SHEILA BUNWAREE
Different forms of violence and the neoliberal order
7th June is the date chosen by the government to present its third budget since it was elected to office in 2019 and it comes just 2 days after World Environment Day, celebrated on the 5th of June each year. These two dates/events and the current societal dynamics unfolding in front of us with violence of all forms surfacing up in almost every sphere of our society, are triggers to this reflective piece. The shocking images of police brutality and torture that some fellow citizens have been subjected to, the rise in violence in our schools as well as in gender-based violence both in the private and the public sphere, the violence done to our environment by the persistent destruction of our biodiversity and natural capital constitute the hallmarks of a profound malaise in our society. Adding to these is the violence which has reached our parliament-the temple of democracy, exemplified by a loud speaker, who unjustly expels opposition members, trampling on the latter’s fundamental rights.
The increasing numbers of families going hungry as a result of the hike in food prices, loss of jobs, the rise in the number of people without a decent shelter – frequently seen as institutionalised forms of violence –, are often the products of ideologies which fail to bring equity and inclusion of all. So can we ‘build back better” without questioning such ideologies? For far too long, Mauritius has allowed itself to be driven by the neoliberal dominant order, with some interventionist approach by the state, giving the impression that all is fine and rosy but when governance goes down the drain as it has since 2014, and particularly pronounced since PKJ took the primeministership, there is a need to stop, ask certain questions and change course if we truly wish to avoid jeopardizing the future of the younger generations.
The budgets of the current regime
The two budgets presented by the current regime so far i.e budget 2020-2021 and that of 2021-2022, titled « Our new normal: The economy of life » and « Better Together » respectively, have been far remote from redefining the broad contours of our society, made so necessary by the multiple crises and emerging challenges that we face as a small, pluriethnic, vulnerable island state. What has been described as “the new normal’and ‘better together’ is in fact being translated into new forms of poverty and inequality and have not resulted in a more green, just and inclusive society – a legitimate expectation by the citizenry.
Runaway inflation, the rapid depreciation of the rupee, public sector debt of over 100 percent of GDP, persistent current account deficits, rising poverty and inequality, overall economic mismanagement, waste and corruption as well as heavy spending on pork-barrel projects are no indication of a desire for ethical governance and the greater good.
While budgets are critical instruments of a country’s fiscal policy, basically showing how revenues are raised and expenditure made, there is nothing that should prevent us from taking the opportunity of budget proposals and the fiscal space they provide, to give a new direction to our economy, address the oppressions in place, mitigate all forms of overshooting of the environment and reduce planetary pressures. There is an urgent need to reimagine our societies and rebuild our social fabric, in short to manoeuvre our fiscal policies in such a manner as to orient ourselves towards the embracing of an alternative development paradigm – one based on care, regeneration, distribution, sharing and solidarity. In other words, what we need is a 5 Ps, 5 Ds and 5 Cs matrix: Planet, People, Prosperity, Peace, Partnerships; the 5Ds: Decarbonize, Digitalise, Decentralise, Democratise, Dignity and 5Cs : Commitment, Competence, Coherence, Cooperation and Conviction. However, it is clear that what has been put in place so far is not responding to the aspirations and expectations of the vast majority.
Critical interfaces – Environment, society and the economy
The necessity of such an alternative development paradigm cannot be emphasized enough. The words of Tedros Ghebreyesus, Director of the WHO, addressing the 73rd World Health Assembly on May 18th (2020), should in fact resonate with all those genuinely concerned with sustainable development and advocating for an alternative development model. Tedros Ghebreyesus argues:
“ …The pandemic is a reminder of the intimate and delicate relationship between people and the planet. Any efforts to make our world safer are doomed to fail unless they address the critical interface between people and pathogens and the existential threat of climate change, that is making our earth less habitable….”
Judging by some people’s insatiable desire to preying on natural resources through constant engagement towards extractivism, as reflected by the recent passing of the petroleum bill and perhaps soon the seabed mining bill while the marine pollution bill promised in the government programme has very quickly been forgotten by the current regime. Budgets are key to changing the development path and the critical interfaces between the economy, society and the economy but this is only possible if sound decisions are made and relevant human- centred, nature-centric priority projects are embarked upon. The stubbornness of the authorities to pursue prestigious, unnecessary infrastructural projects which are costing us far too much and are not a priority for the nation should find no place in the forthcoming budget.
The latter should also ensure less dependence on borrowings and stop the ease with which the government allows the debt to grow, the currency to depreciate without being able to enhance productivity and halt certain macro economic indicators from falling further in the red. The largesse of the state – with the multiple privileges, unnecessary overseas trips and fat salaries that the government and the opposition enjoy – should also be addressed by budget 2022-2023. Nothing justifies these particularly at such a juncture where many families are struggling to bring food to the table. The gender blindness and what feminist economists, such as Diane Elson and Jayati Ghosh, call the ‘male biases’’ of economic policy making which not only makes the contribution of women ‘invisible’ but reinforces the patriarchal structures of the current economic system, must be addressed. Paying lip service to gender budgeting, without understanding the intricacies of the « care economy ». Manoeuvring the budget to assist in curbing the persistent waste as reported by the auditors office year in year out is also necessary to prevent the siphoning off of resources away from useful projects, which could assist the country in ensuring that gains made on the SDGs so far are not eroded. What is also important is to refrain from the piece meal approach to development and the obsession with growth. The latter implies the choice of policies such as attracting FDIs in real estate, to the detriment of our natural capital/biodiversity, resulting in the intensification of the climate crisis.
Sustainability as a philosophy
In short, what we wish to see are budgets which are underpinned by an overall philosophy of “sustainability and sustainable development”, making it possible for the SDGs to be plugged in the DNA of recovery as proposed by the UN Director of SDG impacts as well as minimizing potential tradeoffs between one and the other. The focus of forthcoming budgets should therefore be the ensuring of food security, energy security, human security, environmental security, climate justice and gender justice. Resources must be pumped into relevant sectors to make these happen and in so doing move towards the alternative development paradigm proposed here. If we fail to advocate and lobby for the latter, we will be on the wrong side of history. Our children and grandchildren may never forgive us!