KISSOONSINGH HAZAREESINGH (1909-1992)
Visionary public officer and promoter of Indian culture (I)
BRANDING
Hospitable Mauritius
LETTRE OUVERTE AUX MAURICIENS
Incinération, Recyclage et Compostage de déchets (I)
MARKETING
Let us not brand Mauritius !
ZÈLE DÉPLOYÉ
Foi(e) de poulet
KISSOONSINGH HAZAREESINGH (1909-1992)
Visionary public officer and promoter of Indian culture (I)
Kissoonsingh Hazareesingh (later Dr), intimately called Lakhan, was born at Valetta, near Dagotière, in Moka District on 24 October 1909. His father, Indian indentured Hazareesingh Jhingoor Singh, from Ajamgar (UP), died when aged 40. His eldest son was but 11 years old. To support the family, the poor widowed mother, Bhagmaneea Nundoosingh, also of Dagotière where the family had migrated, started a small traditional sowing cottage industry.
The third son of a family of five brothers and three sisters, Hazareesingh received only primary education. After working as field labourer, he became a day-man at the age of 16, and then a fully-fledged clerk, in the postal service. By dint of hard work and perseverance, Hazareesingh had a meteoric rise to fame. His charm brought him, during his formative years, close to scholars and top officials, Mauritian and British, such as Selmour Ahnee, Loïs Lagesse, Robert Edward Hart, Raymonde de K/Vern, Arthur Martial, Loys Masson and Malcolm de Chazal as well as John de Lingen and Labour Commissioner Twining. They all encouraged his literary and journalistic pursuit or his career in public service. Hazareesingh afterwards became an internationally known figure as both an academic and a civil servant, besides shining in various other fields. His contribution to bridge Western and Eastern cultures is perhaps unique in Mauritius. He rubbed shoulders as a personal friend with Cabinet Ministers of his generation, particularly Prime Minister Sir Seewosagur Ramgoolam (SSR). Hazareesingh helped shape the destiny of Mauritius, contributing notably to make it a Welfare State.
After a few years in the postal department, Hazareesingh successively held other posts in the public sector, almost all at top level : (a) labour inspector (among the first six recruited in July 1938) ; (b) assistant commissioner of public assistance (1948-1953) ; (c) the first social welfare commissioner (1953-1959), becoming the first Indo-Mauritian to head a government department (then an autonomous body run under the supervision of the Colonial Secretary ; (d) the first director of the central information office ; (e) the first principal private secretary of the Prime Minister ; and (f) the first Director of Mahatma Gandhi Institute (MGI) of which he had been the director of planning. For this responsibility, he had occupied an office within the complex of the University of Mauritius with which he was associated since 1971, sitting on its governing council as the Prime Minister's representative. Though not a lawyer, Hazareesingh successfully grappled with complex judicial issues when he served at the labour department. Once chairing a quasi-judicial conciliation board attended by six lawyers representing the employers, he unhesitatingly made an award in favour of the workers. It " was in itself a tribute to the way in which he had conducted the proceedings ", retired acting Chief Justice Raman Osman (afterwards Governor-General and Sir) later appreciated. At the very start of his career in the government service, at the postal department, Hazareesingh had the sympathetic support of the assistant postmaster-general, Selmour Ahnee (1878-1949), an intellectual who regularly wrote for Le Mauricien under the pen-name of Stylet, enabling him, as he later recalled, " to get a secure footing on the literary ladder ".
At first, Hazareesingh contributed regularly to Le Radical, a daily (1898-1941), owned by Maurice Martin, an elected legislator who also chaired the Mauritius Chamber of Commerce, whose editor, Loïs Lagesse, was an admirer of the Indian Aurobindo Ghose's militant writings against the British power. Hazareesingh's early writings on Mauritius also appeared in India during its pre-independence period in the Modern Review of Calcutta, edited by Ramananda Chatterjee, the Indian Review of Natesan in Madras and Sir Sachindananda Sinha's Hindustan Review of Patna. In Mauritius, he edited the collected publication, Mauritius and the War, containing the writings of such personalities as Governor Bede Clifford and Advocate-General Hooper.
National Indo-Mauritian Platform 1935
In 1935, Hazareesingh was the joint-secretary of the voluntary organising committee, later known as Indian Cultural Association (ICA), set up to commemorate the centenary of the indentured labourers' arrival in Mauritius. It was upon his invitation that SSR, freshly back from London where he had stayed during 14 years, joined it. Hazareesingh managed to have as chief guest T. K. Swaminathan, who represented the Madras-based Indian Colonial Society vowed to the progress of Indians in the colonies. Rabindranath Tagore, to whom Hazareesingh had written on the subject and who patronised the Society, personally deputed Swaminathan to Mauritius. Hazareesingh delivered his lecture at the Town Hall of Beau Bassin-Rose Hill on 12 January 1936 when he said to the audience representing plural Mauritius : " The admirable fusion of East and West in Mauritius gives to our population an importance all its own. " The press laudably referred to his literary ability, now earning him a national name in the intellectual firmament.
To mark the centenary, the first issue of the Indian Cultural Review (ICR) came out. It was a magazine edited by Hazareesingh most of the time since the beginning, to which also contributed such literary figures of non-Indian origin as Ms Raymonde de K/Vern, Malcolm de Chazal and Loys Masson. The periodical at times carried greetings and best wishes from such Indian leaders as, among others, Tagore, Nehru and Radhakrishnan. Encouraged by Hazareesingh, SSR wrote in the ICR his article, Sons of Immigrants, in which he first exposed his views to the Mauritian public. According to Hazareesingh, it was to become SSR's "political manifesto." In 1991, he observed later : " I have always held the view that this important event created the momentum (under the dynamic leadership of R. K. Boodhun) which ultimately led the country to Independence. "
Chit Dukhira
(to be continued)
BRANDING
Hospitable Mauritius
Reading the editorial of Le Mauricien and this paper's guest columnists François Antelme, Goolam M. Mungly, Sen Ramsamy, BR, B Rand and surely more to come, I feel, like K. C. Li Kwong Wing, that I must express myself on the image building of my motherland.
In case readers wish to have a few other views, please click into young Saajid Vawda's blog : http//www.sjdvda.com/2009/5-reasons-mauritius-logo-branding-sucks.
Branding aims at giving competitive identity to a location on assumption that others are becoming distinctive and emerging as better alternatives. A brand needs to be short, sweet, selective, preserving and suggestive while reassuring comforts and harmony. A logo, according to graphic designer David Airey, must be describable, memorable, effective without colour, scalable & appropriate. For AMA (American Marketing Ass) a brand is a " name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of them intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group sellers to differentiate them from those of other sellers ".
A country's brand must have visual aspects that captivates, fascinates and activates a meaningful human purpose in people's life to create emotional connection. The brander must also seek the semantic aspect of the brand ; the true human purpose at the centre of the brand to create and convey an image that transforms the way a person thinks, feels and behaves - it is at the same time an identity, a showcase of ideas, actions, and experiences that have made real meaningful connection with people ; Mauritius Commercial Bank for example is "the Best", India is "Incredible" and Malaysia is "Truly Asia". They show how a brand amalgamates visual aspects with a semantic aspect.
Was I to submit Mauritius, c'est un plaisir as a TP coursework on nation branding when reading for DESS (Diplôme d'Etudes Supérieures Spécialisées) in Carrières de Publicité at Rennes I Univ (France), my tutors in advertising, branding and image building, Jacques Séguéla, guru of Advertising & Branding, Maurice Levy and M. Baudry (the then no. 1 & no. 2 of Publicis-France - no. 1 advertising agency in Europe those days & still one of the great four in Europe today as Publicis Groupe SA), would have thrown my piece to the dustbin and ejected me from the course. Mauritius, c'est un plaisir does not qualify under basic branding rules, being deprived of visual (by imagination) and semantic aspects. It is not suggestive in the direction the country wants it to be and it is not pregnant of meaningful positive references. Further, the use of a sentence with a subject and verb is not recommended. A verb is used only in a protectionist context, e. g., Buy British or Consommons Mauricien. A word, single or compound, generally an adjective, is encouraged to be more forceful ; hence, "Incredible" India.
Among other rules, branding must provide factual identities and must impregnate the thoughts of the beholder on the practicality of the brand. South Africa tried to derogate to the rule but ended up having a somehow loose and meaningless brand South Africa, it's possible. And, South African qualify it as : " In South Africa, it's possible for you to get mugged and robbed ". In fact, in professional circles around the world, the saying is South Africa is Africa after all ; do understand the péjoratif. Seduced by the South African slogan, that means it could be feasible just as it may not be feasible, some asinine copycats in Mauritius have apparently directed the branding team on a cut and paste mission, to also copycat the concept of the Hollywood and Bollywood writings on hillsides ; hence, Mauritius, c'est un plaisir with the Pieter Both mountain as relics in background ; a newly discovered icon (un con), the Pieter Both, a Dutch dude, a failure as seafarer who never set foot on the island. What a naufrage !
A literal translation of C'est un plaisir in English is It's a pleasure rather than with pleasure. When you are told, " Je vous remercie " automatically your reply is : " C'est un plaisir " relating to " Don't mention it " in English. But with connotations, "C'est un plaisir" leads to grotesque clichés that cannot be named with due respect to readers. "C'est un plaisir" also connotes to "c'est un plaisir … le plaisir du sexe" - read here selling Mauritius as a sex destination. The "M" in the logo in fact depicts a woman in a popular love-making position, one of the leading Kamasutra's most favourite positions.
I refrain from commenting others' references to the brand as cropping up on the internet. Everywhere, however, the comments are oiling on, " Maurice, c'est un plaisir de se faire arnaquer " or "… le plaisir de se faire attoucher … le plaisir de se faire violer … " or …, mais censurons !
Hospitality
The BOI is investing energy and public funds to source investment in the Healthcare and Hospitality sectors. IRS, RES, Medical Tourism, etc, are investment priority targets of Government. The branding, however, does not go in that direction nor does it convey the safe investment haven message. Still, Mauritius is known since time immemorial as Paradise Island and also for its hospitality. Even Mary Pierce, French tennis player present at the launching ceremony at La Citadelle, said that Mauritius is home second to none for its hospitality.
Yes, hospitable Mauritius ! Oxford Dictionary explains "hospitable" as an adjective that means "giving, disposed to give welcome & entertainment to strangers or guests." The Larousse Dictionnaire du Français Contemporain views "hospitalier" the literal translation of "hospitable" into French as " qui accueille avec libéralité et bonne grâce les hôtes, les invités, les étrangers ".
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (http://www.merriam-webster.com) gives three interpretations to the adjective hospitable, namely,
a. given to generous and cordial reception of guests ;
b. promising or suggesting generous and cordial welcome ; and,
c. offering pleasant or sustaining environment (e. g., hospitable to FDI).
The online Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hospitable) relates the adjective hospitable as :
1. receiving or treating guests or strangers warmly and generously (e.g., a hospitable family or a hospitable nation) ;
2. characterized by betokening warmth and generosity towards guests or strangers (e.g., a smile) ; and,
3. favourably receptive and open (e.g., hospitable to new ideas ; hospitable to foreign workers & to foreign investors ; hospitable to fauna and flora, …).
Customer care is today the most important value added component to business growth. It is the customer service that differentiates a successful business to competition. It sets the business apart from others with an aura of human touch that is divine to none, hence the importance of feeling welcomed and the comfort of proverbial hospitality.
I don't think that I need to discourse any longer on the branding of Mauritius. Nor would I dare comment the bill of US $ 1 million as I am not in the known of the breakdown of expenses involved. But I tender, free of charge, to my motherland a more meaningful and sustained brand : Hospitable Mauritius ; a brand that irrigates the country's positive attributes ; a brand that is a true reflection of the warm, welcoming cosmopolitan Mauritius ; a brand that reassures investors ; a brand that shows an emancipated Mauritius from being a Dodoland or Cookoo's land of the Dutch settlement to an island of preservation of ethnic specificities, religions, flora, fauna and, above all, preservation of rights of individuals, rights to invest and to draw benefits, and rights of religious belief ; and finally a brand that is not cut and paste.
Trusting a contributor to Le Mauricien's Forum page, one concludes that there has been plagiat with Mauritius, c'est un plaisir. Someone somewhere has violated Intellectual Property Rights regulations.
God's lucks to thee Motherland of ours.
Anand Dulloo
PS : In case Hospitable Mauritius requires a French version, the term Accueillante île Maurice could be envisaged
LETTRE OUVERTE AUX MAURICIENS
Incinération, Recyclage et Compostage de déchets (I)
Depuis quelque temps déjà, le gouvernement a approuvé un projet d'incinération de déchets à Maurice. Ceci est une première pour le pays et la région. Nous avons pris position contre ce projet.
Le but de cet article est d'expliquer aux lecteurs notre position. Libre ensuite à chacun de faire son choix en toute conscience. Nous avons catégorisé nos arguments en fonction de considérations économiques, environnementales, énergétiques, sanitaires et philosophiques.
Commençons par les considérations économiques.
Ce projet comporte trois aspects économiques auxquels il faut s'arrêter : a) un tipping fee d'US $ 39 par tonne de déchets incinérés ; b) un prix extrêmement favorable de Rs 5,71 par Kwh d'électricité produite et c) des pénalités au cas où moins de 300 000 tonnes de déchets sont envoyées à l'incinérateur.
En premier lieu, nous notons que le tipping fee est exprimé en dollars US. Pourquoi les autorités ont-elles accepté un tel arrangement qui risque de nous coûter plus cher à chaque dépréciation de la roupie ? Quel avantage le pays peut-il tirer d'un tel arrangement ? Aucune réponse à ces questions élémentaires de la part des autorités ou bien des promoteurs. Ceci n'est pas acceptable. Notons que le tipping fee nous coûtera Rs 386 millions chaque année pour 300 000 tonnes de déchets.
Aucune réponse non plus au fait que le pays sera dans l'obligation d'acheter chaque Kwh provenant de l'incinérateur plus cher qu'ailleurs. Pourquoi ? À l'heure actuelle où il faut renégocier les contrats avec les IPP (Independent Power Producers) de l'industrie sucrière car ces contrats sont trop généreux avec un prix moyen de Rs 3,50 le Kwh, comment peut-on accepter de payer Rs 5,71 le Kwh à un nouvel opérateur non sucre ? Comment est-on arrivé à ce chiffre Rs 5,71 le Kwh ? Pire encore, comment peut-on faire venir un consultant américain pour revoir les contrats des IPP et en même temps accepter de payer bien plus cher le KWh d'un opérateur non sucre ? Il y a une contradiction flagrante qui demeure inexpliquée.
Un milliard par an
Notons que les 20 MW d'électricité produite nous coûteront Rs 1 milliard par an.
Pourquoi l'Etat a-t-il signé un contrat garantissant 300 000 tonnes de déchets par an sous peine de pénalités ? Après tout, l'Etat n'est pas demandeur d'incinérateur ; si un opérateur privé veut se lancer dans un projet d'incinération, c'est à lui d'en assumer les risques et ce n'est pas à l'État de lui garantir suffisamment de déchets contre pénalités payées par le contribuable. D'ailleurs, un tel contrat condamne le pays à produire autant de déchets que possible pour éviter les pénalités quand nous devrions, au contraire réduire notre volume de déchets pour réduire nos divers impacts environnementaux. Comment peut-on d'un côté prendre un engagement sur 20 ans pour 300 000 tonnes de déchets annuels et d'un autre promouvoir le concept de Maurice Île Durable (MID) ? Cette contradiction va affaiblir le louable projet MID dont le fonds sera d'ailleurs pillé pour subventionner année après année l'électricité chère provenant de l'incinérateur. Ce pillage du fonds sera le coup de grâce au projet MID. Le gouvernement devra choisir : soit c'est l'incinérateur, soit c'est le MID, mais pas les deux, l'incompatibilité est trop flagrante. Notons que le tipping fee et la production d'énergie nous coûteront Rs 1,386 milliard par an. En l'occurrence, chaque habitant de Maurice paiera indirectement aux promoteurs Rs 1 000 par année pendant 20 ans au minimum.
Environnement et incinération
À l'heure actuelle, la plupart de nos déchets sont dirigés vers Mare-Chicose pour y être enfouis. Le résultat n'est pas très réjouissant car le village avoisinant doit être évacué pour cause de pollution. Mais un incinérateur est-il une meilleure option ? On peut en douter car en brûlant les déchets, on ne fait que les transformer en gaz toxiques. Près de 2 000 différents composants chimiques dont la toxicité est souvent inconnue sont relâchés dans l'atmosphère durant l'incinération transformant notre atmosphère en décharge publique. Notons que la dioxine et les furannes ne sont que quelques-uns de ces composants chimiques relâchés dans l'atmosphère, donc il ne faut pas que dioxines et furannes deviennent l'arbre qui cache la forêt de polluants chimiques qui vont plomber notre atmosphère. Et ce n'est pas tout car en incinérant 300 000 tonnes de déchets on produit entre 60 000 et 90 000 tonnes de cendres et de résidus qui sont des concentrés de substances toxiques (mercure, plomb, dioxines et furannes) qui doivent absolument être stockés ou enfouis quelque part de manière indéfinie, donc un centre d'enfouissement est absolument nécessaire au projet incinérateur. Il est capital de comprendre que l'incinération ne va pas rendre inutile les centres d'enfouissement de déchets, les fameux landfills, au contraire il en a besoin. Chose rarement évoquée.
L'incinérateur est censé fonctionner pendant 20 ans. Donc après 20 ans de bons et loyaux services, il aura généré entre 1,2 millions et 1, 8 millions de tonnes de cendres toxiques à gérer pendant l'éternité car ces déchets ne peuvent être ni recyclés ni réutilisés de par leur toxicité. Bel héritage toxique que nous léguera donc ce projet. Du fait de leur toxicité, ces cendres doivent être stockées dans des décharges rigoureusement contrôlées pendant très, très longtemps. Le ministère de l'Environnement a-t-il les moyens et les compétences requises pour contrôler que ces centaines de milliers de tonnes de cendres hautement toxiques restent bien à l'abri pendant les décennies à venir ? À vous, chers compatriotes, d'en juger.
Énergie et Incinération
L'incinération est souvent présentée comme une source d'énergie renouvelable. Au prime abord cela paraît sensé ; par définition les déchets sont indésirables et si on peut en extraire de l'énergie en les brûlant, pourquoi pas ?
Mais après réflexion les choses ne sont plus aussi simples. Prenons le cas du papier, matière calorifique par excellence. Il est clair qu'en brûlant une tonne de papier nous allons récupérer de l'énergie. Mais cette tonne de papier brûlé ne sera pas recyclée, donc elle devra être remplacée par une autre tonne de papier vierge. La fabrication d'une tonne de papier vierge nécessite plus d'énergie qu'on peut en obtenir en brûlant une tonne de papier. En règle générale, il faut beaucoup plus d'énergie pour fabriquer une tonne de papier, de carton, de plastique ou de métal qu'on peut en obtenir en brûlant cette même tonne. Ainsi, pour la société dans son ensemble, l'incinération de déchets nous forcera à consommer encore plus d'énergie pour remplacer ce qui a été incinéré. Au lieu d'être un projet de Waste to Energy comme vanté c'est plutôt un projet de Energy to Waste mais bien sûr les profits, eux, ne seront pas gaspillés pour tout le monde.
Karim Jaufeerally
Institute for Environmental and Legal Studies
http://iels.intnet.mu
(à suivre)
MARKETING
Let us not brand Mauritius !
Various well-known personalities have reacted to the recent branding exercise (Mauritius, c'est un plaisir) with refreshing perspectives and valuable comments.
To recap, in my own words :
1. the slogan has un air de déjà vu ;
2. it is too simple, and even simplistic ;
3. it bears a negative sexual connotation ; and
4. costly foreign experts show us the way in our own backyard - whilst local talents are ignored.
Amongst the various counter-proposals, if I may pick one, M. Sen Ramsamy's Art de Vivre is very thoughtful, elegant, full of character and, philosophically, quite epicurean. Sophisticated without being bombastic, yet it is clear and easy to understand. It describes Mauritius extremely well and hints at our culture and history. And it did not cost Rs 31 M. Whilst I do not want to lecture anybody, allow me to propose an almost crazy approach from a lateral but also a fundamental perspective.
I am proud to say that I have frequently witnessed excitement, and even awe, with wide-open eyes of envy whenever I mention Mauritius internationally. Maybe I am biased but I have never seen this type of affectionate reaction about any other country. Mauritius is very well respected in the world and definitely punches above its weight. The Le Morne beach was voted the world's Top 10 only last month in a Sunday UK newspaper. Business as usual. Even travel agents write officially in the trade media that Mauritius is "out of this world". The hard-working hotel staff deserve much recognition - as does the innate hospitality of our people. This is not something you create from focus groups. We are a unique people in a country of extraordinary history and culture. Now, how should such a unique nation be … branded ? Or, rather, should it ?
We come back to Marketing since we have too, unfortunately, in this day and age. Numerous other countries have, for years now, done their branding. Country advertising is rife on CNN and BBC World, from South Africa to Kazakhstan. If anything, it is too late for us. This exercise is, at best, already obsolete and, at worst, a textbook, cheap "me-too" reaction - very unworthy of such an exclusive destination as Mauritius. I would venture to suggest that branding will reduce our country and its rich culture to a mere Marketing slogan : another common destination. Various really successful business propositions, in all walks of life, do not have recourse to basic Marketing activities. They are above that : Ferrari or Rolls Royce do not advertise, Apple does not do customer surveys, Ryanair (a ruthless low cost airline : love them or hate them) are so confident of their value-proposition that they officially boast they do not … offer customer service ! Does Apple have a slogan ? It does not need one ! The name says it all. This tiny David (against the Microsoft Goliath - or Sony, etc.) is known globally for its innovation, slick design and user-friendliness which attracts millions of cult followers - devotees who are happy to pay 50-100% more to be members of this sect !
So I would propose that we forget this already obsolete branding exercise. I hear professional Marketing people saying that, in this world, you have to communicate or you are dead. OK, but Mauritius deserves more of a soft "pull" campaign than a crass "push" one. Just like nowadays a car advertisement portrays more of the lifestyle than the actual vehicle or an airline advertisement shows lucky pampered passengers and not the aircraft engines, let us create an ad off the beaten track : without mentioning Mauritius. Let us show hints of pristine Pamplemousses, the busy bazaar de Port-Louis, relaxing l'Ile-aux-Cerfs, colouful Chamarel and the heavy history of the dramatic Le Morne piece of rock (which could well become our powerful visual identity) whilst naming all these places - but without mentioning Mauritius or any cheap slogan. Call it sub-branding if you wish. This will tally with our unique and far away exotic and mysterious destination. You want viral Marketing ? Here it is : let us tease the global travellers. Let us get them talking and guessing in blogs, on Twitter and on Facebook. They will be the ones to name Mauritius and de facto become its real ambassadors. Let us … outsource our slogan creation to them. And let us have millions of slogans in the hearts of people. Let Mauritius be what they want it to be for them. Advocacy is the highest level of customer satisfaction, the pinnacle of Marketing - if you have to be scientific. In Marketing, sometimes "less is more".
We will differentiate ourselves from the pack.
We are unique.
Let us keep it a secret.
Fouad Diouman
fdiouman@hotmail.com
ZÈLE DÉPLOYÉ
Foi(e) de poulet
Après la sortie du ministre Valayden contre les poulets, voilà que notre ministre Jeetah, lui aussi par excès de zèle, ordonne de jeter 15 000 poulets et 30 000 pilons dans les ordures de Mare Chicose, sans compter les 20 tonnes de foies de mouton.
Toute la population sait parfaitement que ces produits étaient propres à la consommation.
Le seul élément qui ne plaisait pas à Monsieur Jeetah et à ses inspecteurs était l'étiquetage et ce malgré les garanties données par les fournisseurs et experts internationaux.
Combien de familles dans le besoin auraient pu profiter de ces produits parfaitement consommables ?
Bravo Monsieur le Ministre pour votre excès de zèle ; vous avez, sans vous en rendre compte, collé une étiquette sur votre dos avec date d'expiration… fin 2010.
Après tout ce scandale, j'ai la chair de poule et une vraie crise de foi(e) !!!
Brrrrrrrrr….