{"id":2222,"date":"2013-03-29T08:12:31","date_gmt":"2013-03-29T08:12:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/2013\/03\/29\/interview-nita-deerpalsing-7\/"},"modified":"2019-02-10T22:15:55","modified_gmt":"2019-02-10T18:15:55","slug":"interview-nita-deerpalsing-7","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/interview-nita-deerpalsing-7\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cAll that bullshit about voyeurism into people\u2019s private lives is just so stale and useless for the country\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"
Interview: Nita Deerpalsing\"\"<\/span><\/h5>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cSo far, what we have seen from the MSM is gutter discourse. Whether it\u2019s the old man or the very bland younger version, it seems that they take some kind of pervert pleasure in under-women-skirts stories\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

\u201cDoes anyone really want to dig into the reasons behind Herve Aimee\u2019s views? Is there anyone in that mainstream press who is interested in the fact that Hon Aimee has actually personally lived through times when he, as a Creole, was not allowed to sit in front rows at Church?\u201d<\/strong><\/span> <\/strong><\/h3>\n

Nita Deerpalsing was earlier responsible for the Labour Party\u2019s communications. She has now moved on to lead the Youth Wing of the Party. But she is likely to remain as vocal \u2013 and spirited — as she had been in her earlier capacity as the LP\u2019s communications spokesperson. Her views in this week\u2019s interview on a range of subjects \u2013 the mainstream media, CT Power and the \u2018No-to-Coal\u2019 lobbyists, Herve Aimee, democratisation of the economy, etc \u2013 will confirm this.<\/strong><\/span><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Mauritius Times:<\/strong> How come you have left the field of communications and gone fishing in different waters \u2013 the youth reservoir — at this particular (mid-term) juncture when opposition parties usually become more aggressive towards the government of the day, which calls for a response in an equal measure from the latter?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Nita Deerpalsing:<\/strong> I believe that it\u2019s good for one\u2019s mental health to move on to new challenges every so often! I took over the responsibility of the Party\u2019s communications some three years ago \u2013 feels like ages! — when Dr James Burty David passed away. While I felt I couldn\u2019t ever fill his shoes, I gave it my best, I learned a tremendous lot about a hell of a number of things and while I was learning it was fun. I also had the opportunity to be responsible for communications in times of General Elections campaign and I can tell you that while it was tough, stressful, enormously challenging, the adrenalin of it all was a real kick! Even if it was at the expense of my own campaign in my constituency.<\/span><\/p>\n

The other downside of this job was that I was definitely way over-exposed in the media and therefore I had become everyone\u2019s obvious and favourite punching ball. About a year ago, I had decided it was time for others to experience the frontline of the battle and that I should focus my energy elsewhere. So, having \u2018been there, done that\u2019, I thought it\u2019d be good to have a change of scene!<\/span><\/p>\n

* Anyway, what\u2019s the feel of your youth \u2018ministry\u2019 so far? Does it hold the promise of a more accommodating and fruitful (political) intercourse than the abrasive exchanges you have had with some sections of the media here?<\/span> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

I was a bit apprehensive at first because I wasn\u2019t sure what I was getting into. But I am absolutely enthused about this new responsibility! Having already met the core team of the youths of different constituencies in the Party, I have a feeling this is going to be a great adventure! No doubt it\u2019s going to be demanding, but I will for sure, enjoy working with them and for them.<\/span><\/p>\n

I am very proud to say that there is great potential in our Young Labour team. I know that for a fact. It\u2019s very inspiring to see how they are bursting with energy and ideas and their profound will to serve their village, their town, their country. Now all they need is to be able to direct all that energy, the ideas bubbling in their minds to the right channels. We are definitely going to do very interesting things together!<\/span><\/p>\n

* Given those abrasive exchanges with the press, I suppose that you are also all for a review of the media law, as canvassed by the Prime Minister since quite some time? But whatever the nature and scope of the media law reform that\u2019s said to be forthcoming, it has been argued that no amount of official policing will be sufficient to arrest or mitigate the radical shift in power and control away from governments in the rapidly changing media landscape unfolding before us. What do you think?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

But media law is not about any shift in power or control! Let\u2019s get to the basics. <\/span><\/p>\n

As a politician \u2013 and I have no qualms to say I\u2019m giving you a responsible politician\u2019s perspective here — I think that in a democratic fabric worthy of respect, the press has amongst other roles, three major responsibilities: <\/span><\/p>\n

First, is the task of acting as a vigilant, responsible watchdog against anything that is against public interest.<\/span><\/p>\n

Second, as one of the stakeholders of in a democratic society, it has a vital role in the very building, maintaining and strengthening the fabric of democratic discourse. More than the institution of Parliament, it is the media which shapes the depth and the range of public discourse debate in a society. Therefore the task of lifting the democratic debate, the quality of public discourse lies more on the media than anywhere else.<\/span><\/p>\n

Third, in their portfolio of responsibility, I would include the task of bringing positive changes to the lives of the people. You may find this surprising and you may argue that this is solely the responsibility of governments. But I believe that bringing positive changes to the lives of people is also within the role of the media. And I\u2019ll elaborate on this in a minute.<\/span><\/p>\n

That being said, when you analyse the workings of the mainstream press along these three main tasks, I think any levelheaded person would agree that there is a meaningful critique that can be done on where our media is with respect to the three main duties I have mentioned. Unless you think that the media is a sacred cow which is above criticism!<\/span><\/p>\n

Regarding the watchdog role, one can say that this is more or less on track but the media really does a disservice to the very fabric of democracy when they are not politically neutral and when they are on a rampage to malign the character of individuals, usually with a political objective rather than being guided by a strictly public-interest motivation.<\/span><\/p>\n

And this leads on to the role of shaping public discourse. The evolution of substance-free, wild accusations, rumours, voyeurism into people\u2019s private lives can only restrict the range and depth of public discourse. I don\u2019t know about you, but I find it revealing of the poverty of our mainstream media in terms of shaping the quality of public discourse when you find that the weekly which sells the most, is the one which comes out with its cover page on a \u2018fait-divers\u2019 related to some murder, rape, sexual assault, sexual escapade, some \u2018affaire de moeurs\u2019, some quirky stories about someone\u2019s sexual organs being cut, etc! More often than not, these cover pages cannot be left lying on the kitchen table for children to pour over!<\/span><\/p>\n

What does that tell you about media people who think that this is what the country should \u2018consume\u2019 as \u2018news\u2019, as subject for public discourse? Is this a great demonstration of responsibility to the country from these very people who preach responsibility to public officials and politicians? Should there not be some professional guidelines agreed upon at least amongst professionals \u2013 if I can use that term for some of them?<\/span><\/p>\n

Next is the role of bringing something positive to the nation, to its people. When criticism is made wittingly, even scathingly if you wish, but constructively, it leads to an opening up of opportunity for the person being criticised to improve, an opening up of possibilities for the country, to change things so that ultimately there is an improvement for the nation at large. But when the articles are written not from a position of wishing for something better but, on the contrary, from a position of visceral hate, howling sarcasm, vitriol, engaging in baseless character assassination, these kinds of articles and opinion pieces are merely soapbox proixies — an outlet to rant, and vent off the author\u2019s own personal frustrations. They are also completely ungenerative of anything possibly positive for the nation.<\/span><\/p>\n

So to come back to your question, we\u2019re not talking about power. We are talking about responsibility.<\/span><\/p>\n

* It is not clear whether those who are expressing their voices on social media platforms, in the columns of the press or those at the command of the local media itself already make a majority, but they seem to have been able to reverse government\u2019s decisions, freeze their implementation (e.g. CT Power) or project some people in a negative light (Aimee, Dulthumun, etc), rightly or otherwise. How do you react to that?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Again, I think it\u2019s such a sorry state of affair when things are so bloody personalized! Surely you agree with me that this kind of public discourse is stale and ungenerative! So after you\u2019ve maligned a character, what next? What opening up of possibilities for the country can come out of that?<\/span><\/p>\n

On the other hand, if the debates were more centred on ideas, these have potential for the country. Let\u2019s take the debate about secularism. When I brought my PQ to parliament about us being a secular country, I was vilified by some idiots who couldn\u2019t even understand the gist of the subject. Some ignoramuses even equated secularism with atheism royally ignoring that India is by virtue of its Constitution, a secular state! So my point is, after having vilified me, what is left? Any hope for any emerging ideas, debates? No. Well tell me how different then is the mainstream press when they just focus on character assassination of X, Y or Z? All they want is for the readers to hate X, Y or Z? What else? Any possibility of an intelligent public discourse stemming out of that? The answer is NO. That\u2019s how a restrictive straight jacket they want to impose on our society, these very \u2018donneurs de le\u00e7ons\u2019 about free speech!<\/span><\/p>\n

In fact they don\u2019t want free speech. And when I say \u2018they\u2019, I mean the bad apples. I don\u2019t want to put everybody in the same basket because we have some very good journalists, I\u2019m thinking of people like Shenaz Patel, Jean March Poche, Touria Prayag, Nabil Moolna, Henri Marimootoo, Nicolas Rainer, etc. But they are very few and far between. The others, they don\u2019t want generative public discourse. What they want is for their own mishaps, their own frustrations, their past-affinities-gone-wrong to be interiorised by their readers. They want their hated persons to be hated. Their loved persons to be loved. The job they have as journalists is simply the channel, the means through which they try to make that happen. That is not Democracy!! And I\u2019d even question whether that is even honesty and integrity, things that curiously, they have no qualms preaching about!<\/span><\/p>\n

Take Herve Aimee\u2019s case. Does anyone really want to dig into the reasons behind his views? Is there anyone in that mainstream press who is interested in the fact that Hon Herve Aimee has actually personally lived through times when he, as a Creole, was not allowed to sit in front rows at Church and was not allowed to hold the Bible in Church because of the colour of his skin? Or is this too, er, \u2018delicate\u2019 a subject? One that cannot, should not be talked about? Is this censorship? No! Surely not from these great \u2018donneurs de le\u00e7ons\u2019!!<\/span><\/p>\n

* To come back to my reference to CT Power, it\u2019s also not clear what the government wants to achieve in terms of energy security. The CT Power project was turned down by the Cabinet; it was later found that there would have been \u201cmanipulation\u201d at the level of the Ministry of Environment (we do not know if a police inquiry has looked into this alleged serious offence); the Environment Appeal Tribunal eventually gave the go-ahead. Thereafter it took a hunger strike to bring government to set up a National Energy Commission, whose legal and constitutional standing is rather unclear. What does all this mean to you? Should we understand that the Environment Appeal Tribunal erred in its findings?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Again, let\u2019s sift through all that noise and focus on the basics of the policy at hand. What is it that Government needs to ensure? That on the one hand we don\u2019t jeopardise our country\u2019s development and on the other hand we don\u2019t jeopardise people\u2019s health and the country\u2019s environment. In an ideal world, we should be right up there in terms of renewable energy. I think that if Reunion island has gone so far in terms of photovoltaic solar, we can at least go a longer way than we have so far, towards that even if it\u2019s true that the subsidies Reunion receives from France for this is humungous.<\/span><\/p>\n

So yes I think we should do much much more, we should have much more zeal for renewable energy. But this thing about \u2018No to Coal\u2019 is so misleading and so biased and so ignorant at the same time.<\/span><\/p>\n

First, there is no way we can do without any fossil fuel at all even in the long term. And for sure we won\u2019t be able to do without coal in the medium term. By the way, I hope these No-to-coal people know that even when you burn ANY fossil fuel, you have emissions! So why only coal? Why not No-to-oil also? And I hope that they also know that burning bagasse doesn\u2019t come without any air pollution either!<\/span><\/p>\n

Now this whole drama about health-related risks is so ridiculously na\u00efve and partial! When people burn their garbage in their yards, that\u2019s toxic! When people smoke their lungs to cancer, that\u2019s toxic! When people breathe in fumes on the motorway from these outrageous offending cars, 4×4, buses, etc, that\u2019s toxic! It\u2019s all very well to jump up and down about coal but if at the same time you are a smoker, puffing fumes in your own lungs and other people\u2019s lungs, that\u2019s sheer hypocrisy. Or if you partake in ravenous meat-eating, an activity which has a tremendous carbon footprint.<\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019d like to see some logical consistency and see these people directing their energy in campaigns against smoking, in campaigns against consuming too much meat, in campaigns against the authorities who are not controlling the fumes emitted on the roads, in campaigns to educate people not to burn garbage so that themselves and their immediate neighbours are not subjected to toxic fumes in the sanctity of their own homes!<\/span><\/p>\n

And of course for the sake of consistency, I think it would be appropriate if they were to go and put their No-to-coal banners at St Aubin, and all the other sugar estates which are producing electricity from coal for decades now!! For goodness sake, is there any distinction between the coal used by the sugar industry and any other types of coal? Which is why the Prime Minister rightly asked whether there is White coal and Black coal?! And instead of digging into that, some journalists superficially taxed it as a communal argument!<\/span><\/p>\n

* As regards the amendments proposed by the Minister of Labour with respect to the Employment Relations Act and Employment Rights Act, in particular those in relation with workers\u2019 rights to go on strikes, you wouldn\u2019t expect government to go back on, would you? Whilst Ashok Subron seems to think that these provisions would amount to an \u201cinjustice historique\u201d, Shakeel Mohamed says he does not want a repeat of the 1970s. Is he right?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

I think that indisputably there are a number of absolutely great measures in the Employment Rights Act which go a long way towards the rights and dignity of workers. And the minister deserves to be congratulated for those.<\/span><\/p>\n

However, what I think is unfortunate is that the clash of ego between two men is being carried over into this very important debate. I may be wrong but no, I don\u2019t think Shakeel is right when he talks about a repeat of the 1970s. And I don\u2019t think it was necessary to be so personal in a debate which should strictly be about substance and not about maligning characters \u2013 on both sides. Usually inordinate maligning of people\u2019s characters is used when one has no real substantive argument. I can\u2019t help being suspicious when there is so much character-assassination which should rather be on the crux of the argument. Coming back to what we were talking about earlier, this is exactly what some of the mainstream media usually reserve for Labour Party people!<\/span><\/p>\n

And as far as I\u2019m concerned the question which deserves to be analysed, debated objectively, intelligently and clinically is this: do the proposed amendments to the Employment Relations Act nullify the agreement which was signed between MSPA and the trade-unions? If the answer to that is yes, then there is a problem. So far, I understand it\u2019s a question of interpretation. In my opinion, there should be no room for interpretation on this. I don\u2019t yet understand why this can\u2019t be crystal clear.<\/span><\/p>\n

* How was the atmosphere like in Parliament on Tuesday? Was the absence of Berenger felt?<\/span> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Of course his absence was felt! I mean I think everyone who\u2019s ever been in parliament knows that the guy has an inimitable presence! Sometimes that presence can be in the form of a quirky sense of humour, sometimes as derogatory comments, if not outrageously unfounded allegations, sometimes hard-hitting, sometimes very funny and witty. The guy is full of crackling emotions, both negative and positive and that makes for a cocktail which cannot be anticipated! He can unexpectedly provoke anger, indignation, or outright laughter. So yeah, his presence is unique to him and honestly, irreplaceable. Compare that to a Pravind Jugnauth who would probably find it impossible to be more bland, yawningly dull, his remarks so lifeless and lacking of substance, has such a lame presence that if the floor of the National Assembly were to swallow him under his desk, I don\u2019t think anyone would ever even notice!<\/span><\/p>\n

* We did not manage to obtain some \u2018eclaircissements\u2019 \u2013 in the absence of PQs from the opposition benches \u2013 as regards the Lal Dora theory\/story or the \u00ab malencontreuse erreur \u00bb of a public notary in relation with the purchase of an immoveable property at Floreal. Rather depressing, isn\u2019t it? This begs the question: what\u2019s the opposition up to?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Well I would be hard-pressed to answer a question as to what the Opposition is up to! But so far, what we have seen from the MSM in particular, is gutter discourse. Whether it\u2019s the old man or the very bland younger version, it seems that they take some kind of pervert pleasure in voyeurism, in under-women-skirts stories, etc. What that says about their own psyche, I leave it for your readers to conclude! In any case, I think you would have noticed that there has been not one single interesting or relevant thing uttered about the country\u2019s future from these guys. Only what would be interesting and deeply relevant to THEIR future.<\/span><\/p>\n

* It\u2019s however said that there might be more to come in the days ahead, when the opposition would again go for the Achilles\u2019 heel of the government, depending on the mental disposition of the PM vis-\u00e0-vis the MMM. What do you think?<\/span> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Honestly, I can only wish that they\u2019d come with substance-filled criticism, even if it\u2019s hard hitting. All that bullshit about voyeurism into people\u2019s private lives is just so stale and useless for the country. I wish they would really focus their firepower if any, on policies, rather than on people.<\/span><\/p>\n

* Jean-Pierre Lenoir, former editor of Le Cerneen, in an interview to Capital this week spoke of the democratisation agenda of this government in quite disparaging terms. He seems to be saying it would be counterproductive to take away from those who have the know-how the possibility to manage the economy. SSR, he added, had the intelligence to understand that. How do you react to that?<\/span> <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

You have no idea how very happy I am when I hear people utter the words \u2018democratisation of the economy\u2019 even in critical terms! Because let me remind you that before the Labour Party and the current Prime Minister talked about it in 2003, those very words did not even exist in our public discourse! And when these words and the \u2018vision de societ\u00e9\u2019 which goes with it were spearheaded by the Labour Party, there were all kinds of attempts to shut it down by guess what? Maligning of character! There was talk of communalism, of racism of Mugabe and what not. The Labour Party didn\u2019t flinch and fearlessly pursued the idea. It was our campaign platform in 2005. It was no small feat for the Labour Party to take this idea, this concept and force it from the margins right into the centre-stage of public debate. And yes, we unabashedly take the credit for that!<\/span><\/p>\n

So when I hear Mr Lenoir lament that democratisation of the economy is counter productive rather than being a communal concept, I think we\u2019ve made some progress!<\/span><\/p>\n

And when I hear others, who have shamelessly tried to plagiarize the concept and tried to posture themselves as great proponents of the democratisation of the economy when what they are really on about is their own personal enterprise, I also think we\u2019ve made some progress because whereas these people were never heard when we, in the Labour Party were taking all the flak about being racists, etc, now that they are also talking about it, it can only be a good thing.<\/span><\/p>\n

Democratisation of the economy as it was conceived by the Labour Party is an umbrella concept, a vision de soci\u00e9t\u00e9, rather being about just more SMEs for example. So it is, that it is under this umbrella concept that THIS government, THIS Prime Minister has set up the Truth and Justice Commission, the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Competition Commission, the Ministry for Social Integration, etc., etc. Not to mention the historical agreement that the PM signed with MSPA regarding the reform of the sugar sector. These are real, concrete things! Only those with bad-faith or those who are simply unable to comprehend what the ultimate policy objective is, will fail to see what has been achieved so far!<\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019m not saying that there isn\u2019t a lot more we can and should do. In fact, I do wish we could move faster and further. But I have also come to realise that we operate within a system which takes an enormous amount of energy and drive to move even just an inch!<\/span><\/p>\n

So considering where we were prior to 2005, considering what direction the country had taken with the Medpoint 1 alliance MMM-MSM of 2000, considering all the obstacles that the concept of democratisation of the economy has to conquer each and every day from the economically powerful, I\u2019d say we\u2019ve made reasonable progress in the process of steering the country towards \u2018Une Ile Maurice Pour Tous\u2019. And the more people utter or publish the words \u2018democratisation of the economy\u2019 whether favourably or critically, so much the better!<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

* Published in print edition on 30 March 2013<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Interview: Nita Deerpalsing \u00a0 \u201cSo far, what we have seen from the MSM is gutter discourse. Whether it\u2019s the old man or the very bland younger version, it seems that they take some kind of pervert pleasure in under-women-skirts stories\u201d \u201cDoes anyone really want to dig into the reasons behind Herve Aimee\u2019s views? Is there […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17782,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[32],"tags":[6093,4463,2200,15876,15877,15881,12025,11818,15879,322,15884,787,814,3584,280,15880,12949,15882,48,15883,15878,3270,2598],"class_list":["post-2222","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-interviews","tag-ashok-subron","tag-berenger","tag-ct-power","tag-dr-james-burty-david","tag-dulthumun","tag-henri-marimootoo","tag-herve-aimee","tag-interview-nita-deerpalsing","tag-jean-march-poche","tag-labour-party","tag-lenoir","tag-medpoint","tag-mmm","tag-mmm-msm","tag-msm","tag-nabil-moolna","tag-national-energy-commission","tag-nicolas-rainer","tag-pravind-jugnauth","tag-shakeel","tag-shenaz-patel","tag-ssr","tag-touria-prayag"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/03\/Nita-Deerpalsing.jpg?fit=1200%2C584&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8QzSF-zQ","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2222","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2222"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2222\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/17782"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2222"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2222"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.mauritiustimes.com\/mt\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2222"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}