There has been a lot of noise made by the Opposition about the Local Government Bill. What are you unhappy about?

I am not unhappy about anything. I have yet to see the bill. One minister has come forward and started issuing a lot of vague statements ranging from who has the right to be a candidate and who doesn’t, talks about councillors crossing the floor and everybody starts over-reacting. I think that we have to wait. My impression is that he is on a fishing expedition and, depending on the political and popular reaction, it will be decided which fish he is going to catch and whether the fish will be of a protected species

Isn’t that another way of saying he is putting the bill up for discussion in an attempt to involve everyone in the discussion and have you all onboard?

This is not the way to go about discussion on any subject. One needs to embark on a consultative process. There are a lot of people involved. There’s something unique about this country. We have enough laws to export to the world and still another piece of legislation is coming in. It’s not the type of law you would wish to export to any democracy, with its numerous pitfalls.

Let’s talk about the elements involved in the proposed legislation. Hervé Aimée says that when you are an MP, you cannot stand for municipal elections. What’s wrong with that?

At the end of the day, I am not overly worried whether an MP is allowed to stand as candidate or not.

So what are you on about?

It’s just the attempt at changing the rules of the game and imposing upon MPs a new set of arbitrary rules according to the whims and fancies of a minister.

Isn’t that called reform?

No, this is not reform. This is like you have a football match that’s going to be played. The match has been postponed for almost a year and when the players are ready, they learn that the rules of the game are being changed to suit the referee in the name of progress and reform. One might as well hold no match and proclaim the results.

But the rules of the game are being changed for ALL MPs, not just for those in the Opposition.

Yes, but at the end of the day, we know who these changes are aimed at. They are aimed at those candidates who are already sitting MPs in their constituencies and who form the very backbone of the opposition.

Government MPs will not be able to stand either.

But we have the majority of MPs from the urban areas and these are the ones earmarked to get shot. Why shouldn’t an MP be able to stand for elections to a Municipal Council? Maybe we will have to go in the first place to the Human Rights Commission to find out whether we have rights as citizens too.

An MP already has a position and is generally exercising a profession, what time do they have left for yet another huge responsibility?

An MP has the right to serve in a constituency and in a municipality. May I refer you to the example of JacquesChirac as deputé and maire de Paris.

Oh well, if this is about the right to serve, then thank you. That is very nice.

It’s about serving. It’s only recently that councilors have been paid. Before it was almost benevolent.

It was benevolent if you discounted the travelling and the manzé boir.

We are talking about 2011, after five years of administration run by the government in collaboration with the government, blessed by the government. No municipality has remained unscathed in an unprecedented spending spree: catamarans, over generous hospitality, private jets, sale of market stalls, golden boots and dustbins fit to grace the royal kitchens. An ineffective management of the institutions with municipal tax payers not having value for money. And to top it all, elections being delayed thus flaunting democracy!

Now you are shifting the debate.

No. We have yet to know when these elections are being held. We wish to be reassured that elections are coming up this year. The strength of the MMM is our capacity to present strong teams anywhere and any time the minister wants to call elections, we are ready. Whether MPs are allowed to stand or not is irrelevant.

But that is what you have been making a lot of noise about!

No, we have been fighting about the principle of democracy being flaunted. Local democracy, urban democracy being flaunted. We are not unduly concerned as to whether an MP has the right to be a candidate or not. No one is indispensable not even the minister.

So you don’t mind not being allowed to stand as candidate for the Municipal Council?

I don’t mind! What I do mind is that in a country where it is my birthright to stand as a candidate for any election I want, I am being told what is good for me. Let the electors of Curepipe decide!

Is this really about being able to serve the country or about hogging power?

When you are in the Opposition and you stand in an election, let the people decide if they do not want us. It’s so simple.

But you are not opening up to new talent. You are not allowing others to emerge. You want to hog everything.

But we are not yet showing our cards. Why should we? They are not showing theirs. Should we propose new talent only to see them being pressured straight away in occult ways not to oppose government? We can wait.

By opposing the bill you are showing your cards. They are saying ‘We are happy for other people to emerge’. You’re saying ‘No. We want everything’.

We have been provoking a lot of local debates on some major municipal issues and we want a consequential number of the candidates to be women. But in the final reckoning, it is the party that will field the competent and meritorious candidates and we have enough candidates, young, female, mature, no matter what happens.

Do you agree then with the principle that you can’t hog power?

They are in power. We in the opposition only have the power of questioning.

But that is power too.

(Raises his voice) No, that is not power. The ministers can simply refuse to answer the questions as they do so often. There is no compulsion on any minister to avoid hedging and deliberately refusing to answer queries!

Do you allow them to get away with not answering the questions?

Who holds the budget strings? Who holds the purse strings of power? You ask your questions, the minister can refuse to answer them. I have heard ad nauseam from the Speaker ever since I got elected that nobody can force a minister to answer. They have the power and they want to prevent others from having rights at local government level. Why can the game not be played according to the rules that have always been in place? Do you think that in countries like France, England, the US etc. you can restrict liberties in such a way?

Why should we follow other countries blindly? Can’t we talk about the principles underlining the bill, instead?

Are we going to introduce a system where we ask other countries to do like us? Either we believe in democratic principles and apply them or we become totally ambitious like those who are implementing colourable devices to achieve municipal power.

Nobody is asking other countries to follow. We do what suits us. They do what suits them.

I cannot, under the most extreme circumstances, think that the changes in the rules indicate any deep-seated desire to improve the system and allow new candidates to come in. It is all a power game about using all the means at the minister’s disposal to unsettle the population and masking the all too ineffective and corrupt administration sagas we have constantly witnessed!

But if the old people clear the way, aren’t new candidates going to emerge?

In any case, if you had about 18 councillors in a town like Curepipe where I am one of the MPs, obviously 15 new candidates will emerge.

Why can’t we allow 18 candidates to emerge?

What I would have loved is the game being played according to the rules that have been set for almost half a century.

That means you are opposing change.

No. After the game has been played and the results known, consultations with stakeholders at all levels may start about subsequent changes to the system following consultations with all stake holders. I am not convinced that any game is going to be played between now and October – and when the minister says October - he did not specify the year. If the minister needs to improve municipal efficiency, he should ask all those councillors who are in post to stop overstaying their welcome as their mandates are over. They should resign and stop taking the allocations as our councillors did.

Yes, your councillors stopped taking the money but we were happy to continue taking the trips and other advantages.

Our councillors have never taken any trips. We are not in any private jets or on any catamaran, living off the fat of the land and buying boots or having to attend post graduate sessions at the ICAC.

Joe Lesjongard says that it is your bill anyway that is being presented in some form or another. Aren’t you happy about that?

You should ask Joe Lesjongard. When we see the final product, we compare it to what there was before. This minister is intelligent enough to present a bill according to his own intellect or that of his advisers.

What are these discussions about then?

What discussions? Discussions have not started yet. Nothing has been presented.

We have one statement from the minister on the radio, one interview in the press with lovely pictures of the minister attached. I’d rather see pictures of the fielded candidates. I think the waiting game is to see what they have conceived and if they need a Caesarean section or will deliver through forceps. My impression is that it is nevertheless a fishing expedition. Let the public judge and vote accordingly.

Well, we are judging you: we are saying you want to accumulate responsibilities.

Why not? I’ll talk about my personal case. I’m the Member of Parliament for Curepipe. Why should I not be there as a councillor to help the citizens of Curepipe get a better deal. It is also about cleaning out those stables which stink.

Why don’t you let the younger people of your party do the cleaning up?

Nobody knows as yet who the candidates are. We have a lot of people waiting and there will inevitably be a final product.

So why do you want to clean up the stables yourself when there are other people in your party waiting to do just that?

I am sure there are members of my party who can, and I am sure that even if they are MPs they would be able to do so. But again, we cannot change the issue from what it currently is. I do not credit the minister and his government with a sense of fair play in the changing of the rules. The ease with which changes are implemented worries me, a dictatorial streak no doubt.

Where do you see dictatorship?

In changing the rules of the game without consultation with the opposition and other stake holders. Consultation doesn’t mean issuing abrasive statements about not having to take any lessons from x, y or z. Consultation according to the English dictionary means talking to everyone. There is something called consensus. There should be consensus.

How can there be consensus if your opponents have the majority? They call the shots.

We are not calling any shots. We just want to impress upon the population how elections are being held in this country.

How are they being held?
 
There is something called the power of money, the power of corrupting minds.

Is it only they who have the money? Don’t you have any money?

Then I strongly advise you to look at the expenses incurred in the last elections and compare them to ours. My impression is that if you’re trying to defend the minister…

Of course! He’s promised me a ticket for the Municipal Elections.

(Laughs) Oh, I understand now why you agree with everything he said…

Well, not everything. For that, he’d need to offer me two tickets: one for the Legislative Assembly and one for the Municipalities.

(Outburst of laughter)

Are you preparing yourselves for the Municipal elections in October this year or are you going to be caught unawares?

It’s not a question of being caught unawares. In the opposition we are ready. They call the tune. If they call the elections for next month, we will be ready. When I entered the assembly I said that it was the theatre of dreams.

Why did you say that?

There are so many things that are said, just to keep the muscles of speech working. Nothing concrete comes out of it. So in the end, I tend not to dwell on the hypothetical.

You were vociferous about the MedPoint clinic. Are you satisfied that things are being done to your satisfaction?

I’ll use the language of the government: the case is with the ICAC and I’m not prepared to comment on anything that’s with the ICAC. My question is, “When will we get geriatric wards in all hospitals?” I do not agree with the principle of parking the elderly from all over the island in a centralised institution almost like a jail and expecting them to get better service.

Will you go to MedPoint one day?

(Hesitates) I’ll probably go to Brown Sequard at the rate things are going! No, I do not think the policy of a centralized geriatric hospital is the correct one and that it appeals to me.

You are not concerned about the alleged corruption involved, are you?

I am leaving it to the authorities to enquire about that. At the end of the day, there will hopefully be a report which we are all waiting to see.

Are we going to see it in our lifetime?

What is life without hope?

How are you living your life as an MP?

I am much more relaxed now that I am out of the mortuary.

We thought you enjoyed the company of the dead.

I did, otherwise I would not have been able to work in the forensic department. The dead do not speak, they do not change the rules of the mortuary before an autopsy and they do not pay bribes.

The company of he dead must have left an indelible mark in your life, hasn’t it?

Oh yes. When you have been like me in the mortuary and seen the high and mighty leave this world with nothing, you become a philosopher. I have practised autopsies on the same slab on millionaires, politicians and slum dogs alike. You start thinking that there must be another purpose to life than surviving with hatred or prejudice.

Touria Prayag
Photos: Fabien Dubessay

(l’express Weekly)