Lord Paul Swraj, a British businessman and politician, is the fi rst person of Indian origin to become Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords. Invited as a key speaker in “The Forum in Mauritius,” he shares with us his thoughts on the media, various aspects of the developing world, his journey from a Punjab village to the heart of London as well as the recent scandals which rocked the House of Lords.

¦ Lord Paul, you have been invited to take part in “the Forum in Mauritius”, a forum which deals with the influence of the media in the world. What is your relationship with the media?

Well, I am a businessman, but very much interested in education. As a family, we have set up a large number of institutions across India such as schools and colleges, and we must have almost three quarters of a million students in those institutions.

¦ But are you interested in the media in particular?

Basically, I think the media can and should play a bigger role in the development of countries. And the development of countries, in my view, has to start with education and how much better education could become!

¦ And what do you think the media should be doing, in practical terms, to educate the public?

First of all, the world has changed and the role of the media has changed from that of twenty or thirty years ago.

What the media needs to do, in my view, is educate itself more about world affairs, the world itself and the ambition of developing countries and take up the challenge of bringing this much more to the forefront.

¦ You say the media should educate itself. How should it do that?

Basically, through formal education. Through getting the experience of being able to live in the world and understand other cultures. Journalists are writing about world affairs, so they need to know what the world is.

¦ And this is not the case?

No. Go and talk to the journalists in the United States or Britain. They haven’t got a clue how much China has developed. They have not got a clue what’s happening in the United Arab Emirates. Take the example of India hosting the Commonwealth games: everyone knows that the Indians, by nature, are very different from Westerners. Indians do have a habit of leaving things to the last minute. But then, they also have a habit of completing them on time. The same issue arose with the games in Greece in 2004.

¦ You think the media mishandled that?

I think you cannot call it mishandling because it was a lack of understanding of how India works. And judging from their own method of doing things, they assumed that there would be a crisis and that things would collapse.

¦ But the concern of the media was not just the completion of work it was also the amount of corruption involved. Is that also due to a lack of education?

Corruption, first of all, is not something that was in the games themselves. There is corruption in India, but I don’t think that delayed the construction work, or that there was any danger of it not being finished.

¦ These are two issues. There was the apprehension that India might not be ready for the games on time on the one hand but there was also the fact that the games were organized in India through dishonest means in the first place.

Corruption is a very separate issue. It’s not confined to the games.

¦ So the media mixed it up.

The media mixed it up. Again, in my view, because of the lack of understanding.

¦ Because that’s the way India operates.

That’s the way, unfortunately, that India operates.

¦ And that’s acceptable?

No, I don’t condone corruption but corruption is not a monopoly of the developing world. It is everywhere but people call it by different names.

¦ What do they call it in the West, in your part of the world?

All sorts of things except corruption. 95% of corrupt money originates from the G8 countries. 97.5% of corruption takes place in G8 countries. So they should look at the supply lines of corruption, not just the receiving end. It is no use blaming India, no use blaming Africa.

What we need is a worldwide acceptance that this is a terrible phenomenon and that nobody should be part of it. They have tried to make anti-corruption laws in the western world, but are they being followed? That is where the problem is.

They can call it a “consultancy fee”, this or that, but what else is it? You know that. Journalists should be familiar with this. They should educate themselves.

¦ What you are advocating is for journalists to go and live in these countries before they even begin to report on them, so that they understand the culture.

I am saying that, before someone says he is an expert on India or an expert on Africa, why not have exchanges where journalists -to-be spend part of their degree course, one term or two or one year, in some of these countries they want to report on. They would gain a much better knowledge of the countries in this way.

¦ You are obviously talking about very big news agencies, because, in Mauritius for example, no newspaper has an expert on Indian affairs, one on Japanese and another on Chinese.

I am not talking about just specialists on one country. I am talking about their being able to see the culture. And this is not done overnight nor is it done by living in one part of the country. There are substantial variations particularly in huge countries. You can’t learn about America by just being in New York as it is very different from the rest of the United States. You don’t learn about the whole of England from living in London. What we need is a better understanding of the people, the culture. I mean, I arrived in Mauritius two days ago. If the day after tomorrow I start talking about Mauritius as an authority, that would be dangerous.

¦ I’m sure you have enough knowledge of Mauritius and Mauritians to talk about us with authority.

I have a lot of knowledge. Even before coming I had a lot of it, and I have been hearing about Mauritius for a long time because India has such an affinity with Mauritius. But to talk about Mauritius as a specialist I think would be dangerous.

¦ In your speech, you made some very specific points about how to take the media, or the press forward. Basically through an exchange programme?

You are absolutely right. What I would like to see more of is “You send- us-your-students-we-will-send you- ours” collaboration between universities. There is no really big cost. You can always raise money to help pay their airfare and the other university will help with their living expenditure etc.

¦ Are you working on this exchange programme between universities?

I am encouraging it. I am in full favour, for a better world, that there should be an exchange between universities. And it is happening a lot in the world, but it has not happened that much in journalism. Because formal studies in journalism have just come into focus. I learnt yesterday, from the British High Commissioner, that Middlesex University is introducing a school of journalism. It is happening, and we will all need to encourage it to happen.

¦ You also talked about encouraging tolerance.

Yes, basically, the lack of tolerance, in my view, is due to ignorance. Prejudices are acquired. I don’t know whether you remember a movie called “South Pacific”.

There is a lovely song in it: “You got to be taught how to hate anybody”. We are not born with any prejudices and when we die, there are no prejudices.

¦ Do you think the media actually contributes to building this hatred?

I think the media is doing so through sensational reporting aimed at selling the paper.

¦ Is that a general statement on the media all around the world?

It seems to be becoming generally more and more true. I would say that the media is becoming, at best, a silent partner.

¦ A silent partner in?

In this hatred because they feel they have a duty to report certain events, which is absolutely right. They have to report them but they should be careful about the way they report them. I’m not sure that when they write, they worry about how much damage they cause. But then, I am not blaming every editor or every reporter.

¦ And what are your impressions of the press in Mauritius?

I have not had time to really read one newspaper in Mauritius. I have learnt from the various people I have spoken to here that Mauritius has a very sensible press.

You have a very grown up press, a very mature press, much more mature than I thought it would be.

¦ You must have heard about the conflict between the press and the government? How do you feel about that?

The press and he government? That conflict will always remain. Those in power will want to dominate.

¦ Is that good or bad?

If the conflict aims to keep each other under control and if the government aims to make sure the media does not overplay, I think it is a healthy conflict. However, any conflict, when it becomes bitter, is unhealthy.

¦ What stage has it reached in Mauritius, according to you?

I really don’t know. To be honest, if I knew, I’d tell you. I have a bad reputation for saying what I think, but things I don’t know, I don’t talk about.

¦ You may have heard that we have gone down by 14 places in the ranking of “Reporters without Borders”. Is that something you’d worry about?

I never worry about statistics. They are usually one man’s views.

¦ One man’s views or the views of a credible association?

Still, it is the judgement of a few people. It is only important in the sense that you need to take notice and see how you can improve. That’s how I look at it.

¦ Is that also the way you look at the Ibrahim Index of Good Governance where we were ranked first in Africa?

Yes. I would use that not to celebrate but to improve. See what we can do to keep this first position, and that is not easy either. It is much easier to fall than to climb.

¦ In an interview in l’Express this morning, the president of Reporters without Borders says that it is not good for people who are close to those in power to set up news agencies. Do you share that view?

This says something which is that power and reporting cannot work together. That is why the media owned by the government has never proved to be very successful. But today, financial power is a far bigger power and is much more likely to be abused than any government power. Power of any kind in the news agencies is dangerous. I am not against rich people, of course, but…

¦ You wouldn’t be. You are the 88th richest man in the U.K.

(Laughs) I don’t feel that way.

¦ But your journey from the Punjab to the House of Lords is remarkable. It is not a typical journey, is it?

I think it has been a matter of luck. I don’t know how much you know about my life.

¦ I know that you started off in a family where the father was selling steel buckets and you ended up as a lord.

Yes, I grew up in an agricultural environment. Also, my family was very involved in the freedom struggle and at the age of four I used to shout slogans in the street, “English go home”.

¦ And then you ended up in the heart of London. Ironical, isn’t it?

Yes, it is ironical. At the age of eleven, I used to be a regular visitor to the jail every week to see my elder brother who was arrested because of being a freedom fighter in 1942. I lost my parents when I was very young. My elder brother looked after me until I was of age, and then I went to the United States for studies.

¦ Why the US? Was it a rejection of the U.K.?

Well, MIT was very famous and I was lucky to get admission. I studied and came back to India. In 1966, one of my daughters was very ill. She was suffering from leukaemia. So, we rushed to the United States to get her treatment but had to take her off the flight in London and rush her to the hospital where she was looked after until she passed away. And that is how I ended up staying in London, because I wanted to stay where she had died and I still stay in that fl at which I had taken at that time. So I set up a little steel factory with three workers and I slowly worked my way up.

¦ How did you make your way to the House of Lords?

I joined the Labour party in 1974, but that has nothing to do with it. I just joined it because the Labour party was responsible for the freedom of India. I was more on the business side.

¦ Does that mean you financed the party?

No. In those days political parties, especially the Labour party, collected very little money. If you gave 100 pounds, that was considered a good donation. Then in 1996, to my surprise, I got a letter from Mr. John Major announcing that he had decided to nominate me for the House of Lords and asking if I would accept. Of course, nobody would dare not to accept.

¦ And how does it feel, to be the first Lord of Indian origin?

When you get into the House of Lords, you get more involved with politics. But I never got into the political side. I would talk about social issues and education, but never about politics, and I still don’t.

¦ There was a scandal which rocked the House of Lords recently and which resulted in your suspension for four months. How do you feel about that?

To tell you the truth, in my whole life, I have never seen a more rubbish decision taken by the committee.

¦ You were accused of having designated little-used properties as your main home in order to be able to claim expenses?

Yes, but I have never understood one thing: why I was treated differently? I can only ascribe it to jealousy because I was the first Indian to be made a public counsellor.

¦ But in the House of Lords, do you feel that you are an Indian?

No, I have never felt that and even today, I don’t. I am 100% Indian and 100% British. That’s how strongly I feel.

¦ But how do the others feels? You said that there is a lot of jealousy.

Jealousy and pettiness are just other forms of ignorance. It comes from a lack of education. It comes up because a lot of people still think in a very narrow-minded sort of way.

¦ Even in the House of Lords?

I am shocked that, on the one hand, the House of Lords has said that there is no sign of dishonesty or of bad faith. Now, after saying that, they suspend me for four months. The only thing they have accused me of is negligence.

¦ But is negligence not bad enough?

Negligence? What is the punishment for negligence? They cleared cases of much larger amounts and the Chairman of the Committee could not justify his actions. His words in the House of Lords were pathetic.

¦ Are you saying that you were meted out a different treatment because you are of Indian origin?

That is the question the Chairman was asked and he could not answer satisfactorily.

That’s why I say that his answer is pathetic.

¦ Is your reading of the situation then that the punishment has a racist motive?

Yes, that is exactly the question one of the members asked the Chairman the other day.

¦ Would you say that Britain is still inherently a racist society?

I personally thought we had made a lot of progress.

¦ And then you realised you hadn’t?

It looks like we haven’t. We have a big problem moving towards multiculturalism.

Touria PRAYAG