This offering was prompted by a recent news story in the Daily Nation newspaper of Kenya. In summation, the story talked about a group of Councillors who had been invited to a conference in Nairobi by the President to seek their support in the upcoming referendum on the draft Constitution. The Councillors heckled and booed the speakers and when the President tried to address them they punctured the air with shouts of “pesa! pesa!”(Money! money!). This was in apparent reference to a demand for a pay raise and increase in their allowances before they would offer their support to the passing of the new Constitution.
Unfortunately, these are the kind of grass roots leaders we have today, imbued with greed and bereft of any development agenda, yet quick to hold the government hostage by demanding pay raises to do what they were elected to do.
This dismal lack of public decorum displayed by the Councillors only reinforces points we had noted in previous posts, such as this initial offering found HERE.
Dire prognosis
The government will not bring about progress or development, not in present Kenya or in the next few generations. This grim prediction can be avoided if several things are to occur:
- The government redefines its role. It needs to avoid engaging in commercial enterprise, such as seeking foreign investors to partner in government projects. News item can be found HERE
-The government needs to provide better services for taxes collected. Its record on security for its citizens is abysmal. Thugs run wild and even state security forces have been involved in dubious incidents of gunning down civilians without probable cause or provocation.
-Infrastructure needs to focus on rural areas. While having a modern multi lane highway is impressive to visitors, the rural peasantry needs accessible roads to take produce to market and to facilitate commerce regionally.
So in contrast we present two inspiring stories of communities that organized to take back local government from officials and vest it back to the people most affected by its decisions.
Porto Alegre, Brazil-Proponents of participatory budgeting
In the early 1990s, the southern Brazilian city of Porto Alegre, then-led by the leftist Workers’ Party (PT), garnered international attention for pioneering citizen participation in allocating a chunk of city resources. Now fifty thousand residents of Porto Alegre—poor and middle class, women and men, leftist and centrist, take part in the participatory budgeting process for this city of a million and a half people, and the numbers involved have grown each year.
Thousands of citizens sit through meetings, discuss budget priorities, and elect delegates to represent their neighborhoods. The result has been increased civic activity and city budgets which fairly address the needs of the whole city, rather than the wealthy and powerful few. The transparency of the process has eliminated corruption, which had nearly bankrupted the city. Democracy is thriving as citizens gain competence in talking with the mayor, specialists in agencies, and fellow citizens of different means.
Power and learning
The participatory budgeting cycle starts in January of each year with dozens of assemblies across the city designed to ensure the system operates with maximum participation and friendly interaction.
Each February, there is instruction from city specialists in technical and system aspects of city budgeting. Regular folks learn fast because what they are learning empowers them to change conditions that limit or extend their lives.
In March there are plenary assemblies in each of the city's 16 districts as well as assemblies dealing with such areas as transportation, health, education, sports, and economic development. These large meetings—with participation that can reach over 1,000—elect delegates to represent specific neighborhoods. The mayor and staff attend to respond to citizen concerns. In subsequent months these delegates meet weekly or biweekly in each district to acquaint themselves with the technical criteria involved in requesting a project be brought to a district.
At the second regional plenary, regional delegates prioritize the district's demands and elect councillors to serve on the Municipal Council of the Budget. The council is a 42-member forum of representatives of all the districts and thematic meetings. Its main function is to reconcile the demands of each district with available resources, and to propose and approve an overall municipal budget. The resulting budget is binding.
Since the participative budgeting program started:
• There are 120 public day-care facilities instead of two
• Fifty-seven new schools have opened; twice as many children attend school
• The percentage of homes with running water and sewer service has gone from 46 to 85 percent
• The transit system is modern, affordable, efficient, and widely used.
• Each year the bulk of new street-paving projects have gone to the poorer, outlying districts.
• In addition to these achievements, corruption, which before was the rule, has virtually disappeared.
• The Porto Alegre budgeting process is now used in 200 Brazilian cities, including São Paolo, one of the largest cities in the world.
Communal Councils in Venezuela- Revolutionizing democracy
Since the start of 2006, thousands of tiny Venezuelan neighborhoods, with an average of 200 families each, have been organizing communal councils. The councils are part of a broad effort to build a new political system of participatory democracy, in which citizens have control over the decisions that affect their lives. The councils are helping communities address common interests, funneling more money to basic community needs, and bringing people together in thousands of neighborhoods.
The story begins in the 1980s, Venezuela began an extensive decentralization process, launching mayoral elections and handing over new responsibilities to local governments. After Chávez was elected president in 1998, he continued the decentralization, but changed its emphasis. He called for transferring power not to local government, but directly to popular movements.
The Communal Councils Law was passed in the Venezuelan National Assembly in April 2006, it legally recognized the communal councils and, according to Chapter Five of the Law, established the councils’ right to legally receive and administer resources from government institutions.
The law recommends that each urban council contain 200-400 families, each rural council at least 20 families, and each indigenous council at least 10 families. These assemblies are to elect executive, financial management, and monitoring committees, as well as thematic committees based on local priorities (health, education, recreation, land, safety, etc.).
By law, they can receive funds directly from the national, state, or city governments, from their own fundraising, or from donations. In turn, the councils can award grants for community projects. If they set up a communal bank with neighboring councils, they can also make loans to cooperatives or other activities for use.
Effects on the community
Eight months after the law was passed, over 16,000 councils had already formed throughout the country—12,000 of them had received funding for community projects. That’s $1 billion total, out of a national budget of $53 billion. The councils had established nearly 300 communal banks, which have received $70 million for micro-loans.
The communal councils have implemented thousands of community projects, such as street paving, sports fields, medical centers, and sewage and water systems.
Getting people to participate
A national system of participatory democracy requires more participation from more people than any social movement or other form of civic engagement. Venezuelans are indeed participating in massive numbers. Thousands of communities, however, have yet to show much interest in organizing a communal council.
Encouraging participation.
-First, Caracas has delegated significant power directly to the communal councils. The allure of self-government attracts many people.
-The government has also provided direct positive incentives for participation. The most obvious is money. Many people get involved because they can get funds for neighborhood improvements, but only if they form a council.
-The councils attract people by making their events fun. Some of the more prolific councils mix music, food, and entertainment into their assemblies. These virtual block parties transform one of the costs of participation (tedious meetings) into a benefit (a good time).
-Finally, the government is trying to reduce the obstacles to participation. Because the councils are so local, the transportation and time costs of participation are less.
-Another approach is even more ambitious—freeing people’s time by making participation part of their jobs. Such a program could especially boost the participation of working professionals and could be coordinated by the state, like a form of community service.
Venezuela’s communal councils are still a work in progress, but so far, the results are promising. Thousands of communities are mobilizing as never before, taking advantage of their new power to decide government spending and policies.
Conclusion
From the above stories there are many fine examples that we will research and tweak to fit to Kenya’s local situation. The budding political party, The African Economic Democracy Party is currently a Think Tank dedicated to Rural Development policy formulation and implementation and will be charged with bringing to fruition these ideas here and in previous offerings.
No comments:
Post a Comment