Tuesday, February 20, 2007

UAE Elections: expenses that did not pay back?

Forbes Arabia had an interesting article in its February edition which talked about the elections that took place in the UAE; however, they discussed it from a different angle:

How much was the election's promotional expenses totalled to?

It started by comparing the UAE elections with Bahrain’s elections that took place in almost the same period. In Bahrain, the elections were directed towards the whole public while the UAE’s election was targeted for 6689 person elected by the government. In other words, the “audience” is much less.


Having said that, the Bahraini Budget was: 10 million Dinar while the Emarati’s budget totaled to 300 million dirhams within the first 10 days for all the seven emirates according to Dahi Khalfan.


According to three candidates who have not succeeded in their elections, they stated that the average daily expenditure was 15 million dirhams.


Many of the candidates have mentioned that the average expenditure on the promotional campaign was 150,000 dhs per person. That was what Mohammad Falaknaz (lost) that his campaign amounted to 200,000Dhs that were divided into the website, newspaper ads and a seminar.


But the question is, is money the important factor in such campaigns?


Salim Khamees (dubai candidate who didn’t win) stated that his budget was was less than 20,000 dhs yet he believed that he did spread his message efficiently.


There was a part which discussed that there was correlation between media personnel and the candidates where some have paid what amounted to 20,000dhs in return to have their ads and press releases in their magazines.


The article also mentioned that the election committee have three main rules:
1. No sponsorships allowed from any sector.
2. A budget ceiling from their campaigns which could reach up to 2Million dirhams.
3. No supporting funds from any party governmental it was or personal.


Many of the candidates have mentioned that their success was due to their social relations or their family’s relations rather than the effect of the promotional campaign.


I wonder, are our advertising means that expensive? Is the high price in such promotional campaigns was due to the high prices of the media services or what could it be?



For the next elections, how would they go about their elections; the most known gets the highest votes or the one with the most informative campaign gains the votes?





A Lost Dot:

If you are planning to be one of the candidates, start saving from now…and don’t forget the inflation rate effect.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

والله الغاليه شو ممكن أٌولج

يعني فعلا الناس الي صرفت عدل على الكامبين مالها فادها
بس مش دايما

نحن في مجتمع يعتمد على المعارف والتواصل
وعشان هالمره ستة ألاف بس الي كانوا يصوتون فتخيلي واحد مثل جمال الحاي في دبي رعه وايدين ومعارفه وكثير منهم كانوا من ظمن الستة آلاف...

فأكيد بيرشحونه

بعد أربع سنين يوم بيفتحون التصويت للشعب
ماراح يختلف الموضوع
كل واحد بيطلب فزعة جبيلته

الحين إلا شاعر المليون والميدان وتشوفين كل جبيله تآزر ولدها

نحن ماعندنا ديمقراطيه في التصويت مثل العالم المتقدم وناس تبا تعرف برنامج المرشح

لا ... جان ولدنا بنرشحه لو عساه ماعنده برنامج عدل

أتمنى الجيل المتعلم يكون فعلا موضوعي وقت التصويت

ونتريا الخطوه الثانيه في التعديل على منهجية المجلس لأني أشوفها من وجهة نظري وايد أهم من الترشيح

Anonymous said...

Well, this is one of the side effects of democracy. Frankly, I am not a very big fan of democracy because of 3 reasons:

1. I firmly believe that good leaders are a gift from our Lord & bad leaders are a form of punishment. And don't forget, leaders reflect the society. If the society is good, it generally produces good leaders. Otherwise, expect the worse.

2. In almost all "democratic" countries, you see a rise in corruption level. Of course, to finance your election campaign you need money. Who gives you the money? Usually the rich people who own big corporations. As they say, nothing is free in this world, so naturally the guy who financed me to win the election expects me to look after his interests too. Just a small example, I believe عاشه is in UK & she will confirm the recent "cash for honors" scandal haunting Tony Blair & his Labour party.

3. Democracy slows down the decision making process. Just look at the comedy shows played in the parliaments of our neighbors Bahrain & Kuwait. I am sure UAE would not have achieved so much progress in such a short period of time with democracy.

Elections are a big business. This time it was only 300 million, maybe in 4 years time the figure will probably be in the range of a couple of billions !!

DoTs... said...

جمال الحاي صرح انه السبب وراء فوزه يعود مب لمعارفه..لمعارف ابوه... وهاي نفس النقطه اللي تكلمتي عنها بخصوص فزعة القبايل..
ها طنعنا..انا واخويه على بن عمي وانا وبن عمي عالغريب... بيني وبينتش الحملات الإنتخابيه اللي صارت حملت نفس المبدأ و تقريبا نفس الطرح الا من رحم ربي..المفروض يكون في ابتكار في عملية تسويق الشخص.. طفرنا من " نحو غد أفضل" !! انشالله تكون في حملات تثقيفيه اكثر في المرحله اليايه.

DG: an interesting list of issues you have posted which i might have to disagree with some.

1. I don't agree that the leader is a reflection of the society. Some management people said that Hitler could be classified as a leader; and Sadaam Hussain was a leader.. now if so, then we can't say that they are a reflection of their society 9a7?


2. according to the NEC, one of the rules was that no financing from other firms are allowed. there were few cases but no official corporation financing :)

3. In management books, democracy minimizes the time spent on decision making.. now that is again the "classical" definition of democracy. Our problem is that we understand democracy as something when it is another issue. We understand the definition that OTHERS want us to believe in. And it is not so.

from now till the next election; i don't think the number will increase .. it will be utilized better. and if it increased it would be due to the increase in the number of candidates.

That is my opinion..

thanks dg for commenting.