Both became heads of their Labour parties at the same time (1992-1993) and both promised to revamp their camp, under the banner of ?New Labour?. Both came into power at the same time (1995-1996) and both have had rough rides within their party and the media during their tenure. While our man in Mauritius is himself probably laughing away after reading this intro, you might be hard-pressed to deny that the resemblance is not as far-fetched as the title of this piece suggests.

Education ? Tony Blair has made ?Education, Education, Education? the focal point of his mission in re-building the economy in the UK. He promised that, by the end of 2020, there would be 40% of the British population who would have had an education up to university level.

Navin Ramgoolam has only just this week talked about ?empowerment? of the nation, through educating individuals so that the quality of our workforce will develop into one of the most efficient in the developing world.

Way out of poverty

Navin Ramgoolam has also introduced the concept of free transport for students and, though that measure has not been met by unequivocal acceptance in most quarters, you can certainly not deny that this is a way that could enable people from more modest backgrounds to have access to education and the way out of poverty.

Economy ? Both Blair and Ramgoolam will leave mixed reactions about how well they have done economy-wise in their respective countries. Blair has done extremely well in some stages into steering the UK economy into the next level but some of his policies have been hugely contested. Ramgoolam?s battle with the JEC this week shows how on a purely economic analysis, he would himself probably admit that he could have done better.

However, where the similarities continue is that both Blair and Ramgoolam would probably say that pure economic success is not their ultimate priority. Most Mauritian economic-connoisseurs would probably say that Sir Aneerood Jugnauth was probably the most efficient prime minister in the economic building of this country. However, he was also at the helm in the 80s when economic boom was predominant in a lot of developing countries.

The late 1990s and especially the beginning of this century ? after the 9/11 tragedy especially ? have changed the whole world economic outlook. Things have changed, the progression of developing countries has stalled and, with the loss of our guaranteed sugar quota, any current Mauritian prime minister would have found it tough in this economic turmoil.

Empowerment ? Navin and Tony have both resolved to sort out their respective economies through bettering their people. Put it simply, what is being said is that you might be poor today but, by educating your children, they will probably be more competitive in 20 years? time and that could help you lead a better life. As Navin himself said this week, he is the prime minister of ALL Mauritians and should ensure that he safeguards the interest of ALL Mauritians. Have you not heard this from another foreign leader recently? Well, you would, if you had been watching BBC World!

Modernity ? Empowering the nation includes everybody and that means everyone whatever their background. If you were lucky to come from a fortunate background, you should admire and take your hats off when you see people who come from poor families and have made it into the very top. Navin?s Dad was probably one of those. No one should be denied the opportunity to get out of poverty. We do not want people who would rather have economic power exclusive. As Jacques Chirac would say, you want everybody to be given the chance to succeed.

The battle with the media

Navin?s empowerment speech with Mauritian women this week was the first of its kind in the history of Mauritius. When have you ever heard a politician, let alone a prime minister of this country, be such a fervent defender of giving equal opportunities ? this includes equal chances of success and equal pay ? to women?

Sticking to their guns ? Both Navin and Tony would probably admit that they have not been the most popular ? both have found the task of winning the battle with the media practically insurmountable. However, do you really need the media on your side if you want to succeed? The answer is that as prime minister, you would rather not have the media make a witch hunt on all your policies, but is this not the point of a democracy? Of course, it is! I could write this column in l?express and on another page (or even next to it) you would have some-one lambasting Ramgoolam. There is a word for this ? it?s called freedom of speech and I am pleased to live in such a country.

Reaz GHANTY