then we can say that we told you that it wouldn't but you didn't listen.'
And you wonder why we are in the state that we are in?
