The Govt’s Health Report

Editorial

Berenger’s Diagnosis: “All Is Not Well”

In the first months of any new government, a quiet period of consolidation is typically expected. The senior partners, having just secured a mandate, are meant to present a united front, ironing out disagreements behind closed doors. Yet, in a departure from this established norm, Deputy Prime Minister Paul Bérenger has taken on an extraordinary role: that of a physician delivering a public health report on the very government he serves.

In two consecutive press conferences held within a week, Bérenger did not speak as a loyal subordinate. Instead, he presented himself as an unsparing critic, detailing the ailments and potential threats facing the Alliance du Changement. From internal conflicts to the precarious state of a national institution and accusations of nepotism, he laid bare the alliance’s vulnerabilities for all to see. This bold and unprecedented strategy is more than a simple venting of frustration; it is a calculated political manoeuvre, one that defines the new government’s unique and precarious dynamic. This public diagnosis, delivered with surgical precision, forces us to question the nature of unity, the meaning of an alliance, and the fine line between political loyalty and personal ambition.

The Doctor’s Diagnosis: All Is Not Well

Bérenger’s first press conference on August 7 served as a clear warning shot, a public airing of grievances that would ordinarily be handled in a closed-door meeting. His tone, described by the media as one of “insatisfaction,” was a polite but firm signal that not all was harmonious within the ranks. The most telling sign of discord was his public intervention in the dispute between Minister Arianne Navarre-Marie and her junior minister, Anishta Babooram. By backing Navarre-Marie and calling for a swift resolution, Bérenger was putting his political capital on the line. When Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam resolved the matter by transferring Babooram to another ministry, it created a paradox. While the conflict was officially “tranché” (settled), it left open the question of who had the final word—and whether Bérenger’s public support had been subtly undermined.

Beyond this internal squabble, Bérenger delivered a dire prognosis for a national institution. His statement on Air Mauritius—that “things are not good at all” and that it is “not too late… but very late” to save the airline—was a stunning admission from within the government itself. This was no rumour; it came from a senior partner in the alliance. By framing himself as an insider who had been silently alerting the Prime Minister for eight months, he simultaneously portrayed himself as a responsible leader while putting a significant amount of pressure on the government to act decisively. It was a classic Bérenger move. He publicly cast himself as the one who predicted the problem, ensuring he could always say, “I’ve done my bit” while holding others accountable for ignoring his signals.

The Nepotism Antidote and The Political Juggler

If the first press conference was Bérenger’s diagnosis, the second, held just six days later, was his attempt to pre-emptively administer an antidote. Faced with a wave of “hysteria” and charges of nepotism regarding the nominations of his daughter, sister-in-law, and son-in-law, he called a new press conference specifically to address the issue head-on. His defence was meticulous, almost legalistic in its detail, and presented a fascinating study in political justification.

Bérenger’s argument was built on a series of paradoxes that showcased his political acumen. He defended his daughter, Joanna, by claiming he had denied her a full ministry to respect the principle of seniority, even while under “enormous pressure.” He thus transformed a potential accusation of favouritism into a claim of principled self-restraint. For his sister-in-law, Dany Perrier, he shifted responsibility, stating her appointment as ambassador was not his doing but a “surprise” from Navin Ramgoolam himself, which was both “touché” and a strategic masterstroke. Finally, in defending his son-in-law, Frédéric Curé, as Chairman of Airport Holdings Ltd (AHL), he introduced the concept of the “sincere militant” who is also “perfectly qualified.” He subtly distinguished this from past nepotism by clarifying that the appointment came from his alliance partners, not himself. This defence, while not satisfying to all, was a masterful exercise in public relations, allowing him to appear both transparent and in control. He was simultaneously defending his family, his party’s principles, and the government’s legitimacy—a difficult juggling act indeed.

The Prescription: A New Political Direction

Beyond the immediate issues, Bérenger’s press conferences offered a clear prescription for the government’s future course, solidifying his role as a partner who is not just in the alliance but is actively steering it. His call for a new “Appointments Committee,” a measure he had proposed during the electoral campaign, was a clever way to address the nominations controversy while simultaneously presenting himself as a reformer. It was a subtle admission that the current process was flawed, but a firm promise that he would ensure it was corrected.

He also targetted a senior minister from a past era: Rama Sithanen, the Governor of the Bank of Mauritius. Bérenger’s statement that while Sithanen had “helped the country,” his “time has passed” was a direct and public challenge to the status quo. It was a clear signal to Navin Ramgoolam that certain key figures from the old guard needed to be replaced if the new government was to truly forge its own path. This move demonstrates that Bérenger’s critiques are not just about small skirmishes but about a fundamental reshaping of the country’s leadership. His passionate denunciation of the war in Gaza, even admitting he sometimes feels like quitting to speak freely, further illustrates his commitment to a political identity that transcends the day-to-day work of government. He is a partner who comes to the table with a firm set of principles and is unafraid to test the limits of his alliance to uphold them.

A New Model of Alliance

What we have witnessed from Paul Bérenger is not a sign of imminent collapse, but the emergence of a new model of coalition politics. It is a high-wire act where one of the senior partners uses the public sphere not to declare war, but to maintain a powerful position of influence. He is a “loyal critic,” a partner who is simultaneously inside and outside the room. By airing his grievances publicly, he is doing two things: first, he is pre-emptively protecting his own reputation and political brand by distancing himself from decisions he disagrees with. Second, he is exerting pressure on his alliance partner, forcing Ramgoolam to either accept his criticisms or risk being seen as deaf to the concerns of a significant portion of the alliance.

This new political dynamic will likely be a defining feature of the Alliance du Changement. It is a risky strategy though, but for now, it allows Bérenger to have it both ways: he can hold a powerful position in government while also positioning himself as the conscience of the alliance. The question for the long term is whether this unique approach to governance can sustain itself.

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 15 August 2025