In a former life I interviewed ordinary folk during elections on whether they believed they were getting proper representation. More often than not, their vision for themselves and their communities was pared down to comparatively primitive elements: roads, lights and water.
Not long ago a politician was eviscerated by critics after he exhorted constituents "not to sell their community for a box drain." At the time, the remark was interpreted as obscene mockery of the needs of humble folk.
What that politician suggested, albeit clumsily, is that there are larger concerns at play; jobs, the economy, education, security and all this. But for vast swathes of our society, isolated from the loftier mechanics of governance, the currency of their vote is only worth the box drain.
This raises questions about the role of the media in an election year. Going on conventional coverage, a lot more can be done to furnish voters with useful information to cast their ballots.
A discerning voter needs more than a reporter's look-in on constituencies, trawling for opinions on MPs.
"Onliest time we does see we MP is rong election time when he lookin' fuh vote." This typical comment suggests an MP needn't do more than a weekly visit to the constituency office to hear people bellyache about standing water in a ditch and "moss-ki-tow."
That sort of approach delivers little insight, particularly when the only types reporters are able to catch at home during the day are "oncle" in a beat-out merino swinging in a hammock or tantie shellin' peas.
Additionally, journalists shouldn't lean heavily on information harvested from political meetings. Those speeches are crafted to titillate the crowd. Politicians will attest to having built a million new homes, curing childhood cancers and crushing ISIS in the Middle East.
Media houses, who have always had a today-for-today mentality, must develop a culture of fact-checking. Reporters need time and resources to assess the wild claims made on elections platforms.
The run-up to the UK polls has no end of lessons for us here in T&T. As a political leader in the UK, you can be fairly certain that if you quote figures or make projections or promises conjured by sneaky strategists, you will get called on it by the British media.
Labour leader Ed Miliband assures the electorate that he will balance the books in the next parliament, promising to reduce the deficit every year.
However, the BBC's Reality Check team, which was set up to allow voters to cross check campaign claims with facts, reveals that Labour's deficit reduction plan doesn't include borrowing to spend on long term infrastructure projects. So Labour's pledge to "balance the books" is realistic for only part of the deficit.
The UK electorate benefits from something we could use a lot more of here in our coverage: analysis. Analysis isn't going to Dr Keith Rowley to ask his opinion on a PP proposition.
Here's an example. The PNM promises an end to traffic gridlock with the rapid rail. Transport Minister Stephen Cadiz is offering his own curative: a dramatically improved bus service.
What the public needs to know from the opposition is, how will this light rail, which research suggests isn't a mass transit system, make a dent in the legions of commuters making the crawl to the capital city every day? For the PP, how will more buses on already congested roads dilute our traffic problem? This is the sort of analysis that will help voters make sense of election promises.
The local media can also do parallel comparisons of the track records of our political parties. Show us how they have honoured their campaign seductions, or banked instead on national amnesia. How does what this government has said and done over the last five years stack up against the PNM's performance in office?
The British media have also been doing side-by-side comparisons of manifestos organised by major issues: the economy, health, education, immigration. At a quick glance, the public can compare and evaluate the ideas being advanced to solve national problems.
There is also an understanding that the electorate is not omniscient. The Telegraph Newspaper has printed A Dummy's Guide to General Election 2015. It explains what the general election is, the number of MPs, what constitutes a hung parliament, etc. As elementary as these articles may seem, they help to bring folks into the conversation who might otherwise feel excluded.
Our local media can educate the public about the marginal seats, exploring how these constituencies could have evolved over five years through migration, death and indifference. How does the first past the post system work and how does it differ from proportional representation?
Why, you may ask, the heavy referencing of examples from the British media? The simple truth is there are important lessons we can learn from the achievements and mistakes of other countries.
An educated voter is an empowered voter. Our local media must put in the work to bolster a more informed electorate, better disposed to taking the bit in their teeth.