After the elections, it is time for a national reset

______________

OPINION

By Quillino Bamwine

As the election season draws to a close, the country is finally settling back into its familiar rhythm.

The campaign trucks have gone quiet, the crowds have dispersed, and the posters that once coloured every roadside are slowly curling under the sun. With the noise behind us, we are left with the reality every democratic exercise delivers: Winners who rejoice and losers who sit with the weight of what could have been.

For those who did not win, the sting of defeat is real and undeniable. Campaigns are not casual undertakings. They demand months of movement, sacrifice, conversations, sleepless nights and for many, substantial personal investment. Losing after giving so much can feel like a personal blow. But in politics, as in life, loss is not a tombstone; it is a moment that invites reflection.

Democracy is not designed to close doors permanently. Many respected leaders began their journeys with setbacks. What separates those who rise again from those who fade away is the willingness to reflect, recalibrate and understand the message the electorate sent. A loss provides clarity, sometimes brutally honest clarity, about what resonated, what fell flat and what needs rethinking. It is a lesson, not a verdict on one’s worth or future potential.

Yet even as the disappointed regroup, the winners have their own moment of reckoning. Victory, especially in a heated political contest, can feel exhilarating. But it also invites a necessary reality check: Parliament is not a pathway to sudden personal wealth. It is not a shortcut to luxury, comfort, or elevated status. It is a public trust.

Too often in our political culture, winning office is treated as a passport to prosperity. This perception fuels the very behaviours the public later condemns. When leadership becomes transactional, when public roles are treated like commercial investments that must “pay back,” corruption finds fertile ground. But leadership, in its truest form, is service. It is my responsibility. It is a sacrifice. Parliament is not meant to transform the lifestyles of those elected; it is meant to transform the quality of public governance.

New MPs must, therefore, step into office with humility. The campaign season is over; now begins the harder task of legislating, representing and overseeing the systems that affect millions. The oath of office is not a ceremonial utterance. It is a commitment to integrity in a space where shortcuts and temptations are plentiful.

But even as we examine the roles of winners and losers, voters must also reflect on their expectations.

If we are honest, our political culture has long placed unrealistic demands on MPs. They are expected to pay school fees, fund weddings and funerals, repair roads, sponsor community projects, and respond to every personal crisis that emerges in their constituencies. The MP becomes a default solution to problems they neither created nor have the resources to solve alone.

This expectation is not only unsustainable, it is also harmful. It distorts the purpose of Parliament and forces leaders into a cycle where they spend more time firefighting personal requests than performing the legislative duties they were elected to fulfil. When voters judge MPs based on how much personal support they offer, rather than how effectively they represent their interests at the national level, it creates a political environment that rewards patronage over performance.

The hard truth is that MPs are not development banks. They are not ministries. They do not control government budgets or infrastructure projects. Their job is to make laws, shape national policy and ensure accountability within government. That is where their power lies. That is where voters should apply pressure and demand results.

If we shift our expectations, we may begin to see the kind of leadership we keep saying we want: leaders who focus on governance, oversight and nation-building rather than handouts and survival politics.

So, where does this leave us?

It leaves the losers with a chance to learn rather than lament. It leaves the winners with a chance to lead rather than indulge.

And it leaves the voters with an opportunity to rethink what they ask of the people they send to Parliament.

Elections are not just about choosing leaders. They are about renewing the social contract. They are about recommitting to a shared national project. They are about understanding that democracy is not an event that ends when results are declared, but an ongoing process that thrives only when every participant plays their part with clarity and honesty.

As we enter this post-election period, the country has a rare opportunity to reset its political mindset. Let the losers regroup with dignity. Let the winners approach their roles with humility. And let the voters engage with realistic expectations. If we do this, the election will have delivered more than leaders — it will have strengthened the democratic culture we all depend on.

The writer studied political science and political economy