|
Immediately after winning the first round of the French presidential elections, UMP candidate Nicolas Sarkozy very elegantly expressed his respect for Socialist rival Ségolène Royal, and invited her to engage in a battle of ideas.
Essentially, what “Sarko” asked of his political opponent was that, following the clear decision of the people, both he and Royal present their programmes and vision for French society before the court of public opinion. In a country fraught with internal divisions, we can expect a hard-fought battle of ideas to take place during the two-week period leading up to the French presidential coronation.
Sarkozy hit the political nail on the head: in politics, ideas should come first. Having the necessary numbers is important, but only insofar as it enables the politician to implement those ideas to begin with.
But the reality is that in all too many countries, politics has degenerated into show business. There is little serious debate on the concerns confronting people in their everyday lives, and even less in the way of vision to address them.
Comparisons may be odious, but Sarkozy’s argument is equally applicable to the local scenario. The political engagement he requested is precisely what needs to be tackled locally. Ahead of the next election, we should be discussing people’s concerns, and viewing the opposing parties’ manifestos on the basis of the solutions they offer to the problems people are facing.
For this reason, it was disappointing to see the topics with which the Prime Minister will kick-start his dialogue sessions this evening: topics which are too generic and far removed from the world ordinary people call home.
Dr Gonzi would have been wiser (and braver) to host open public discussion on the issues for which his own administration has been criticised: the cost of living, hunting and excessive construction, to name a few. This would have resulted in an animated debate, giving people a long-overdue opportunity to present solutions, rather than listen to the usual litany of rhetorical speeches. Fortified by people’s opinions, government could take credit for not only having the courage to discuss difficult issues, but also having the political will to take the hard decisions necessary to overcome people’s concerns.
Placing a battle of ideas as the fulcrum of the political arena means discussing bread-and-butter issues like immigration. The battle of ideas involves also finding solutions to the rampant unsustainable development, which is causing more misery than the government would like to admit. And rather than placing issues such as divorce on the backburner, the battle of ideas would involve public discussion on this issue. Essentially, it means overcoming our national culture of taboo, whereby certain uncomfortable subjects are simply never aired in public, instead of being thrashed out without fear or favour.
A battle of ideas also involves formulating policies based on a clear vision of where our country will or should be in the year 2010. What impact is climatic change likely to have on our agriculture, climate, sea and water levels?
Much of the paucity of local political debate is attributable to a political class which simply carries on with the old way of doing politics: allowing civil servants to keep them tied to outmoded concepts with little relevance in today’s fast changing world. Ministers are simply acting as head of departments, dedicating too much of their time to administrative matters and too little to matters of policy. But the politician is a policymaker and not a general manager. He must serve as the catalyst for change and drive that same change through the department. This involves thinking outside the box, and finding new answers to old problems.
It is time to start a new level of political engagement. Let’s hope that tonight’s exercise in dialogue will not go down as yet another lost opportunity to confront ideas. |
