The most recent cabinet reshuffle in Egypt took place last July. It saw changes in twenty out of thirty portfolios; also, with the appointment of younger ministers, a significant drop in the average age of cabinet members. Yet, ever since that reshuffle, social media has overflowed with harsh criticism of the new Cabinet and the capacities of its members, branding them as individuals who lack expertise and competence, but who were selected because they are trusted by the political leadership. I believe such judgement to be short sighted and unfair, seeing that it comes before any announcement of the policies or programmes the new Cabinet intends to implement, let alone before giving them a chance to activate their programmes and see results. The entire situation is tantamount to an advance No Confidence vote that curtails the Cabinet’s task to implement the national plans assigned to them before accusing them of failure. If anything, it exposes an attitude of undue lying-in-wait, censure and rejection that lacks even the slightest objectivity.
The media, including Watani, has always been replete with negative sentiments towards current or former cabinet ministers who implemented policies that proved detrimental to the social stability of Egyptians and to their rights on various fronts: their living standard, health, social security, education, public services and other aspects. I have been in agreement with some of the criticism voiced, but I was also in disagreement with some other. So what is the criteria for expressing legitimate approval or disapproval? There must surely be some expanse that goes beyond the mere cursing of a situation, and ventures into the new perspective of proposing answers to it. This is a very real political responsibility that ought to be handled by the opposition.
At this point, I find myself back where I need to reopen a file I repeatedly tackled among the “Problems on hold” series; this being the file of the performance of political parties in Egypt. It is no secret that Egyptian parties need to do a lot before they could have any tangible influence on the policies that impact our societal and political actualities.
I have written, as have others too, calling for reform of our fragmented 100 political party map. I called for formation of coalitions of like-minded political streams, with the objective of ultimately attaining robust political blocs that would represent the right, centre right, centre, centre left and left and, accordingly, have in place solid policies reflecting their views. Only then can these parties declare clear, alternative policies to those of the government; they should announce these policies to the public who would then have well-founded options to elect come election time. The winning party would then move into the executive authority. This is how I can see real, constructive change in the making, not through a volley of unending curses.
Where are we today from all this? Where are we from crystallising alternative policies to those anticipated from our “trusted” rather than “competent” Cabinet? Where are we from the shadow government created by the opposition in democracies around the world? The parallel government that includes shadow ministers who hold portfolios parallel to existing ones and who, basing on given solid facts, draw parallel policies they believe to be more competent than those of the government to tackle existing predicaments? Come election time, the shadow government is armed with a plan to confront national challenges supposedly better than the current government. So the situation is not about cursing or hurling accusations, but of offering serious alternatives to allegedly failed policies; a sure way to attract voters to the shadow government.
Granted, it is easy for the opposition to criticise, object and reject the new Cabinet, whether rightly or wrongly. But it is difficult to examine situations and come up with real, pragmatic alternative answers to those offered by the government which they reject. Such alternatives should be able to work the change aspired by the public, without deluding that public with cries of detrimental rejection that go nowhere. Again, I say that the only way to achieve that is through party reform and shadow government.
Watani International
16 August 2024
