Mansoor Statements That Don't Survive A Fact-Check

1. The real threat is AI. And we don't know how fast it's coming, because we have five fingers I say in about 5 years, it can be a bit less, a bit more (2025). So I guess horses think AI will be here in 12 months.

2. Unfortunately neo-liberalism has gone everywhere in the world (2026). No, there are several countries that follow other policies. Examples include the Nordic countries and many other European ones which have a strong welfare state. And he seems to forget that neo-liberalism was brought to Mauritius by him and his university buddy who gave him the post of Financial Secretary when an extreme version of trickle down economics was implemented with a 15% flat tax as from 2006.

3. There were no billionaires in the 1980s (2026). There have been billionaires since at least 1919.

4. We found Mao's cat that's good at catching mice (2013). Destroying our savings culture and generating growth rates that were much lower than the promised 8% hardly makes the case for Chairman Mao's feline being active during his stint as FS for almost eight years. 

5. Tax cuts have worked as government received more revenue and jobs were created thanks to a higher level of investments (2011). This contradicts his own circular where he said that revenues would fall till 2013. And it was obvious that the tens of billions of rupees of FDI we had received since 2006 did not prevent the creation of a massive amount of poverty. Plus if the reforms had worked why did Sithanen not get a ticket and not even run as an independent candidate? Besides other components of the infamous reforms killed our savings culture. Mansoor should also tell us how the average GDP growth from 2006 to 2011 compared with the 8% target. There was also calls for his contract not to be renewed and even be terminated.

6. Our water problem is one of management, not of lack of finances (2011). The water network has expanded significantly after the CWA was established in 1973 including watershed events like the coming into operation of the Midlands Dam in 2003. If everything was going on swimmingly why was the payment of the rice/flour subsidy shifted from the budget to the STC? And there was also the cancellation of the school-feeding program which cost peanuts.

7. Rama Sithanen is one of the most intelligent economists I have met (2010). You should meet more and different economists. Befriending a Rs5 coin might also not be a bad move.

Why Electing Bizlall is Voters' Next Logical Step

To understand this we have to recall how they arrive at their decisions. In its most basic form that depends on two things: one is the information they have and the other is their ability to process that info. For sure they make very complex decisions. Which makes electoral data absolutely fascinating.

The First 60-0 Was The 

Optimal Decision, in 1982

It was the optimal for voters to keep every candidates of the outgoing Labour government -- which many consider as the best we ever had -- out of Parliament given the paucity of information that was available then and their sophistication level. Still if you dig a little bit you find out that there was some kind of order in the way they voted. This is apparent when we see who among the unreturned candidates grabbed the highest percentages of votes in their respective riding. As Table 2 shows SR got the highest, followed by SB and Duval. KJ who implemented free education after he came up with the idea was sixth. This table may be familiar to you. It is the same one we used to propose that best loser seats should have been allocated to these people as they had the highest ratings among voters -- Nicol Francois, a candidate from Rodrigues, actually came in right after Duval but doesn't appear here as our proposal wouldn't have granted him an additional seat to reflect the relative sizes of the voting pools of the two island. So what we can note here is that voters seemed to have said "Ok, we're booting all of the guys out but we have decided not to treat everyone of you the same way."

Wong Had Little to Do With Massive Amount of Poverty Created

Because he was not Finance Minister (FM) during any of the past eleven years when by far the most backward policies -- top tax rates were set too low and this broke the economy -- our country has known were implemented. For sure he has been a member of Cabinet during the last two and half years and as such has to accept part of the responsibility of the mess we're in because he could have vehemently asked for the end of the worship of the golden calf. Or at least distanced himself from it. Besides he was until recently a member of a party which has two interesting words in its name: Social Democrate.

XLD, Less So

Of course Xavier-Luc Duval (XLD) has a lot more to do with all the poverty created over the last decade because he was in the driver's seat for quite some time -- close to three years. But before we look into this let us not forget that poverty and the fight against it is heavily dependent on two quantities: the size of the economic cake (GDP) and how it is shared. From the 2012 household budget survey (HBS) -- which tells us about the sharing -- we know for a fact that the poorest two-tenths of Mauritian households saw their shares shrink by 10% to 15%. That's their smallest shares in at least two decades if you care to know. So we don't exactly get bonus points here. And what about GDP?

Lev Pake Reste Turns 10

Yes. Already. A recap. So Ramgoolam nominates Bheenick as Governor -- one of his best decisions ever but that too after a year and a half of doing God knows what -- but Sithanen is unhappy so he threatens to resign or maybe he does. The PM is out of the country at the time but makes an appeal to the Minister on national tv. The latter eventually changes his mind -- after about a week -- when his pick as the BoM chief gets the SBM chairmanship. But not before swallowing something that's not exactly a grass snake and creating an urgent need to amend one famous Chevenement formula.

That was a really strange week. See if a Minister cannot be present at his office there has to be a colleague who steps in for him. We've seen this so many times: another member of Cabinet will answer parliamentary questions on behalf of the officeholder when the latter is out of the country. If a Minister resigns our excellent constitution takes care of that seamlessly. And that too without the PM having to be at his desk. The Ministry can also be reassigned to another colleague. For example SAJ held the Ministry of Finance for a few months last year. So did Ramgoolam in 2014. But none of those happened back in February 2007.

Plenty to Learn From US Election Process

Americans know pretty much what to expect from the person they will elect as President of the world's second largest economy today. And that's thanks in no small measure to the candidates thoroughly discussing the main planks of their plans and to several independent groups of people scrutinising them. If it's Trump they are aware that the extreme version of trickle-down economics he's proposing – a flat tax of 15% – would add 5 trillion dollars to the US national debt, make 3.5 million people lose their jobs and potentially throw the economy into a recession. If it's Clinton the economy should keep on growing from the middle out and that too without a Great Wall that Mexico would be made to pay for. The fiscal policies of these candidates are also consistent with the DNA of their parties: Democrats don't believe and rightly so that tax cuts for the wealthy work while the Republicans do.

Lepep Budget May Miss Boat, Again

Budget Doesn't Address Dominant Issue

Namely the extensive damage caused by the flat tax: 1. a massive GDP gap; 2. a serious impairment of our domestic savings; 3. making Mauritius less competitive and dynamic by keeping local pump prices at unreal levels and 4. generating the smallest increase in real disposable income for the poorest 20% of households of the last twenty-five years. Besides the flat tax was implemented on the basis of spurious claims.

Why Poverty is Winning

Because so much of it has been created over the past 10 years. Some people have been getting out of poverty for sure but a lot more have been falling into it. Of the pool of 126,200 poor people in 2012 a staggering 33,000 had joined it over the last decade. That's more than one in every four poor Mauritians. This has happened because our economy has not grown fast enough and whatever wealth was created has not been shared properly.

Massive Policy Failure

Which in turn has mostly been caused by dismal policy-making and the lack of dynamism of our economy. External events have certainly played a role but given that they were beyond our control we shouldn't have spent that much time crying over them. We should also acknowledge the fact that there has been a wide variation in the way poverty has expanded. Chart 1 captures that by looking at how it has progressed over a fifteen-year period. Which coincided roughly with three different governments and in one case with major policy changes.

Who's the Better Cake-Cutter?

We can get an idea if we look at the Household Budget Surveys (HBS) that our highly-esteemed CSO publishes every five years. Let us proceed the same way that a clock ticks and start comparing the 1991/92 data with that of 1996/97.

Lutchmeenaraidoo vs. Sithanen

These are quite interesting years as they coincide approximately with the last year for Vishnu Lutchmeenaraidoo as Finance Minister and the end of the first mandate of Rama Sithanen. It gives an indication of how the cutting of the economic cake changed from Minister to Minister. In this case from cousin to cousin.

As Table 1 illustrates every single group saw their share of the national cake fall except the richest one. The poorest 10% -- that's the group which is more vulnerable in case you have forgotten -- had their share reduced by 13%. The other thing you want to note here is that the ratio of the share of the wealthiest to the poorest which was 12.09 when Mr. Lutchmeenaraidoo left increased to 15.40. Which means increased inequality and that's bad for growth -- just like keeping energy prices much higher than what is reasonable, flattening taxes or creating a major structural problem by making a multi-billion rupee gift to a dead industry -- and for the general well-being of our country. Please note that these were both ministers under SAJ. And I guess you will be hard-pressed to find even traces of a savat-leponz-gato-pima effect in the 1996/97 data.

Eski Sithanen Enn Kosmar Pu Popilasyon?

Kestyon bet, non? Kosmar disparet ler uver lizye. Parkont lanfer so bann politik ekonomik kontinye fer u lavi vinn margoz pandan buku banane. Sithanen finn reponn a sa kestyon la resama avek kat kestyon. Anu analyz zot.

1. Linn dimande si pa enn politisyen de long dat kuma Ramgoolam ti pu pran enn risk vinn tir li depi kot liete si li tienn kosmar. Anfet Ramgoolam pe pran enn mari gro risk reprezant Sithanen kom minis de finans apre sa bann gro gro dal ki linn fane ant 2005 ek 2010 (nu tu finn remarke ki lalyans pep tuni pann gagn sa kantite plis dimunn ki lalyans papa piti dan miting nasyonal le duz oktob). Me kan de parmi trwa pli gran parti zwen sa amenn suvan bann gro skor dan elekyson: sa lalians la gagn lao 50 siez. Me pa tu letan (ek sa eleksyon ki pe vini la pa enn eleksyon ordiner ditu sa). An 2005 Ramgoolam ti gagn enn viktwar istorik ler enn gro parti ti bat 2 gro parti.

Anfet telma Sithanen ti fann dal kom minis de finans -- avek so kamwad Ali Mansoor -- ki Ramgoolam finn bizin ed Pravind Jugnauth eli dan No. 8, donn enn segon manda prezidan SAJ pu finalman fer lalians ek MSM ek pa donn tiket Sithanen. Parksi Ramgoolam ti kone si ti donn li tiket kitfwa Ramgoolam mem ti pwal manz feyaz. Sithanen pann gagn tiket ar Berenger usi byen ki Berenger -- papa kominalis syantifik sa do -- ti dir ki Ramgoolam finn fer fos ek bann Tamul-morisyen parski Berenger kone ki elekter pa kas latet ar kominote bann faner dal.

Thoughts on Electoral Reform (3)

There are a number of problems with the Constitution Temporary Provisions Bill and its Explanatory Memorandum.

Temporary Provisions Bill 

has at least three problems

I don't think it's right to say that you are presenting a bill that modifies our constitution for one election pending subsuming the best loser system into another system for at least three reasons: (i) there is no guarantee that the same government will be there after the next election; (ii) there is no guarantee that the next government will want or have the required numbers to modify the constitution again or that enough MPs will agree to do so -- which means that candidates may be obliged to declare a community again in subsequent general elections; and (iii) the proposed electoral system that the current government wishes to adopt does not subsume the Best Loser System (BLS) as we know it because this system is simply not subsumable.

Plus Bill flouts meritocracy

If there are additional seats they should be allocated to the most successful unreturned candidates as measured by the percentage of votes received because our ridings are not exactly of the same size. That is if Mrs. Robinson who hasn’t declared a community tops that list then she should get the first additional seat. And not someone who ranks a lot lower in the esteem of voters. After all MP is a job like any other – save the indefinite paid holidays this year – and nobody who has the blessing of the voters should be discriminated against. Besides, ethnicity is not a criterion which will enable an MP to do his or her job better.