We did say that the leader of the opposition’s dilly-dallying was not his finest hour and we stand by that. We do not, however, condone the abuse he is being subjected to. Politics is a ruthless game where backstabbing, back-pedalling and U-turns are legendary. And promises are only kept by those who have no better options.

Those who are lashing out at Paul Bérenger because he has ‘betrayed’ Sir Anerood Jugnauth (SAJ) might perhaps benefit by remembering how the latter – with Navin Ramgoolam’s help – got Bérenger out of the game at the eleventh hour in 2010 and how SAJ had publicly stated that it was “better to be in karo canne than work with Bérenger”! So let’s please not pretend that the political arena is some sort of place of worship where protagonists have some sense of ethics. We all know it is a question of balance of power and you are only as faithful as your options. We therefore refuse to gloat at the sight of a Bérenger being crucified by his own people while an assorted supporting cast are cheering from the sidelines the way people in the middle ages used to cheer those who were being guillotined. As a people, we are better than that.

And because we are better, we deserve a better system than we have today. We deserve reforms which do not bring parties together to gang up and generously bestow even more powers on themselves, add more – unelected – members of parliament to an already disproportionately long list of – in some cases – arrogant wasters paid from public funds. The reforms we want should go deep enough to eradicate the worst scourges of our system – namely the opacity of political party financing and pre-electoral alliances, which skew the whole system, reduce the opposition to the role of wishful thinkers, result in floor crossing and create instability – the worst enemy of investment and economic growth.

The people of this country will feel that they are choosing their representatives only when each party faces the electorate on its own strength rather than lean on ethnic crutches and cynical calculations. Those who are encouraging pre-election alliances, which are systematically based on ethnicity – what else? – really have no moral leg to stand on in the fight against communalism because their very existence is based on ethnic/racial/caste considerations.

Parties going it alone can still have their post-electoral wedding but we will have chosen the grooms and decided on the dowry. The opposition will then play its role without fear or favour and turncoats will have to face the electorate anew instead of shamelessly bargaining their way into ministerial positions. That is stability. That is democracy. Those are the reforms the country is interested to discuss in a cool-headed way.

The terms being whispered in the background on which the MMM is negotiating another alliance with the MSM as a junior partner  sound like a groom telling his prospective partner, “Since I don’t love you and I don’t trust you and I have publicly said so, I suggest we still get married but, instead of having two children, we will have only one.” Sad if the belle agreed. Sadder still if we gave our blessings to their union!