Dear Mr President,
I am writing to you in my capacity as a long-standing social scientist, a patriot, an engaged citizen, deeply concerned for the stability and sustainability of our nation. I am writing in all humility, to kindly request that you defer your assent to the Finance Bill in its current form. The Bill will most likely come to you very soon-once it is voted by the current highly skewed legislature. The people of Mauritius are unhappy and aggrieved. Little did they expect to see their aspirations for a more inclusive, just, transparent and accountable Mauritius thwarted away so soon.
“Let Mauritius be Mauritius again”
The phrase ‘Let Mauritius be Mauritius again’ with which you beautifully concluded the presentation of the Government programme some months back no longer resonates with the average Mauritian. The rumblings of discontent run high. At the heart of this discontent is the abrupt, unilateral decision to postpone the eligibility age for the “pension de vieillesse” to 65. Arguments have been made for and against this decision. I am not going to repeat them here but suffice it to say that there can be No Sustainable Development without Social Dialogue and effective Tripartism. Contrary to what some may think, it is not a mere handful of trade unionists who are expressing their discontent, there are many Mauritians out there who are angry. Mauritians will no longer accept top-down governance and the ‘we are government- we decide’ attitude or ‘pran to kritik al lakaz’.
You – the Guardian of our
Constitution/our Democracy
I attended the ‘forum-débat’ organised by Plateforme syndicale on “Pension vieillesse” at La Salle Municipale de Belle-Rose on Wednesday. Hats off to the diverse panelists from civil society, academia, the trade unions and organisers for a very rich and thought-provoking debate. In many ways, the debate prompted me to write to you – the Guardian of our Constitution – our democracy.
I recall you saying, when you read the Government Programme:
“Government has received a clear and overwhelming mandate for a drastic change of course and to chart a new development path… Government seeks not only to respond to the aspirations of the people and honour its electoral pledges but it will also forge a social pact with the people…” .
Allow me to say that forging a social pact requires first and foremost listening to the people and finding solutions together to solve our problems. No social pact can be achieved by the imposition of dominant ideas and narratives.
I speak from the vantage point of a scholar-activist, a feminist immersed in the grassroots, a jurist/social scientist who has been working and writing papers on poverty, political economy and socio-economic rights for many years now. The current dismantling of the Mauritian welfare state does not augur well at all for the future of small, vulnerable, multiethnic Mauritius. The sudden, unilateral decision to alter the eligibility age for the ‘pension de vieillesse’, will bring new forms of poverty and inequality to an already highly stratified society, where wealth remains concentrated in the hands of a few and collusion between political and economic elites persist. And it is certainly not the ‘Income support of Rs 10000” which came as an afterthought which will be sufficient to forge the new social pact.
Interestingly, ‘L’Alliance du Changement’ promised to inscribe socio-economic rights and rights of Nature in the constitution and to which you also refer in the government programme. I have no doubt that you, as a seasoned politician, a sound academic and now the President of the Republic – the Guardian of our constitution, realise fully well that the ‘pension de vieillesse’ is a fundamental socio-economic right with huge implications for the betterment and protection of Mauritian families – not only the elderly but across generations. Fundamental socio-economic rights and democracy are inextricably linked. How can we therefore reconcile the intention to inscribe socio economic rights in the constitution with the current dismantling of the welfare state? Packaging the latter under the guise of ‘fiscal consolidation’ is not only immoral but will bring more precariousness and misery. Fiscal consolidation through the promotion of neoliberalism is not what we need at this juncture!
The Urgency of Counter Hegemonic Discourses
As you very well know, the people of Mauritius had had enough of the oppressive MSM regime which had pushed our democracy to the brinks. V Dem then, rightly so, described our democracy as ‘hanging on a thread’. When Moustass Leaks came out, people voted with rage because they could no longer bear to see and continue to be party to the different forms of injustice and wrong doings associated with the unethical and inept governance of the MSM. The people of Mauritius massively sanctioned the MSM regime – it was a ‘vote sanction’’ rather than a ‘vote d’adhésion’.
The electoral manifesto and promises made by L’Alliance du Changement, geared towards bringing fundamental changes for a more inclusive, just, transparent and accountable nation, raised the hopes of many. But building such a society cannot be done on hegemonic economic discourses, arrogance, hypocrisy and lies. Narratives around the issue of sustainability of pensions, particularly by those holding the reins of power, have revolved around ‘la caisse vide’, high indebtedness, shifting from a consumption led ‘to an investment led economy, Moody’s and the risk of junk state status’ and that ‘there is no other option’. Options always exist but it is a matter of choices we make. Do we want economic models built on new forms of economic colonialism out of which will emerge new forms and faces of poverty and inequality, menacing our peace and social cohesion or do we really want a new social order/a pact where empathy and compassion truly prevail? Where the dignity of the Mauritian worker is preserved? If so, we must get rid of certain hegemonic discourses, engage in human development-oriented policy making via solidarity economics.
Conclusion
When the people of Mauritius voted, little did they know that their aspirations for a new Social Order will be so quickly and unhesitatingly suppressed by a few. The angst is serious and tangible. We cannot kick the can down the road. To ensure that ‘Mauritius be Mauritius again’, we need social stability and peace. Models of development which bring more inequality, unemployment and poverty have been denounced by several Nobel laureates in economics such as Thomas Picketty, Amartya Sen, Joseph Stiglitz to name but a few. Not all economists think alike. To make our world more secure and humane, we need counter hegemonic discourses infused with humanism, principles of inclusion and egalitarianism. Some of these ideas were discussed at the debate in Belle-Rose yesterday but there is a need to engage further.
I do hope that you will, Mr. President, give the required attention to my letter and that you will in your wisdom, assist to open up the space for consultations and discussions around the issue of concern here. Time is of the essence. We are too frail and vulnerable as a nation to afford any new kind of instability. The latter must be averted at all costs. A first step in this direction would be to postpone giving your assent to the bill in its present form.
Thanking You.
Professor Sheila Bunwaree
