by Pauline ETIENNE

The anger of the population may not come from the government’s decisions themselves but from the contradictory signals they have observed since the last general elections. When the government was elected in July 2005 – and even before – it promised that the lives of all citizens would change within the 100 first days of its mandate. And they indeed kept some of their promises, as we witnessed an abundant distribution of presents during the first few months after the election.

However, a year later, the situation has changed radically. They are suddenly told that the country is undergoing major reforms and facing tough times ahead. In short, there is an appeal for sacrifice at all levels. How can we expect people to assimilate and accept such a major side-step without crying out their anger or at least misunderstanding? The more so as the prime minister, Navin Ramgoolam, has himself admitted that the government may not have communicated enough or well on those issues…

The most vindictive people could say that the government was only looking for votes and took some time before revealing its true face. But its opponents would then easily reply that they were not aware of the “skeletons” left by the outgoing government at first and now have to make up for them.

But all this would not prevent the perception that the government has betrayed the people. Moreover, the government has another factor that plays against it: Mauritian citizens are usually more in favour of the opposition soon after they have elected the government. But all this is part of Mauritian reality and the government has to live with it.

The past few months have been marked by a few protests from different groups of people and the latest was the students’. Do the latter understand the real reasons behind the abolition of subsidies on exam fees? Do they really feel concerned by what is happening? Were they right to use violence to make their voices heard? All these questions are debatable but this is not the point here.

The point is that all of them were given free transport a year ago and now, they are told that they will have to pay their entire SC/HSC fees. There is no doubt that many families will find it difficult to pay such high amounts this month. But wouldn’t it make the pill less bitter if they had been better prepared? It was well known that the preferences we used to enjoy by the international community were coming to an end. So, why did the government choose to grease the population’s palm with its presents while there were so many difficulties ahead?

The reforms contained in the last budget needn’t be discussed. They were necessary. Now, the government has a lot on its plate to make the population aware that the era of subsidies must be forgotten and that each and everyone will have to contribute for a better tomorrow. The “resignation and then comeback” of the Finance minister may be positive for the economy but it will have certainly tarnished the government’s image in some way. The government should fine-tune its communication channels to help restore people’s confidence in it.