Having left Mauritius in 1961, I have returned for short yearly visits ? insufficient to assess the country?s evolution. My recent three-month visit has allowed a better understanding of the country?s challenges, socioeconomic conditions and quality of life. I have lived in different parts of the world and am thus able to compare developed, developing and politically unstable nations ? affluent ones and scavenger economies.

Mauritius has no natural resources except its beauty and sandy beaches. Mauritians are ambitious, competitive and self-confident? The country has a high ?literacy? rate, moderately skilled labour force, accessible and universal healthcare system; a functional transport system and good infrastructures; the population?s needs are met; there is freedom of movement and expression, and a free press. Internationally Mauritius ?punches above its weight? and enjoys privileged relationships with major nations. The ingredients for a successful society seem present and it should be an ideal place to live in, prosper and raise a family.

?A good number, young and old, would seize the first opportunity to emigrate. It is strikingly acute and disproportionate. This malaise therefore begs the question as to what ails and why??

This, however, is unmatched by palpable feelings of alienation and lack of control over one?s future in Mauritians who long for more. A good number, young and old, would seize the first opportunity to emigrate. It is strikingly acute and disproportionate. This malaise therefore begs the question as to what ails and why? There are many interrelated reasons ? economic, social, insufficient opportunities for development, lack of hope and control over the future.

Political leaders establish ? positive and/or negative ? conditions that affect citizens? daily lives. To say that the government is responsible is to ignore the past. However, there is a trust deficit in politicians reflected in voting patterns and sudden swings from Labour, MSM, MMM (or a coalition), irrespective of performance. The popular press emphasizes the fact that there are no major policy or philosophical differences between ruling parties as differences in governing appear to be cosmetic. The major parties either do not have a vision or lack the necessary hormones to take that courageous path to move the country forward.

Perpetuating political cynicism

Cynicism about politics is encouraged and perpetuated. An example is the unceremonious turfing out of appointees from previous administrations ? the message is that these are political appointments and competency is of marginal importance ? you do not belong to my party is the message. This creates a feeling of uncertainty and mistrust throughout the various institutions. Governments have an entitled right to the loyalty of senior public servants and the latter need to realize that their positions require them to be apolitical. This loyalty, however, must be earned and the role of political leaders is to find compromise and unify without creating fear and dislocations. Shooting first and asking questions later is destructive and does not inspire trust. It promotes neither continuity nor belonging, much less patriotism. Worse, it is a damning reflection on the leaders.

The strong feeling is that, to be upwardly mobile, one must show active allegiance to a political party. The population is coerced into being politically active ? not that political activism is wrong but it should be voluntary, a civic duty and a matter of choice. This sinister system creates a slippery slope mentality as membership equals ownership that creates an expectation of kick-back and, yes, corruption.

The Mauritian economy is mainly agricultural ? sugar, service ? tourism and light industry ? textile, with off-shoots from these three engines. This hardly diversified economy is sensitive to outside forces and events. The recent sugar-pricing predicament underscores this argument. Tourism, while bringing foreign currency and creating employment, has its drawbacks ? one major event can disrupt years of nurturing, environmental degradation and a feeling of envy in the population that they should have the lifestyle and spending ability. Tourism cannot be discarded as it brings advantages and must be managed. France ? its geography, culture, history, food, wine, beaches and architecture ? attracts more tourists than any other country and the French do not feel unequal or envious of tourists.

Balanced governmental social interventions

Mauritius offers beaches, sun, friendly people, food of acceptable quality, shopping and a safe environment. Tourists pay a high price for this, as Mauritius is expensive compared to destinations like Bali where, in addition to the above, history, culture, service and spectacular natural beauty offer real value and make tourists want to return.

On the surface the local socioeconomic model appears benevolent and altruistic. Free education, health care, transport for pensioners and students, subsidy for basic foods, a pension plan and the occasional intervention in free market with price controls.

The extent of government intervention in social services must be balanced or it can have a negative impact on development. Government has a role in essential services such as health, water, police, fire departments and education to ensure minimum standards. Taken too far, it becomes controlling, paternalistic, creates dependence and encroaches on freedom of choice. It shifts the locus of control and decision making from where it rightly belongs ? the individual ? to government. It becomes perfidious at best and nefarious at worst.

Therein lies the root cause of discontent. The average person does not see the wood for the trees and helplessly views social programs as privileges. The well-intentioned programs have negatively metamorphosed into an albatross and are unsustainable. Free transport, free university and tax-free cars are a burden. Worse, they substitute for individual responsibility where everyone promotes his own interest.

Instead people should be allowed to decide through tax incentives ? loans, bursaries ? so that they know the true cost and value of education. Allow universities to manage their budgets and stimulate research, invest in the future and develop centres of excellence. Pay personnel a decent salary instead of wasteful tax-free cars that give a false sense of affluence. Improve pension plans and let seniors decide when and where to travel, not just because it is free. Let people establish their priorities and manage their household budgets. The need for transparency is essential ? no hidden privileges ? the current system promotes corruption ? and the root cause is systemic. The system smacks of colonialism that Mauritius was freed from in 1968 ? only players have changed.

Private enterprise should realise that the use of a car is no substitute for fair market value compensation. This deceitful practice disadvantages the population ? let them decide if they want and can afford a car ? perhaps their priority is to buy a house and use public transport thereby unplugging the roads that are in a state of gridlock. It will also reduce the import of expensive fuel thus saving valuable foreign currencies. Undoubtedly the combinations and permutations of what ails are endless. The above issues contribute to the general malaise and inhibit the creation of true wealth.

If the government is serious about improving life conditions and retaining the young then it should look at the climate it?s creating. On the other hand, if the goal is to promote emigration, it?s on the right path and should continue with its current programs. Ultimately this will bring in foreign currency via family support from abroad and Mauritians will compete with countries like Somalia, Bangladesh, Philippines and Laos for menial jobs. This is already occurring in places like the United Arab Emirates. The future does not have to be bleak but the optics need to be adjusted.

Jeewan R. SOONARANE