Picture from L’express
Avi having already written an interesting post on the content of the budget speech, I will focus on the communication/psychological aspects of that grand event that marks the local scene every year.
So, here are my thoughts point-wise:
– Our Minister of finance could not help using the usual tactic of leading people to believe (before the budget speech) that the measures will be very stringent and result in harsher conditions for most Mauritians so that the actual measures taken that are announced appear more acceptable, thus creating an artificial a sense of relief. Most people actually thought that VAT would be raised or that the number of goods under VAT would increase…
– As per local traditions, the pre-speech marathon of the minister was chronicled by all media outlets painting the picture of a terribly tired man who sacrifices his family and works till midnight, so much so that his wife demands Jacques Brel’s ‘Ne me quitte pas…’ to be aired (on Radio One). Yet he finds the time to get interviewed by all the radio stations, newspapers and the national TV station. No wonder he was tired!
– An obsolete tradition: the 2-hour long speech that is against all modern presentation approaches with a heavy veil of secrecy until the D-Day and H-Hour. It is time for our politicians to learn how to make a good presentation… Who can now have the patience to listen to (or worse, watch) a 2-hour long diatribe with no presentation aids whatsoever?
– Obsolete also are the reactions of our local trade unionists and opposition parties who did not fail to criticise the budget as being ‘pro-capitalists’ and ‘pro-private sector’. They could probably learn to videotape their reactions for re-use every year; it would save them time and energy. Trade unionists even decided to boycott the budget speech… and to follow the event on TV in another place (I wonder if they know what ‘boycott’ really means). As for the opposition parties, they were again ever so bland in their reactions… Never able to articulate any strong alternative!
– On gender: I note there’s a slightly innovative approach as Sithanen announced measures to encourage women to take up jobs traditionally occupied by men in the construction sector (e.g. mason, plumber, etc.) but he wasted it all by announcing triumphantly that he is going to improve women’s lives by reducing duty on microwave ovens, grills, kitchen hoods, etc. The kitchen is never very far… Who said that women’s feet are smaller than men’s so that they can stand more comfortably in front of the sink?
me 🙂
I was waiting what you would write on that budget.I agree with your points .In fact ..I have a feeling that ‘rich will become richer and poor will become poorer’
Only the rich can do big business and high investment and things will become more cheaper and more easy for them than the poor who is finding it still hard to match their food-shelter and health expenses.
I also have a fear that in 10-15 years to come foreigners start to buy many areas and lands of our country ,public and private firms which could take a form of gradual colonisation.And tomorrow these foreign businessmen and investors will surely influence government decisions on their side rather than the local population’s demand.The price of land and flats will raise a lot in the years to come if the govt follow these policies.Well let’s hope I’m wrong.
A common sentence in all budget speech is’ ancien l’heritage’..’squelette dans placard’…I’m sure next year these sentences will come again.
I experienced the things that are happening overthere. The result? Middle class became on extinction, with absolutely unbelievable bad consequences for a lot of people.
I like especially your last paragraph, Christina! If I start to elaborate on that, I will never finish… 😉
It is 2007 … and it is amazing that some things overthere are so “ancient” and unfortunately, they destroy the life and health of people who have no courage to step up in front of their own families because of fear of not being able to live overthere after that, so how can one expect things to really change at a larger scale if there is no courage at much lower level (the family level) ???
The gender issue is difficult to address when those who are most affected by it (women, I presume) are themselves divided on the subject. Some want to become more independent, and have equal rights and pay in the workplace, while others are quite happy to play by tradition and stay at home. There are, of course, many variations in between, which complicates the issue even more.
Sithanen may think himself clever for the bones he have thrown to the extremes, but more intellectual women, like Christina, will have un-masked the irony.
s/have/has
The presentation was pathethic, overelaborate, lacking focus and direction. Here is one of one top politicians lacking presentational skills, charisma. He should have presented the key points, and provides clarifications in other policy documents. Does his media advisors never realise that the attention of the general public can only be sustained over a period of 45 minbutes and not two hours.
In any democratic system, there must be a system of consultation and negatiation. It is totally erroneous to discount some of the stakeholders, such as the opposition political parties and the trade unions. Some of the latter have failed to provide an alternative view of the budget, but instead managed to proffer some silly and negative criticisms. They just discuss some semantics, and not the core issues.
On the other hand, we must acknowledge that this governement has a mandate to govern. Whatever criticims may be levelled, this will not have any consequential effects as this governement has an absolute majority in the Parliament. Under the Minister of Finance, all we are getting in this budget is the mantra that he knows best.
This government has been actively promoting the democatisation of the economy at home and abroad, especially in Hull, England. The least we expected is a pro-poor stategy of economic development with a redistributive taxation system. Instead, we have a pro-capitalist development strategy with a flat rate of taxation: 15%. Where is his rationale for justice and equity? The government has been lamenting that a handful of families own or control 90% of land in this small island.
A land tax with those with an excess of say 10 acres of land should be imposed to target the big land owners. A missed opportunity! The poor will definitely become poorer whilst the rich will be laughing to the bank! I’m not advocating the destruction of entrepreneurship and risks. The Mauritian public wants a level playing field.
Whatever Rama Sithanen may articulate, he has failed in his social responsibility. His financial policies have weak intellectual fondations, and will not stand the test of times.
The paucity of the opposition parties can be best exeplified by Vishnu Lutchmeenaraidoo, who wanted to argue about semantics: how much FDI?
It is the role of the ordinary public to get involved in shaping the economic policy of Mauritius.If the politicians will not pay any heed to our views, we must stand up and lead the way via the involvement of the grass roots. Rama is simply displaying his contempt for the voters who gave his party victory in the elections.
By refusing to take part in a radio debate, Rama Sithamen has proved that he is damaged good. His funding for the UoM shows his lack of vision.
I have to disagree with you when it comes to the length of the speech. The budget has always been a technical speech and it is not one of those speeches that is synonym to: “Vote for us.”
As it is a technical presentation, the length of it, in my opinion, should not be deliberately shortened. The minister did not repeat the same points over and over again so that’s fine.
Also note that the budget is fully available on the web. Not the speech but the figures and everything so I suppose that’s a very good thing.
Unless you are ICT literate, then thousands of people will be denied access to the internet. Regardless of its technicality, the budget should appeal to the masses, not to the elite. The key points should be clear and comprhensible.
There was too much spinning in this budget. There was a deliberate manipulation of figures and statistics. The Finance Minister is perhaps a good technocrat, but he needs to improve his presentation skills.
The length of the speech is a matter of semantic debate. However interesting the speech may be, most people cannot concentrate over more than 45 minutes. The Finance Minister needs to less bombastic and more userfriendly for the masses of people. Is the speech reserved entirely for the elitist and educated class. Where are his “spinmeister” to proffer him advice about presentation skills. I don’t deny his economic and financial intellegence. But, he is too dour and lacking charisma.