Manoeuvring against discontent (Le Mauricien 06.06.2023)

Chetan Ramchurn

The billions spent on gargantuan infrastructural projects, the strong arm tactics against adversaries, the prime ministerial-like image of Jugnauth crafted by marketers and the carrots fed to the population notwithstanding, those in power only managed to sway 37.7% of votes in their favour in 2019. Despite an often-clueless opposition, there is concern among those with strong interest and sizeable gains in perpetuating the present regime that the ground might be slipping from their feet as a result of the accumulation of the many scandals and the monster that inflation is. The latter might lead their grip on their vote banks to wane. With an economic system that thrives on a weak rupee, price rises cannot be tamed for very long as the population shall discover soon enough. The attempt of the government to generate a feel-good mood through money distribution may never quite materialise.

Carter as lodestar

That the MSM’s Minister of Finance chose a Jimmy Carter quote as epigraph for the budget should come as no surprise. The parallels are glaring. Burton I. Kaufman and Scott Kaufman, authors of a seminal work on Carter, write of his presidency;

“he was a president who never adequately defined a mission for his government, a purpose for the country, and a way to get there.”

There is not much of a roadmap for the country these days; where do we go from here? Where are the new sectors? Where do the new jobs come from? How do we correct inequality? How do we stop the rampant corruption? Incidentally, the parallels might not stop there. Carter had a rabid hate for his predecessor, Gerald Ford, and would ask his advisers the same question every single day:

“Don’t you think I should put Gerald in jail? […] I can do that, right? Send someone who lost the election and no longer has any official political power to prison, just because I feel like it?”

The fake good factor

As expected, a cunning budget was presented to quell the growing restlessness of voters. I say ‘cunning’ for it is not built on profound intelligence, i.e neither one that understands never mind corrects the many nagging woes of our society nor does it hold up to the ‘progressive’ cachet that has been ascribed to it by ‘experts’. There are, as in all budgets, some inspired measures like the one advocating an inheritance for all but even that is shabbily dressed with little explanation on the philosophy behind it (“It is our contribution for them to start a new chapter of their life.”) In 2015, I penned an article based on Anthony Atkinson’s book on Inequality. One of the bold ideas propounded in his work is that of an inheritance for all.

“Atkinson reminds us that inheritance allows the wealthy to conserve their position at the top of distribution. To counter this, he recommends that a capital endowment (minimum inheritance) should be paid at adulthood. An idea dating back to Thomas Paine who advised the creation of a national fund from which every person reaching the age of 21 was offered a compensation for the loss as the result of landed property. In modern times, this ‘inheritance’ could take the form of a start-up grant for young people as recommended by Le Grand and Reich.” 

What this government does instead of elevating this measure to a stepping stone for young people is reduce it is to a mere gift. Could it not have been linked to the creation of an enterprise, or vocational and academic uplifting for those individuals? Most certainly but this Government has transformed it into yet another electoral carrot.

Socialism à la Padayachy

In the present exercise, Padayachy dutifully follows the capitalists’ demands and paves way for the easier recruitment of foreign workers thereby further exposing Mauritian workers to lower wages and layoffs. This is the MSM’s way of caring for them apparently. The much hyped progressive tax is very much a misnomer. Without the solidarity tax, high income earners (above Rs 3M) will now be paying 20% instead of 40% under the previous regime. How can this be termed ‘progressive’? 

The deterioration of public education (laid bare in the Parliament with results of the extended programme and its 2% pass rate) and health (where a lack of leadership seems evident) have not been addressed. This will further be accelerated with the decision to resort to private services instead of bolstering public hospitals for eye surgeries.  

This socialism à la Padayachy is no socialism at all. Shunning direct taxes in favour of consumption taxes which will impact poor families most is not progressive. The writing is on the wall, while the most well off will be paying less taxes, the bulk of the burden will be shouldered by the middle and lower classes.

Window dressing and several flyovers

The more astute observers highlight that the deficit of 3.9% of GDP does not include expenditure incurred by Special Funds standing at Rs 6.2B. For 2023-24 the budget deficit estimate is 4.9% of GDP but excludes spending to the tune of Rs 18.7B made from special funds. Greater transparency on the state of our finances from those pretending to guide us is mandatory.

Developing the tramway network across the country seems to be an obsession of the present regime, sometimes against logic with La Vigie earmarked to be connected next. But even that pales in comparison with the speed with which flyovers are being constructed. 4 new ones will be built and delivered by August 2024. With the country living above its means, were these projects required in a most urgent manner.

Former economist of a section of the private sector, Padayachy’s doctoral dissertation dealt with an analysis of poverty in Mauritius. His penultimate budget leaves little doubt on where his allegiances lie. 

References:

Tilted Scales by Chetan Ramchurn (Le Mauricien 2nd September 2015)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/01/14/carterism

https://www.lemauricien.com/actualites/societe/cancers-a-maurice-en-2021-mortalite-en-hausse-de-10-et-leger-recul-de-06-des-cas-detectes/540678/

https://www.lemauricien.com/le-mauricien/parlement-lechec-de-lextended-programme-fait-monter-la-tension/556486/

Go Bold or Go Home (Le Mauricien 06.09.22)

Us

by Chetan Ramchurn

 « C’est une expérience éternelle que tout homme qui a du pouvoir est porté à en abuser. »¹

Political reigns since December 2014 have been soaked in chaos so much so that the better part of the mandates had an end of reign feel to them. The abrupt dismantling of the BAI has created ripples felt to this day, the mishandling of the Betamax agreement with taxpayers having to the foot the bill, the soiling of our institutions with nondescript political nominees and their subsequent gross mismanagement, the consolidation of the historic bourgeoisie with the smart city scheme and the MIC, incompetent ministers, vendetta attempts against opponents, futile spending sprees, the devaluation of the rupee, the terrible mess in law enforcement amidst corruption scandals have weakened the country.

In Mauritius, the mantra for electoral success is composed of divisions along communal and casteist lines, money politics, promises without regard for their economic consequences, a servile posture towards the ruling class, and the pimping of religious events into public meetings. Mauritians have fallen prey to this time and time again. In 2022, one of the most worrying features remains the sway of populism over Mauritians. While members of the governing alliance have indulged into it wholeheartedly, former MPs and Ministers with tarnished records and with past association with those in office have also engaged in attention mongering through threats of hunger strikers and revelations on the current regime. This noise which conveys a lack of clarity dims any chance of change. An indiscernible political proposal with rejects that have done the country harm remains unsurprisingly unpalatable.

We seem to be stuck in a loop with déjà vu all over the political landscape: dynasties perpetuated at our expense, sycophants working for the oligarchy or the better interests of the family or in laws while pretending to be protectors of public weal and having recourse to the ethnic card whenever there is a dip in popularity. The non mainstream opposition is certainly more vocal and despite the dearth of proposals and a maniacal hunger for attention that clouds most of its initiatives, it has ruffled the Government by disclosing cases of police brutality. Calls for the bolstering of purchasing power have been answered by paltry remedies in the latest budget. All of this does not constitute a sustainable remedy to the enduring purchasing power decline.

« Il va jusqu’à ce qu’il trouve des limites. Qui le dirait ? La vertu même a besoin de limites. »²

How did we land into this sorry mess? How did we transform individuals bereft of any of the Roman virtues into all powerful beings that have bent the system to their advantage. We have satisfied ourselves with one voting expedition every 5 years for too long. Elected ones are left without surveillance and have grown rogue. We have been sitting ducks. No one can save us but ourselves.

Salvation cannot come from seasoned actors busy rehashing their shtick on public platforms. A bogus winning formula around the bonding of opposition parties remains impotent. As Prashant Kishor puts it “United opposition is not necessarily a strong opposition.” As Kishor elaborates, without the narrative, and ground dynamics, not much is likely to happen.

We do not need entertainers to represent us; those who will indulge in imitating their lame opponents, those that will indulge in lives on social platforms to say absolutely nothing, the individuals that have been associated with drug lords and have morphed into pro bono saviours overnight or those that will indulge in self glorification using movie titles. We have to save ourselves.

« Pour qu’on ne puisse abuser du pouvoir, il faut que, par la disposition des choses, le pouvoir règle le pouvoir. »³

With no restrictions imposed upon MPs and Ministers, we face havoc. Exuberance in the spending on capital projects will further ruin our country. The middle class is likely to be further squeezed whilst the capitalists have their whims and wishes granted. Unless, we roll up our sleeves, we will see this country run for the better interests of the haves and their stooges. To fight against the shenanigans of those meant to represent us, citizens need an arsenal of weapons to control their representatives.

Referendums

Consulting and abiding by the population’s choice at regular intervals would make sense. Participative democracy would give people a greater say over major decisions. Would the loss-making tramway project have been approved by the people of the country? Would they give the green light to the nonsensical extension of its network to Côte d’Or? Would they approve the Smart City Scheme or the flat tax? Would they not abolish the Vice Presidency? Would they condone hefty hotel refurbishment schemes? Would they put a halt to exporting monkeys to research labs abroad? Would you agree with your country not being autonomous on the energy front? Decisions with ruinous consequences cannot be made by people that receive financing for their own election and commissions through private entities.

The Charles F. Sexton Chair in American Enterprise, Professor of Finance and Business Economics, & Executive Director of Initiative and Referendum Institute of the University of Southern California, John Matsusaka identifies 6 direct democracy-related reforms for the United States that could be tweaked to fit within the Mauritian context. In his latest work, the researcher proposes 6 types of reforms:

Advisory referendums called by Congress: debates and issues are submitted in this model to voters. The outcome would not be binding upon  Congress.

Advisory referendums called by petition: If any change is to come, it has to be the people’s doing. This would allow citizens to bring to the forefront debates that they would like to bring to the limelight. In recent times, greater attention to the end of life of senior citizens has become an important issue. This was debated last year in the House of Lords. Mauritius would do well to see how to provide assistance to people in the final stages of their lives. Over the last year, readers would have come across several cases where people die in solitude with no one knowing about it for days or weeks. This is of concern. Another issue that would require greater spotlight is sexual crimes against children. Many including the author deem that the paedophilia cases in Rodrigues were not dealt with a proper manner. Did officials ensure that these children and adolescents were properly accompanied, was psychological support offered to the victims and their families and was the proper cadre constituted for other victims to come forward with testimonials?

Advisory referendums required on specific issues: This type of referendum would automatically be triggered anytime a constitutional change would be on the cards. Any issue of importance would demand consultation of voters’ opinion about same.

Binding referendums required on specific issues: Like the former model, except that the outcome of the referendum would have to be abided by. Matsusaka avers that  “Mandatory referendums are common among the American states; all but one of them require a vote on constitutional amendments and many require votes on taxes, debt, relocation of the state capital, liquor prohibition, and other matters.”

Binding referendums called by petition: This would allow voters to repeal laws. This method would be akin to Italy’s abrogativo process where its use has been prevalent with 72 referendums held in the last 70 years.

Constitutional amendments proposed by petition: In its most extreme form, Matsusaka states that it would “allow citizens to propose constitutional amendments by initiative, and then approve them by referendum. Several states allow initiatives of this form and, predictably, so does Switzerland.”

Recall Elections

Another weapon that would help correct the incompetence and malpractices of our elected cohort would be the introduction of recall elections. The latter refers to the removal of elected members from office through a vote before the end of their mandates. When introduced in the US in the early 20th century, the recall was looked upon as “a means of bringing some honesty back into politics” (Bowler, 2004). When introduced in 1908 in Oregon, it was heralded as the ‘final crowning act to complete the temple of popular government’ (Barnett,1912).  As with other democracy-broadening ventures, the inherent risks of this inclusion reside in the influence of money on recall initiatives and referendum campaigns (Cronin, 1989).

Supported by Marx and Rousseau and dating back to the Roman Republic, this would be a feature that would empower citizens so that they no longer bear with representatives that have failed them. In Latvia, Slovakia and in some Swiss Cantons, dissolving the whole assembly is also a possibility. This measure would allow for continuous accountability and electors would get to remove incompetent, maligned, unresponsive or irresponsible public officials. As one author puts it, candidates sometimes lie and voters sometimes make mistakes- recall elections is an effective tool to correct their errors of appreciation.

The modus operandi of this method is succinctly described by Bowler (2004): “The initial step to recall is a petition drive demanding that there be a recall election. If the number of signatures reaches a required threshold then a recall election is held. Should the incumbent lose the ‘recall’ then an election is held for his/ her successor. Sometimes the two elections are held simultaneously (as in California), more often there is a short period between the two elections. The recalled official is typically not allowed to stand as his/her own replacement.”

Recall elections serve as a useful reminder to elected representatives that they are not trustees bur merely delegates (Bowler, 2004). They also serve as a means of punishing politicians that would otherwise be left unpunished by the parties. Opponents of recall elections believe that politicians should not be slaves of public opinion. However, we have reached the opposite extreme in Mauritius where politicians are rejecting the expressions of discontent against their actions and public gatherings are being closely monitored by authorities.

This democratisation process cannot materialise unless and until we have a party that is ready to put power where it truly belongs; in the hands of the people. Indiana Democratic congressman Louis Ludlow fought for the holding of a referendum prior to going to war and supported his stance with the following argument “common people who would serve and die in a war ought to vote on whether to enter a conflict.” Likewise, common people who bear the consequences of miscalculated decisions have a right to decide whether these decisions should be taken in the first place. We can trust no one but ourselves.

Readings & Videos:

• Recall and representation Arnold Schwarzenegger meets Edmund Burke, Bowler, S., Representation, 2004
• Can the Recall Improve Electoral Representation? By Pierre-Etienne Vandamme, Frontiers in Political Science, 2020- Accessed on 11/06/2022 https://dial.uclouvain.be/pr/boreal/object/boreal%3A242210/datastream/PDF_01/view
• Initiatives without Engagement A Realistic Appraisal of Direct Democracy’s Secondary Effects By Joshua J. Dyck, Edward L. Lascher Jr.,2019
• Six thèses pour la démocratie continue, D. Rousseau, Odile Jacob, 2022.
• Let the People Rule How Direct Democracy Can Meet the Populist Challenge, Matsusaka, John G., 2020
• OffTheCuff with Prashant Kishor, Political strategist talking with Shekhar Gupta & Neelam Pandey (Link:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSmSgGVJXPE)
• ¹²³De l’esprit des lois, Montesquieu (1748)

Mauritius Times Interview 29.10.2021

Mauritius Times Interview 29.12.2020

Interview: Chetan Ramchurn/Mauritius Times

“This will be a very dirty fight. Nothing is off limits”

The MSM is trying very hard to portray the heir as charismatic and confident. The allure of the PMSD is overhyped. The MMM is in wilderness, the Labour Party lacks a grand strategy’

‘Traditional parties have all benefited from private sector financing and in some cases there are allegations that drug money has been used in campaigns’

---

Chetan Ramchurn is a young entrepreneur who is not afraid to speak his mind about the prevailing political situation in the country. In this interview, he expresses his concern about some the latest measures being introduced in the Parliament such as the Declaration of Assets and the judiciary’s opposition to it and the financing of political parties. He also comments on the lining up of potential alliances in view of the forthcoming elections, and also believes like a few other observers that this is going to be a no-holds barred campaign with plenty of muck flying about to discredit opponents… Read on:

---

Mauritius Times: The last week ended on a more or less sour note for the Government when the Judiciary made known its opposition to the submission by judges of their Declaration of Assets to the ICAC as provided for initially in the Declaration of Assets Bill, which Bill has finally been voted by Parliament this week after the necessary amendments. The Judiciary may have valid reasons for refusing to submit to ICAC, but would you think there is more to its stand, as suggested by the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament? That it speaks eloquently of the esteem in which the Judiciary holds the ICAC?

Chetan Ramchurn: It is but the latest of a number of “hit and run” amendments or additions to our legal arsenal. Sparse are the details but great is the urgency. This was on full display with the alterations made to the Immigration Act with dubious reasons offered to explain the haste with which it was ratified. Resorting to ad hominem legislations is not befitting of a serious government. Ours has a strong tendency to opt for same as evidenced by the Prosecution Commission Bill of December 2016.

People are wary of such moves, not only in Mauritius but across the world. In an interview given in Le Monde, General De Villiers, in his assessment of the mistrust of French citizens in their representatives, avers that «Deux pelleteuses creusent cette crise de l’autorité : la bureaucratie tatillonne, plus importante malgré la digitalisation. Et le juridisme, qui complique la vie des citoyens et des chefs d’entreprise. Quand il existe un problème, on fait une loi, mais elle ne règle rien. Et les gens se demandent : ‘Où va-t-on ? Y a-t-il un pilote dans l’avion ?’»

And in our case, the pilot was never licensed to fly the plane. The dearth of consultation with the judiciary was identified by the leaders of the two main opposition factions as being the origin of this “messy” state of affairs. Duval mentioned the danger of judicial officers coming under pressure from the government through a servile arm. No thinking person would dismiss that possibility, especially when the polls are nearing and those governing would like to keep their main opponent in a legal quagmire. Still, this does not seem to be one of the previous lois scélérates, but more of a posturing device for the incumbent. He is now the tireless crusader against corruption…

While the government has seemingly opted for a one-size-fits-all legislation, the OCDE in a 2011 report entitled Asset Declarations for Public Officials outlines the necessity for different declaration systems for the diverse branches of power:

“It remains debatable whether a single declaration system should apply to all branches of power, including legislative, executive and judiciary, and to all levels of officials, from ministers to ordinary civil servants. Recognising that various categories of public officials indeed differ from each other, with different levels of responsibility and power or potential to go into conflicts of interest and corruption, countries should consider specialising regulations of asset declarations for different categories and branches of public officials.”

The MMM, through its leader, even went as far as detailing how trusts should be properly introduced in the Act’s definition of assets. Some of those intervening from opposition ranks explained the myriad of financial and investment instruments that are still not within the ambit of the act. The government would have done well to listen to these recommendations. It chose not to…raising even more doubts on the true design of this move.

* One would have thought that the legal requirements contained in a piece of legislation like the Declaration of Assets Act would be rendered effective if they would pass the test of regular and rigorous verifications by a competent body having the capacity and authority to conduct such verifications. What purpose will it serve if the declarations are left in the custody of the Speaker or the President of the Republic or any non-investigative body? Only for the sake of mere political correctness?

The Judicial and Legal Services Commission has been mentioned as that possible authority. However, it lacks the required resources and expertise. It seems to be more of a PR coup than anything else.

Image is everything and everything is image. We have a new Saint-Just. That is the message being conveyed after the flop of the budget. Not Lee Kuan Yew and the economic miracles like his father projected, but a hotchpotch of qualities. It gets you wondering about the extent of make-believe in politics. Everything is staged and some of our representatives accept any proposal that would enhance their visibility or help in their positioning with disarming alacrity. This results in getting on the zip wire in Rodrigues or bringing bills to the house without prior consultation with all those involved.

That is certainly keeping our focus away from the ever-increasing cost of the Côte-d’Or complex or the obvious issues associated with the Safe City project. But we should not worry on the latter matter for the Minister Mentor has the solution to the obvious privacy encroachment issues for those people who will have to deal with the invasive lenses on a daily basis…“they must keep their doors and windows shut”. I should probably add that they should stay at home and not do anything to thwart the son’s attempt to become prime minister on his ‘own’.

* It would appear that the refusal of the Judiciary to submit to the ICAC has not gone down well with the latter body, according to a daily paper. The contention of ICAC being that the Judiciary also falls under the purview of the POCA. How do you react to that?

The greater the responsibility, the more the scrutiny. It applies to the judiciary as well. But who should they report to? Is there a truly independent institution that will not toy with them to serve their masters? Pierre Rosanvallon, in ‘Le bon gouvernement’, writes about the addition of a fourth branch to the existing powers;

“Le Conseil du fonctionnement démocratique (gardien des principes juridiquement formalisables de la démocratie d’exercice (l’intégrité des gouvernants et la transparence des actions et des institutions au premier chef) […] veillerait à la protection des lanceurs d’alerte. Pour être efficace, il devrait avoir un pouvoir propre d’investigation et être en mesure de formuler des injonctions contraignantes adressées aux administrations et aux personnes. Il pourrait publier un rapport annuel sur l’état de la démocratie, les gouvernants devant publiquement s’expliquer sur ses critiques et se prononcer sur ses suggestions. Ce rôle majeur impliquerait qu’il ait un statut renforcé par rapport à celui des diverses autorités indépendantes actuelles et qu’il soit constitutionnellement reconnu comme relevant d’une forme spécifique de pouvoir, distinct de l’exécutif, du législatif et du judiciaire. Faire reconnaître ce « quatrième pouvoir » est un des enjeux essentiels de l’instauration d’une telle démocratie d’exercice.”

A Council watching over the state of our democracy that would derive its investigative powers not from the existing three branches of government but from an independent fourth one would be best equipped to carry out this task. It would offer safeguards to whistleblowers and ensure the integrity of our decision makers at different levels.

With a political nominee at its helm, the commission fighting corruption does not inspire much confidence. In recent times, it has earned some successes that are high in buzz value. The onslaught against diamond-adorned platinum grills (stylised as grillz) and the ensuing need for a dentist will generate some attention but there are a lot of sharks in full feeding frenzy and they are the ones that should be targeted.

* Linked closely to the declaration of assets issue is the financing of political parties, through official donations by corporate and individuals as well as through their funding by black money by the same financiers. What is being proposed in the Political Financing Bill tabled by the Government for its First Reading, last Tuesday, looks like we are going for the continuation and indeed the consolidation of private sector financing of political parties, with the Government having dropped the idea of financing by the State. What’s your take on that?

It was to be expected. the Political Financing Bill is aligned on what mainstream parties have practised for years. They are now not only preaching it but going as far as trying to legislate same and is merely the affirmation of their belief that the government is a doormat for private interests. Most of our representatives are mere pawns in the hands of the bourgeosie. Zom patron and Zom tablisman.

We have witnessed the Rs 15 billion fiscal exemption on smart cities (bear in mind that the government is ready to sell the country’s assets to generate Rs 11 billion for debt repayment), the introduction of the flat tax, IRS & RES and the ‘mari’ deal Illovo…Let us not fool ourselves, this is merely the laying bare of the usual behind the curtain dealings.

* Politicians who are averse to taxpayers footing the bills of political parties may have good reasons to take that stand, but the alternative is no better, don’t you think? The undue influence that financiers are likely to hold over the public policy making process, and which would explain why decisions blatantly against the national interest pass unopposed by the People’s representatives – that will continue?

The financing of political parties is a complex issue and a simplistic take on it will further damage our democracy. The immediate reaction is often one of rejection with the accompanying reason that we should not involve taxpayers’ money to finance some of the hopeless candidates we have. But that would be short-sightedness on our behalf. Would it not be better to dictate the rules of the game instead of letting the private sector impose its neo-liberal fantasies? I said it earlier that the state financing of political parties would be crucial to ensure that the allegiance of those elected is first and foremost to voters and not to financiers. Transparency should also encompass the assets of the state and include a more rigorous control on land; the allocation of leases should be monitored and regulated so as to prevent the kind of generosity towards ‘petits copains’ we have witnessed and are witnessing.

Is it the magic solution to all woes? No, but if the right cadre is implemented it would be a step in the right direction.

* What do you think is sought to be achieved by the Government when it comes at this late hour, some six months before the National Assembly will stand dissolved, with this Political Financing Bill, and that without any guarantee that it will go through given the unlikelihood of it being able to raise a majority of three-quarters in the Assembly?

The government is keeping its opponents busy, entangled in debates and more importantly on the defensive. The PM is setting the agenda and the others are following. Not all of them though. The Leader of the Mauritius Labour Party privileges absence and has created obvious breaches in his opponent’s defence since the 1^st May gathering. Even the first measures he has advocated as part of his ‘Rupture’ have been copied by the government. Since he is rare, he is hard-hitting when he intervenes.

Mitterrand and Chirac’s communication advisor Jacques Pilhan said it best, ‘Nous installons la rareté. Et donc la densité.’ The worrying part of this charade is that there is not a huge difference between the traditional parties. They have all benefited from private sector financing and in some cases there are allegations that drug money has been used in campaigns. There is no perfect system and whatever we decide to go with will have loopholes that will need to be plugged. The fascination with new laws without proper consultation is to be noted. Remember: “The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.”

* Would it also be the intention of the governing alliance to force opposition parties to declare their political interests in view of the forthcoming elections with their vote on the Political Financing Bill eventually?

The worrying part of it is that all the mainstream parties have all privileged private financing and are not actively campaigning for an alternate route. They have all amassed war chests over the years but will pretend otherwise.

The intent of the alliance in office is to occupy the moral high ground. Expect images of safes being showed ad nauseam and their self-promotion as paragons of virtue to be pursued.

The other goal at this stage of our political calendar would be to find common ground with potential allies. This is another ‘hit and run’ addition which for the sake of political interests leaves our country worse off and reduces MPs and parties to servants of the financial elite.

* Besides making a political point, it might also be the same motivation behind the Labour Party’s decision to table a motion of no-confidence against the Government at this stage. What do you think?

Indeed, it is a zero-risk, show of hands move. We will get to see how many walk the talk. There were vehement exchanges during the budget debates. But we are accustomed to On/Off bouts. And this is verily the season when it is most acute. Get your act right is essentially what the Labour Party is telling them. Choose your side. The timing is interesting but there is the risk that everything will be drowned in the noise that we are now accustomed to.

* What all this and the ambivalence of certain opposition parties vis-à-vis the Political Financing Bill show perhaps is that the die has not yet been cast in terms of “winning formulas” for the next elections. Is it too early for the real “tractations” and negotiations to start?

Negotiations have started months ago and the best possible deal is being sought by the different players. The parliament is a stage. MPs deifying their leaders would backstab them without flinching if their political careers were at play. The lengthy debates, rebuttals and insults should not fool us. They will look for the partner offering them the very best chances of winning.

The MSM is trying very hard to portray the heir as charismatic and confident. The PMSD claims to be the belle of the ball but as demonstrated in the No.18 by-election, their allure is overhyped. The MMM is in wilderness and while it has some solid MPs, they have no sense of direction and their allegiance to their leader’s ‘pragmatisme économique’ means that they are likely to side with those that wield power.

The Labour Party knows that there is still everything to play for. It lacks a grand strategy like in 2005. But in terms of storytelling, it has great material. Its leader has been besmirched. Many of the cases against him have been dropped. The narrative of the outsider that rises from the pits of despair to win has to be properly told.

* Whether our parties will come up with their winning formulas or not for the forthcoming elections remains to be seen, but would a three- or four-cornered fight be better for the health of our democracy?

When the three-cornered fight happened in 1976, the Labour Party was a socialist party that had democratised access to education and ensured social stability. The MMM was still on the left and its messages echoed with those yearning for hope. The PMSD, having staunchly rejected independence and with a dwindling following, was fighting for relevancy.

A four-cornered fight today would be near impossible for going alone would lead to sure casualties for two out of the four parties. It would also remind us how alike they are. It would have been a fairer fight and some bloated egos would have been rightly reduced to their just proportions but I cannot see it happening.

* The media has started talking about the mud-sling campaign that the governing alliance would direct against the Labour Party leader at an opportune time. It’s going to be a “vicious” campaign according to Rama Sithanen. The question is whether there is a limit to the viciousness that the public/electorate would deem acceptable. Can it also cut either way?

Earlier this year in this paper I stated that, “Vous ne dirigez plus, mais vous dominez toujours.” I feel the same way about this Government. It is bedlam but they are eager to implement new laws to curb our freedom and will resort to every trick in the book. The opposition parties should gear up for some serious mano a mano and that much hyped ‘Rupture’ better not be about gossamer changes.

With the fear of the ‘retour de bâton’ hovering above their heads, this will be an ugly campaign.” The attacks have never really ceased to be honest. On a pro-government private radio, some weeks back, with no coherent argument to defend his case, a noisy MP merely rehashed the scandals associated with the Leader of the Labour Party. This is what is to be expected.

The MSM and ML are disastrous for this country, indulging in useless expenses that jeopardise our independence and place undue pressure on future generations. The perception that corruption has reached new highs is prevalent. Their devastating reign does not however translate in certain victory for its opponents. The spin weaved around it will influence those that are easily swayed. Countering the governing alliance’s massive propaganda machine will not be easy.

This will be a very dirty fight and with the political personnel we have, nothing is off limits.

Interview: Chetan Ramchurn – Entrepreneur (Mauritius Times)

“The MMM today is essentially about a battle between old and new yes-men/women”

Interview: Chetan Ramchurn – Entrepreneur

‘The Labour Party should let the honest leftist voices be heard. For at the moment, it is not connecting with Mauritians’

 

‘The Annual ‘Tap Latab’ exercise (Budget Speech) is such a waste of time. 3 hours of pure PR’

Our interviewee this week is a young entrepreneur – formerly president of the Youth Wing of the MMM – who has bold and incisive views on the current chaotic state of our polity. His views span politics, economics, finance, business and the shady undercurrents on which they float and which are corrupting Mauritan society. His diagnosis is clear: there is rot everywhere and the only redemption can be a return to nobler values which the leaders and their yes-men/women have long since abandoned in their pursuit of filthy lucre in cahoots with Big Business and dubious investors to whom they are selling the country’s soul just so as to remain in their seats. His is a breath of much-needed fresh air. We hope it will blow all around and remove the mental cobwebs of those who are supposed to be leading us, but also of the people who must get out of their lethargy if they care for themselves and the future of their children.

 

Mauritius Times: The leader of the MMM went public a few days ago to express his “surprise” by and annoyance (“agacement”) with the goings-on within the MMM in relation to the election of the Poliburo of the party. It’s almost certain that he had been taken off guard, and might well be losing the upper hand over his party, as some would suggest. Rather surprising, isn’t it, for someone so well versed in turf battles in the political arena?

Chetan Ramchurn: Before indulging into that, let me first point out how irrelevant such internal spats are while we are in the midst of suffering from further encroachment upon our private spaces with the opaque Safe City project and we face the risk of welcoming dubious figures in our motherland, such is the eagerness of this government to sell our nationality to foreigners. But this is the MMM, a party that can re-enact the same stale acts sine die. Expect one of the patented yes-men to profess the non sequitur of ‘Plus fort que jamais’ or ‘Mari Travay Dekip’ after the confusion stemming from this masquerade.

There were signs of ‘revolt’ back in 2015 where an initial list scripted by ‘rebels’ (former obsequious members that had finally seen the light) had already penned the ousting of Bérenger. The latter having tamed some of his adversaries with top-notch posts was able to quell that revolt. This is the ‘lutte des places’ taken to its next stage. Taken to its extreme, this fight over seats could involve profiling and canvassing on ethnic lines.

These elections, now reduced to a divide-and-rule device, have been long used by the circus master to exercise total control over what will eventually become his last bastion. Having stripped the MMM of real causes, killed the ‘droit de tendance’ and sacrificed its credibility with on/off bouts, this was to be expected. French rappers use the line ‘Il a accouché de sa propre fin’ to describe such situations. Only time will tell whether it applies to him or not. He might have resolved the conflict on Wednesday and cobbled a team that satisfies both sides but the credibility of the party is in tatters. So many new and unknown figures with no expressed opinion on the issues that matter next to those who merely echo their leader, it does not look good.

This is my reading of things; the absence of any desire to improve the lives of the masses and the selling out to the capitalists has transformed the movement in a hollow vessel with many yearning for any form of recognition. We are at the stage where the ‘seconds couteaux’ try to upgrade to première lame status; essentially a battle between old and new yes-men/women. The only way a party’s internal elections would gain in credibility would be through the organisation of open primaries where all Mauritians would be allowed to vote. Like other mainstream parties, MMM’s version of democracy is a farce.

* Paul Bérenger will surely fight back, as he is being nudged to do so – he would not himself want to be reduced to being a “Leader Minimo”, wouldn’t he? Do you expect him to regain control of the situation, or have the circumstances changed today for him?

He is not doing much as an MP albeit voicing his concern for the oligarchy on the sugar (a misnomer, this is verily the cane sector) conundrum so he has plenty of time to leverage control in his favour over the next few weeks and months. He will be patient and will not hasten matters. You will have noticed that he is only annoyed (agacer) and not angry (Mo bien amerder). He holds the purse strings of the party and that is a determining factor. He has a national aura that his adversaries need.

Some in the mainstream press still hold Berenger in high esteem and it constitutes an asset for the party. Both sides need each other. This is why they have compromised and he seems to have gained the upper hand with a number of people from his circle placed in good positions. While the two pretenders to the secretary general position have been denied, it has gone to his most loyal follower. He has fought and seems to have won, not necessarily to salvage his dimming career, but to keep the family concern going.

* If you go by the MMM’s past track record in the opposition, the current government would have faced a difficult time opposite an MMM of the earlier days what with the long list of scandals that have marked its mandate so far. Whatever happened to the MMM of the earlier years?

It simply does not know which party it will have to ally itself with so as to have the best chances of gaining power. Le cul entre deux chaises, the safest position is to stay quiet and not create ripples. The MMM has long been at the forefront when it came to the revelation of scandals. The catchphrase ‘Zot mem aster, zot mem vander’ punctured young Jugnauth’s credibility to such an extent that even the numerous advisers could not plug the leaks to this day.

But let us be honest about the MMM. In 2014, it was happy to play the “opposition loyale” while the Labour Party was in power and following the power change it resorted to taking shots in a most selective manner so that the scandal-prone MSM would get rid of the ML. With the live telecast of debates, people are realising that even Duval can ask questions that embarrass the government. One of the rare questions asked by the MMM’s leader this year showed the decrepit state it had reached; asking whether a hike in electricity prices would be considered to give some comfort to the troubled billionaires of the cane sector.

* Do you think that the younger generation who have climbed on the MMM bandwagon following the recent ‘Comité Central’ election, or those who look poised to take over, be able to take up from where Paul Bérenger has left it and provide the leadership that would reinvigorate the party?

The second fiddles in the MMM will have trouble upgrading to first violins. The system has been festering for a while and many who have held on to it have been nurtured into saying yes and not having ideas. This is not likely to change. There is no rebirth without a real funeral. I trust them to get this version of the MMM to the pyre eventually. Then only something new can emerge.

* The MMM is sailing in turbulent waters presently and it’s not clear in which direction it is heading. The PMSD and the Mouvement Patriotique are not tall enough to constitute a threat to the governing alliance. The only remaining contender on the political spectrum is the Labour Party. Do you see the LP capable of successfully challenging the government?

Limiting the potential contenders to a single option is dangerous and would mean that we would have to accept that it is only a cyclic switch between two families and factions. Can a leftist movement muster enough force prior to the next elections? We will see.

The Labour Party seems to have lost its voice. To paraphrase Gramsci, power is only conquered through ideas. At the moment, the hegemony of the capitalists is well entrenched. They are the ones dictating the terms of the debate. Their stooges are polluting the mainstream media and are framing public opinion to please their masters. Social engineering is being used extensively to veil the truth from our eyes. Nonetheless, shunning confrontation with highly biased figures would be a mistake.

Unless the Labourites position themselves in a battle of ideas versus the capitalists, there is the real danger of this calamitous government returning to power. It needs honest voices that say things as they are: this is a government that will rank amongst the worst this country has seen. So bad, that Pravind Jugnauth seems to be a visionary when compared to its other members. This is a government that has relinquished its powers in favour of the private sector that is happy to give exemptions worth billions of rupees to promoters of smart cities, that has considerably weakened the state while the EDB will determine what type of economic growth this country will pursue.

This is a government that toys with the idea of privatising water, that does not pay much attention to the rule of law, which is ready to do everything to satisfy the gluttony of the kitchen. Its charge sheet would have been enough to have it condemned. But the times have changed. There is little to no reaction on the part of the public on several critical issues. The first step would be to wake the people up.

The Labour Party would do well do revamp its personnel; let the honest leftist voices be heard. For at the moment, it is not connecting with Mauritians. It would do well to do away with those that have created a chasm between it and the middle class; those with love for stimulus packages and fiscal gifts for conglomerates. It needs to work on what democratisation would entail; it has to be the empowering of the masses not merely the pandering to another bourgeoisie.

It has to be bold; come up with new checks and balances and additional power to the people in the form of recall elections. Their dearth of bold ideas allied with an amateurish communication cripples them. They need to step up their game to have a solid chance of winning it next time.

* As regards the current government itself, critics have argued that its recent budget lacked a clear economic vision and substance and that it was more geared for the next elections. Isn’t it what all governments do at this stage in their mandates?

These are paltry gifts compared to what have been given to the haves. The Annual ‘Tap Latab’ exercise is such a waste of time. 3 hours of pure PR — I use PR to be politically correct. Big Business understands that and knows that the servile government will grant it whatever it desires, whether the government acknowledges it in this bill or not. There are a number of déjà vumeasures: the Civil Service College, Ocean Economy. Sprinkle some fad terms (Fintech, AI) and you have a potpourri akin to what this mandate is (not a lot of substance and plenty of spin.)

What is even more worrying is that some opposition leaders were almost begging for the government to include gifts to the cane sector… this tells us how rigged and perverted the system is. Of course, the government will be happy to oblige and will be setting up a Ministerial Committee for the bending over exercise.

As an entrepreneur, I find the budget out of sync. Saddling SMEs with graduates is like putting two issues together and hoping that a solution will materialise out of it. This is  simplistic and shows a dearth of knowledge of the many administrative hurdles and costs in the initial years of business.

Any measure to alleviate the burden on the middle class is welcomed. Still, this government is also saying that it will not touch the privileges of the ultra-rich. It needs the financing at election time. So what it does is reduce the price of petroleum products that it increased some weeks back and oversells the tax reduction. A lot of overselling will mean as many disgruntled people in one year.

* The government may be also looking for a face-saving device which would allow it to get out of the mess caused by the ‘Cash for Citizenship’ scheme. What lessons should we draw from this episode as regards the formulation of government policy on economic development and the role of such institutions like the EDB, the membership of which shows a predominance of private sector executives?

The way a few of the directors of the EDB are passing the hot potato to each other so that the ownership of this half-baked measure is not ascribed to them is comical. I am not even blaming them though. The private sector works like this; easy money means you can throw caution to the wind. What was the Prime Minister thinking when he chose to keep it in the Finance Bill? Pertaining to the outcry of some certified protectors of the historic bourgeoisie, this is an upgrade on the IRS/RES which only offered residence permits to the purchasers. The capitalists are good at influencing public opinion when they are not maximising profits. Some of the lobbying in that regard is thus artificial and we should be wary of that. Their villas could remain unsold.

The private sector works best only when the State holds its ground and is not reduced to a doormat for the private sector. The latter is on the look for profitability, usually on the short term and without caring about that happens in the long term. The EDB cannot dictate the terms of the game and tell us how the economy will be run. The present Prime Minister seems to have given up on affirming this stance. And this joke of a budget attests to that.

While we have been lauding the Singaporean model for years, we should probably pay attention to how their country is run. There is a strong state with strong regulators allowing private companies to operate in a safe cadre. Any government kowtowing to conglomerates hoping that this will lead to more jobs and economic growth fails to understand the primary motive of companies.

* Speaking of cash for the government’s budget, there would be a few billions forthcoming from the Saudis in the wake of the visit of the Kingdom’s Interior minister Prince Abdulaziz Al Saud. Whatever the price we would be paying for that, Showkutally Soodhun seems to outperforming his predecessors – the earlier frequent visitors to Saudi Arabia – who could never fetch us a political price for Saudi oil. What’s your take on that?

There is no such thing as a free meal in this world. Be it from India, China or Saudi Arabia. We are increasingly the hostage of their interests. I call it a duopoly; whatever the local oligarchy does not own is now being preyed upon by imperial powers.

The devil is in the detail. What will we be giving up at a later stage to please these overtly generous donors is what truly matters. Will they eventually have a say in how we are supposed to live? We have already started banning women from assemblies and there are tensions on communal grounds. Our way of life is what makes us unique. We should do our best to preserve that.

The generous grants showcase how past decisions affect us to this date. The manque à gagner from the flat tax considerably decreases the Government’s ability to act. Hard to believe that it is Soodhun’s charisma that is attracting this generosity, so I am pretty sure we will have to foot the bill in one way or the other at a later stage.

* But there is also some disturbing news about MP Soodhun relating to the sale by his son, Umeir, of his lease rights over a plot of State lands to Chinese investors for some Rs 48 million, a sale which according to documents published in the press would have been approved by former Housing and Lands minister Soodhun himself. The Intermediate Court ruling in the matter of MedPoint, although subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court, would however be a good place to start with for guidance on matters of conflict of interest. What do you think?

Well, jamais deux sans trois. First the accusations of threatening Duval, then he is alleged to have used derogatory terms about a section of the population in a private meeting and now the sale of this lease which raises questions.

The 2015 verdict would be a good starting point although the facts of this case might differ. The sentencing judgement in the MedPoint case highlighted that despite the absence of monetary gain for the accused, any participation in the decision making process was found in contravention of the POCA.

‘The concrete fact is that he participated in the decision making process as regards re-allocation of funds wherein his relative had a personal interest, and this actual taking part in these given circumstances is absolutely prohibited under section 13(2) POCA.’

The toothless watchdog could eventually pretend to act under public pressure. But not much is likely to happen. What people would like to know is whether he has respected his duties and responsibilities as a public official. Expect threats to members of the press by the parties involved and a lot of spin around this matter.

* There also appears to be lots of cash holed up in different places around the island – not only in ‘coffres-forts’ in the Upper Plaines Wilhems. And if we go by the trade the ‘depositors’ of the latest catch to the tune of some Rs 58 million ply, the Rs 220 million look like peanuts today. Isn’t that the perception?

These two issues are interrelated. The opaque political financing system is at the heart of our woes. How can people enjoying the perks of unlimited money from financiers seriously try to crack down dirty money or prevent money laundering? It is a state of mind that has percolated to the masses. The wheeling and dealing, what Mauritians call ‘tracer’, is present at different levels. This greed is seen when we open our arms to international con men, when vehicles are given like bones to those holding important positions in the system, when despite the billions of profits of the well-diversified cane sector, there is still the desire for more, when the father ensures that he places his/her ward to replace him so that this system perpetuates itself. Insatiable greed is present everywhere.

What we can do at this stage is initiate our youth to more noble pursuits. I wrote earlier in the year about cultural democratisation and the importance of a pass which would allow students to discover the beauty of our culture. This along with the cultivation of empathy should be at the heart of our concerns. Otherwise, we have other leaders that will not care about the inequality gap and this is not the type of society that would be elevating for its residents.

As regards the much maligned Rs 220 Million, we should be honest. To even think that only one of the mainstream party leader’s would have a war chest would be illogical. There are many that have profiteered from the system and have built whole empires with this kind of financing. It is a massive hypocrisy on the part of those that have handsomely benefited from this system to pretend that they are any different. What I regret is that nothing has been done by the Labour Party or the MMM to remedy same. They have not questioned the system and if they have their attempts to change it have been weak.

We should add the number of drug cases, the ballad of Lutchigadoo, the freebies given to family members, the use of public money to rescue a sinking hotel, the constant lying of our leaders, their dishonest acquaintances, the vulture-like lawyers, and the many shady deals to the unaccounted money that seems to circulate in Mauritius.

What is even more worrying is that the disenchantment of the population is quickly turning into indifference. The people seem to no longer care. This is what we will have to fight against.

 

The Circus is Back in Town (28.03.18)

The Circus Is Back In Town

After months of respite, the disgruntled population has to bear the shticks of the seasoned

Chetan Ramchurn

actors again. Are there any new additions to their stale acts now? Albeit the unanswered questions, the “tombe dehors”, “vander”, “batchiara”, the sniper-like targeting of anyone preventing an alliance with the On/Off party, the walk-outs at dinner time, the spats between former and future bed partners, and the half-baked answers of an utterly incapable leader? Yes, there are two novelties that have been​ added to the drama; colour matching when it comes to ties and beyond the sartorial effort, visual cues are now part of the fray. ​

Hence, neck deep plunged in immorality and shenanigans, the heir can find no better answer than to come up with a snap that proves nothing but his own limitations.

Veiled in secrecy, the former doormat for an international crook is hardly bothered. He sits there while his stooges continue their destructive work in our institutions. The name of a toothless watchdog headed by a patented yes-man is often thrown in the fray. Not much is likely to materialise such is its inaction. The system is rigged and not in our favour. The weekly discussions are make-believe; an increasingly difficult exercise to sustain the illusion that there is an alternative.

The house is presided over by a partisan lady whose bias makes the illusion seem slightly more believable such is the one sidedness in the way she handles the business of the agora. Overtly protecting the incumbent, hearing most selectively, she does more harm to those she wishes to serve. Every week, the freak show is broadcast live. The public is now accustomed to the acts of the ones it has chosen. They are scripted and some of the actors have spent decades perfecting the art of pretense. And the gullible electorate has spent years believing that the dynasties working for those wielding economic power would ultimately be beneficial to them.

The people are weary now. They are progressively more aware that they have been repeatedly betrayed. They know that corporate interests will predominate on their rights. On this Tuesday, not much was spoken about inequality while the gaps continue to widen and should have preoccupied. While the actors hail from different banners, they are united around the same goal; benefit from the generosity of financiers. This has led to a loss of faith in democracy and lower voter turnout and could potentially see the emergence of parties with extremist views.

This Tuesday is no different from others. The circus will be in town on a weekly basis. Over the next weeks, love will be gradually introduced to the plot. Love between two brothers will be rekindled “au nom de l’intérêt supérieur de la nation”. Likewise, two forsaken lovers, one in red and the other in blue will gradually move towards each other. The population knows it and will ​watch the déjà vu with tired eyes.

Removing The Colonial Blinkers

---

What is lacking as we prepare for the next 50 years is a movement that cuts across social classes that ensures that it talks left and walks left, which pledges to limit the political lifetime of elected members, which rejects corporate finance to run its activities

---

Democracy comes with its fair share of bitter surprises. Many now feel that the Lepep Alliance’s victory in 2014 will rank among the most unpalatable ones. Having reversed whatever was achieved in terms of ‘democratisation’, it has manoeuvred towards the consolidation of the historic bourgeoisie and the offering of freebies to its hangers-on and members of its close-knit circuit. We are in regression mode. If anything, this highlights the glaring loopholes of a system that demand to be plugged. Shifting the levers of real power to citizens would significantly embolden and truly liberate Mauritius.

---

“A month celebrating Creole and Bhojpuri in their various forms would be helpful. Perhaps, the only way the Mauritian identity will flourish is by letting our specificities co-exist. By being respectful towards each other and seeing the beauty of living side by side in harmony. A culture pass for students would be beneficial in this sense; allowing young Mauritians to discover the beautiful tapestry that is our culture…”

---

Image can be nothing

While the ripples from the havoc initiated during the first months of this government in power are still felt, this prime minister has manifested a deep concern for his image. His elusive quest for a bard to hype him so that he gains a prime ministerial cachet continues. Good luck with that.

Still, this has worked in the past when his father took to aping Lee Kuan Yew and tried to adapt very selective chapters of the Singaporean model to our local context; public housing for lower to middle classes was never very high on his agenda and the government was relegated to a mere doormat with selected members of the private sector acting as puppeteers. Whilst Lee Kuan Yew’s vision empowered Singapore enough to break through the middle income trap, our system seems to favour the election of those concerned only about securing positions and contracts for their near and dear.

The State of the Left

In a country where parties talk left and walk right, gleefully submitting themselves to the oligarchs, bold progressive ideas have suffered. The Labour Party betrayed its ideals and followers when it chose to go along with corporate tax cuts prescribed by Sithanen. These have proved ruinous for our country which now finds itself reduced to asking for money from foreign powers to sustain infrastructural development. Having wilfully crippled our motherland in the name of growth, Labour lost itself while dancing to the neoliberal tune. This is unbefitting of a party with such a glorious past. The GDP growth, very much like the heir’s desire to appear prime ministerial, has yet to materialise.

The MMM, in ideological wilderness for decades now, seeks to be in power merely for the sake of power. There is not much it wishes to change that will benefit the masses. Like the MSM, it wishes to be a welcoming doormat for oligarchs. It is not the kind of faction that would be positive for our motherland and light is unlikely to come from them. Other leftist blocs are still at a precocious stage but they will grow and in time hopefully become wielders of change and progress.

“If there is hope… it lies in the proles”

Direct democracy would help curb the disgust of citizens with politics. No longer would they be limited to one voting expedition every five years but would have a say on the things that matter and be in a position to correct the imbalances of the system. Excessive expenses would be monitored, the behaviour of MPs would have to be at their best since there could be the possibility of being removed from office, new laws that would really change the lives of citizens be initiated and people would connect with our Motherland’s present and future.

---

“A democratic state requires independent regulators to ensure fairness. This is not the case at the moment where many nominees act as rubber stamps, refusing to see what seems to be hidden in plain sight. Selection of heads of regulatory bodies should be made independently and chosen candidates should be free from any political shackles…”

---

What is lacking as we prepare for the next 50 years is a movement that cuts across social classes which pledges to limit the political lifetime of elected members, which rejects corporate finance to run its activities, that allows open primaries for local and national elections, that ensures that it talks left and walks left and that is not afraid to tackle the mighty conglomerates when the better interests of the country are being jeopardised.

Where Economic Power ≠ Political Power…

Mauritius and the vast majority of Mauritians suffer from the encroachment of economic power upon the political sphere. Financiers are handsomely rewarded with fiscal exemptions of billions when embarking upon real estate projects again killing the possibility of any democratisation of land. Ganesh Sitaraman, Professor of Law at Vanderbilt Law School and a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, outlines the importance of ensuring that “Economic power doesn’t turn into political power. When the wealthiest people and corporations are deciding policy, that’s not an actual republic – a representative democracy – there must be campaign finance regulation and a more representative political system.” A democratic state requires independent regulators to ensure fairness. This is not the case at the moment where many nominees act as rubber stamps, refusing to see what seems to be hidden in plain sight. Selection of heads of regulatory bodies should be made independently and chosen candidates should be free from any political shackles.

Real democratisation and what it entails?

The historic bourgeoisie and the state supported one both gun for profits. In this regard, pandering to either of them can hardly be conducive to the progress of this country. We need a strong state; one that can democratise access to land and that will ensure the supply of energy without having recourse to any private intermediary. We need ‘un Etat stratège’ that ventures into new sectors and creates new avenues for its citizens. Our economy will remain amorphous if driven by the interests of rent seekers. The country’s progress will depend on how buoyant our economy will be in the next half a century.

The empowerment of citizens is an absolute requisite for real democratisation. We have too many echoes and not enough voices. This starts with the constant upgrade of our education system and as crucial is the offering of real incentives to enable citizens to break free from the shackles of a salaried life.

The Road Travelled

There has been substantial betterment in the lives of Mauritians since independence. With proper vision and planning as well as a strong welfare state as keystones, the country has progressed. Faced with the inequalities inherited from the colonial era, only a safety net for citizens has ensured the social and political stability of our country. But the inequalities continue to exist and the oligarchy still pulls the strings. Through free education, the possibility of beating fate and improving one’s destiny became an achievable milestone.

Despite the obvious progress, this is a country that has yet to reconcile its citizens around core themes. There is a schism along communal lines to this day. There are newspapers that host articles reminiscent of Le Cernéen. There are talks of Hindu hegemony by some brainwashed minds being spewed. To this day, there is a clear attempt at whitewashing the history of our island telling us so little about slavery and the plight of the coolies. This is a wonderful country but a fragile one.

Being Mauritian

There have been talks for decades about the creation of a national identity. It takes the form of due recognition of our mother tongues. A month celebrating Creole and Bhojpuri in their various forms would be helpful. Perhaps, the only way the Mauritian identity will flourish is by letting our specificities co-exist. By being respectful towards each other and seeing the beauty of living side by side in harmony. A culture pass for students would be beneficial in this sense; allowing young Mauritians to discover the beautiful tapestry that is our culture.

We are born free. That is the greatest gift imparted to every citizen. The freedom to think and act. We should never forget that.

Viv Moris!

 

* Published in print edition on 9 March 2018

Pou Enn Demokratizasion Kiltirel

Article paru dans Le Mauricien | 6 novembre, 2017 – 15:35 | Par CHETAN RAMCHURN

Mo rev denn kiltir dekloisone,
Ki permet bann lespri evolie,
Nou sosiete ava benefisie,
Ant nou, bann lien ava resere.

Rises kiltirel Moris pou ogmante
Bann zenn pou lir bann oter ki zot oule,
Ant Bellow ek Balzac zot kav navige,
Ek proz Cabon ek Chazal zot kav teleporte,
Si enn kolezien le al teat,
so paran pa bizin frike,
Kan kikenn ler dekouver Mozart,
pena pou dimann prete,
Si to ler transporte par mazi
Bharat Natyam, to nepli bizin ezite,
Calligraphie Chinoise ava fer toi emerveye,
Enn konser Menwar, to oblize vibre.

Mo rev denn alokasion kiltirel
kouma Renzi inn amene,
Kot a laz 18 an, to gagn enn larzan pou depanse,
Lor expozision, liv, mize, konser ou sine,
Toi to gete!
Lib arbit lor seki to opte.
Macron pe esey kopie,
Seki dan Italie apel 18app,
« pass culture » linn nome,
Me lesans napa sanze.
Se permet la mas ek kiltir konekte.