L?Eglise St Esprit in Bel-Air is a symbol of calm, historical design, religious authority and commands the respect of all. As a proud ex-pupil of Bel-Air RCA school, I must say it represents the educational roots of thousands of people. The Church has played a fundamental part in our lives. It is not surprising that Mgr Piat took the opportunity to articulate and pour out his strong feelings on the poor and their education at Bel-Air. Why did he do so? Who is he trying to convince that there must be a tripartite effort between Church, State and People to uproot poverty through better education? Why has the serenity of Bel-Air been ruffled?

Religious leaders argue that religion is a way of life. It affects what people do everyday and aspire to. Thus, religion is not only a huge component but the one and only component of our lives. This is perhaps more pronounced in Islam, which looks at the Quoran as God?s prescription of what we are and how we must live our private or public lives. God and the Prophets have already mapped out all good governance principles and practices. Our role is to follow them for ultimate success and a better life on earth and? in heaven. The principle of religious leaders is to stay with the people, poor or rich, pray with them and exalt them.

On the other hand, politicians claim that politics is about day-to-day activities although few understand this principle. If we understood this claim from politicians we would all become politically active and dictate them how to conduct the affairs of the country. But we all know that, once elected, politicians see themselves as people with authority to govern us, travel in Mercedes cars, command higher salaries and distance themselves from ordinary people.

Thus, there is a direct competition between politicians and God?s representatives - priests, imams and pundits - to get people?s attention. Have politics and religion got a symbiotic role? As ordinary people, we are swayed by arguments especially when they come from legitimised sources. Credible religious leaders are legitimised by us and by a superior holy authority whereas politicians seek legitimacy at election time. Religious leaders have a continuous ?big conversation? with their people - on Fridays at the mosque or on Sundays at church. There is an ongoing relationship between Holy men and the people whereas the politicians are trapped in the role of doing things for the people but away from them. The big lesson is that politics and religion become powerful only when the people legitimate them. This makes people, institutions and policies look authoritative. If we refuse to endorse them, they become meaningless.

<B>The battle against poverty </B>

Mgr Piat is right to voice concern for the poor. Poverty is evil and should be uprooted by all means. We have poor Christians, Muslims, Tamils, Hindus and Buddhists. The Tengur issue should not antagonise any religious group. Poverty has no religious preference or allegiance. It results from social stratification and bad distribution of wealth. It is man-made just as rich countries develop policies to suppress the economy of poorer countries and maintain their own superiority. Thus, if the battle of Bel-Air is one for the poor and less privileged, then let it rage on. If it promotes a fairer system of education for all, then everybody should support it. Then the serenity of Bel-Air will never run dry. Water will continue to flow under the famous bridge but let that be a source to improve our educational system and whisk our children from poverty. Let it bridge the gulf between poor and rich. It is surprising why all religious leaders do not vent their frustrations and aspirations in public to fight for the poor and for better education. Too much reliance that politicians will do the right thing for us can be misleading. Our religious leaders must take a leaf out of Mgr Piat?s book to show their sincerity and passion for humanity.

Why should our religious leaders wake up and speak for the poor? Here are some well-known facts:

• Half the world (nearly three billion people) lives on less than two dollars a day.

-The GDP of the poorest 48 nations (a quarter of the world's countries) is less than the wealth of the world's three richest people combined.

• Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read or sign their names.

• Less than one per cent of the world's yearly expense on weapons was needed to school every child by year 2000 and yet it didn't happen.

All over the world, disparities between rich and poor, even in wealthiest nations, are rising sharply. Fewer people become ?successful? and wealthy while a disproportionately larger population grows even poorer. Believe it or not, Mauritius is a rich island. Only a small minority is becoming richer while the majority remains poor. Just look at the turnover of hotels. It is enough to transform Mauritius into a super rich country for all but it is not happening. Poverty is still rife and tourists go home with the image that houses are half constructed; no maintenance is viable because of poverty. The contrast between what tourists experience in hotels and what they see outside is startling and disastrous for the image of our Island in the sun. This is why we must have advocates to articulate the concerns of the poor and bring about a fairer system for all.

The education system we need must take on board that our children are not only educated but also have ethical knowledge of our society. They must not only know that religious representatives are fighting for a just system but that we also want them to live in a just society. Their education must be entrenched in the respect of all religious communities. Mauritius is held up as a place where different religious groups live in harmony. This should be the basis of our solidarity and anybody seeking to tarnish this image must not be supported. It is only through this mutual understanding that we will tackle poverty.

Our hope is that Mgr Piat is battling for an ideal Mauritian community, which cares for its less fortunate, regardless of their religion. We must aspire to a set of collective characteristics and interests. Let us all have an inclusive conception and not breed a dichotomy, which will break us. Division is easy to create but moving forward together can be more challenging. The State must play its part in promoting an ideal community within the social and political contexts. It has three essential roles:

1. As gatekeeper

2. As provider of certain services, goods and resources

3. As upholder of law and order

As gatekeeper, the State is right to ask for "social criteria" for school admission, aiming at fighting poverty and promoting an egalitarian society. As a Muslim boy, I am grateful that Bel-Air RCA school gave me a good start in life. Had admission been dictated by "religious criteria", I might not have had access to a school. Thus, thousands would be disadvantaged if religious criteria became the norm in "poverty-buster schools". As provider of educational services, our prime minister faces the challenge of upholding the Constitution and parity for all. The pressure is more on the ministry of Education to expand the ZEP approach to education and meet the needs of possible marginalized sections of our community. We need a broader discourse from the Ministry of Education (MOE) on (1) the politics and practicalities of embracing disadvantaged sectors of the community, (2) decolonisation of the minds of members and representatives of marginalized groups and (3) opportunities for learning and advancement of disadvantaged sectors and the construction of a learning terrain for the voiceless and the vocal. Religion may not be the central issue but the cultural perception of being marginalized is a critical aspect the MOE needs to grip if the Tengur verdict is to be upheld. The MOE must not disempower the target group but seek to understand its culture, concerns, fears and needs. A win-win strategy is the order of the day.

<B>The battle for cultural identity</B>

The Tengur verdict is not simply a wave of disappointment for RCA schools but is perceived as a major threat to core values. It could threaten the cultural identity of a sector of our community and it is no surprise that it has led to such major outbursts. The cultural landscape has suddenly been laid bare. This is more than unnerving, intimidating and demoralizing. However, RCA schools have stood the test of time and they will continue to flourish. Perhaps it is time for a hybridisation process while retaining its identity. Once one criterion has been proven unconstitutional, it is difficult to impose it again. It mimics the relationship between the coconut and the egg. No matter whether the egg falls on the coconut or the coconut falls on the egg, it is the egg that will break.

Cultural studies have shown that cultural sensitivity in education and development programs can be achieved only by integrating the cultural experiences of those marginalized. The MOE must use Paolo Freire?s revolutionary pedagogical approach to see what will work. Culture is the underpinning for pedagogical and political issues and must therefore be fundamental to school functions in shaping cultural identity, values, ideals and history. The hope and comfort for RCA schools lies in what Freire says: ?If we lose ourselves sometimes, we will find ourselves again in the end.? So, a set of social criteria for RCA schools is not silencing a tongue but underlining its particular perspective. The adoption of Creole in schools is another way of demonstrating that a marginalized sector is further integrated into the wider community. Perhaps this is the only trade-off the MOE is left with for a win-win strategy and revalorisation of RCA schools.

Cultural identity does not change overnight or by legal decree. Identity is essential to who we are as individuals or groups. This is why the Church must not panic. Cultural identity may not be at stake but the speeches for better funding and better standards of education must go on. Mgr Piat and others must speak on behalf of the poor and the underprivileged. If the men of the cloth will not, the voiceless have nobody. It is a well known but peculiar phenomenon that the Mauritian intellectual community is docile without a visible social conscience and exercises unusual civility and loyalty to institutions. A recent article in l?express entitled ?A podium for intellectuals? illuminated the incomprehensible relationship between Mauritian intellectuals and politicians. Is Mauritius an island where people live and work in fear? This is another culture of silence that needs redress. The intellectual community must assume as much responsibility as religious institutions to speak for the voiceless and must not be scared of treading on some toes.

<B>A word of hope</B>

Struggle for the poor on religious or other grounds is nothing new. We are proud of religious pluralism in Mauritius but we must guard against setting one religion against another. Poverty and lack of opportunities are potent arguments for resource allocation. Our religious institutions will do much better using these criteria as they belong to all religions and will serve everybody.

Our hope lies in the fact that our religious leaders and politicians want a compassionate and equitable society. They have no option but to work together to achieve anything. We must have faith in them because faith is the force, which moves people on. But we must ensure that our faith is not misused. We must keep religious leaders and politicians in check because it is our power that they use to advance policies and doctrines. They articulate our aspirations. Those who strive towards an inclusive society know too well that only grass roots power matters.

To bust poverty, we should be optimistic about doing something, regardless of religion. Our hope depends on how prepared we are to do it. A French missionary in the 17th century said: ?I expect to pass through this world but once; any good thing therefore that I can do or any kindness that I can show to any fellow creature, let me do it now; let me not defer or neglect it, for I will not pass this way again."If we hope to help people, we must not consider their religion but deficiencies in opportunities. We need to take a greater interest in poverty alleviation because we all have a flame of hope glowing in us.

Religion is a powerful guiding force in our lives but it must not be the single criterion for school admission. Those who care for the Mauritian child must have a broader view of life. It is through understanding others that we understand ourselves. We are a pluralist society. Living in harmony is learning to understand different religious perspectives and our multicultural society. Those who want to help humanity should focus on social criteria and let the battle of Bel-Air symbolize the alleviation of poverty and vulnerability.