After asserting that its budgetary decisions were crucial to get the country out of the difficult times we are living in, the government has nevertheless reviewed some of them. Last week, it backed down on the school feeding programme (see inset). After the taxation on lump sums and the rehabilitation of financial aid for HSC and SC exams, the bread-for-primary schoolchildren issue is the latest measure to be reviewed by the ministry of Finance.

If the government operated an important communication campaign while the budget was being prepared, it has completely changed its approach since then. After reforms announced in Parliament, it took refuge in silence despite growing anger from the population. Likewise, re-reforms are done almost secretly?

Since the budget speech by the minister of Finance, Rama Sithanen, two months ago, there is no doubt that the government?s popularity has dwindled. After promising miracles to the population during its electoral campaign, the government had to come back to earth when it was voted in; it realised it could not afford such generosity and had to make the public realise that sacrifice and discipline would be necessary to get through the difficult times ahead. This is why Rama Sithanen had to take decisions like ending the school-feeding programme.

People see what they can?t afford

However the people, who are currently the ones suffering from the measures, cannot have the same long-term vision. Despite the minister?s reassurances that this is just a bad time to get through, the people only see what they can?t afford. So the abolition of the bread supply in schools was considered as one more injustice done to them.

Members of the government are well aware of the social alliance?s loss of popularity among the population. If some would prefer to keep their good image ? even if this meant jeopardising the economic situation of the country ? the prime minister, Navin Ramgoolam, sees the situation in a different way. He is convinced that the budget measures will save the country from a future catastrophe and intends to explain this to the population as soon as he comes back from the SADC summit of heads of states and governments in Lesotho.

Government wakened

Hence, he appears fully conscious that his government?s popularity is at stake and that there is an urgent need to explain the decisions as well as what appear as counter-decisions. The ?bread march? organised by trade unions ten days ago showed how disappointed and lost the population was concerning the government?s decisions. People?s lives are subject to many changes, the standard of living is decreasing and yet, the government is doing ?business as usual? without giving them any plausible explanation.This protest might have been one factor which has wakened the government from its torpor.

The lack of communication has often been considered as a lack of support from the prime minister for his minister of Finance. His recent promise to come forward and justify the budget decisions is a proof that this is not the case. On the contrary, the prime minister?s support for Rama Sithanen is stronger than ever. This might lead other ministers ? who have not appeared very close to the latter during the last few weeks ? to show support for the Finance minister as well. Moreover, the head of government has made it clear that the government?s approach can succeed only if ?we are all together in a national effort?.

Bread for all in primary school

The ministry of Education has sent a letter to all managers of primary schools to inform them that the ?supply of bread is maintained until further notice?. Although this was said a few weeks ago, it was supposed to be a provisional measure until the government found a way to target the children who really need food at school.

This time, it appears as a long-term decision. The programme cost about Rs 26 million to the state last year and the minister?s objective was to reduce expenses. Hence, he decided to stop the programme; but faced with strong opposition from teachers and parents, he finally decided to continue to supply bread until the end of June. But, as the public was still very discontented with the measure, a new provisional method was proposed: the government said it would maintain the programme for the most vulnerable pupils. The teachers were expected to decide who was to benefit. Once again, teachers were not keen on making such a decision and the minister decided to send a form to parents who would have to state whether they wanted their children to get bread in school. As the public showed very little enthusiasm about this move, the government finally gave in. It may have realised it cannot afford to arounse such public anger and disappointment and has decided to make concessions before it is too late.