Thu, 24 Jun 2010

New politics still waiting for breakthrough in the Philippines

When the Philippines went to the polls in May, more than 50 million voters chose candidates to fill a total of 18,000 offices ranging from the president through senators and congress men and women to governors and mayors. What gave these elections some spice was that civil society activist and anthroposophist Nicanor Perlas, who has been an influential figure behind the scenes in Philippine politics, was one of the presidential candidates. However, as NNA correspondent Walter Siegfried Hahn explains, Philippine politics will remain under the control of the traditional political dynasties for a while longer, despite Perlas’ best efforts.

MANILA (NNA) - He had promised a new politics in the event of being elected and to strengthen the third sector, for example by setting up a ministry for non-governmental organisations:

Nicanor Perlas is well known internationally for his support for the threefold restructuring of society and has won numerous awards. “We have no real democracy if we do not empower the citizens to be involved in the development of our country,” he says. “Traditional thinking in terms of executive, legislature and judiciary is no longer sufficient. The new balance of power must consist of civil society as cultural force, the state as political force and business as economic force.” Such ideas, based on the thinking of Rudolf Steiner, regarding the appropriate way of organising the way we live together in society were introduced by Perlas into the Philippine Agenda 21 under the then President Ramos. In 1996 this was adopted by the United Nations as strategy for achieving the millennium goals.

Whereas so far the votes in Philippine elections were always counted manually, and people were used to waiting for weeks for the results, voting machines were introduced for the first time this year. Just days before the elections there continued to be many problems with this equipment and so Perlas went to court in an attempt to have the elections delayed. When he failed, he commented: “Then we are heading for disaster.” It was all the more surprising, then, when the first results came from the voting machines as early as the evening of election day, showing a stable lead for the favourite, Noynoy Aquino.

Perlas himself came eighth with approximately 0.13 percent of the vote – a total of 50,000 votes was the final official result. As expected, Noynoy Aquino was elected with 40 percent of the vote – a simple majority is enough under Philippine law – the son of the martyr Benigno Aquino who was shot by henchmen of the Marcos dictatorship when he returned home in 1986. This act triggered the revolution which within days brought Corazón Aquino, wife of Benigno and mother of Noynoy, to power as president and drove Marcos and his family into exile in the United States.

One of the peculiarities of the present election is that several members of the Marcos family were elected back into office with a huge majority in their home province of Ilocos Norte. Imelda Marcos, widow of the dictator, who has a museum in Manila devoted solely to her thousands of pairs of shoes, was elected to Congress, as was one of her daughters. Her son became governor.

But the Aquino and Marcos families are not the only clans and political dynasties who have retained their leading positions in Filipino politics in the wake of these elections. If on previous occasions this could easily be attributed to the several-week-long count, which also allowed for manipulation of the vote, this argument would no longer seem to apply with the introduction of voting machines for this election. Not so, says Nicanor Perlas, himself from a wealthy family. He cites various reasons why he has not so far recognised the election of Aquino. All other candidates apart from Joseph Estrada have conceded, arguing the time had come to work with the new president for the benefit of the country.

Critic and political scientist Bobby Tuazon from the Centre for People Empowerment in Governance (CENPEG) does not believe either that machines could have prevented electoral manipulation. “First you have to limit the power of the political dynasties,” he says. Supporters of Perlas had made their own observation in the polling stations which together with other reports produced a doubtful picture. Perlas points out that five million voters could not vote because the queues at the polling stations were very long and the voting machines very slow. He questions why there was suddenly talk of 75 percent voter turnout when initially a figure of 85 percent was quoted. Take the five million here, ten percent there, and Estrada might well have been elected – an irony in itself because Perlas contributed significantly as part of the Kompil II leadership team to removing the former actor from power in 2001 on the grounds of fraud. Kompil II is an association of civil society organisations.

Leaving dynasties and electoral manipulation aside, the new president faces a Herculean task. About one third of the inhabitants of the Philippines live below the poverty line. Another great problem is the conflict with the Islamic Liberation Front on the second largest island of Mindanao, which has claimed more than 100,000 victims in the last 40 years. And corruption in almost all areas of life makes life difficult and slows down many processes.

Perlas had addressed these issues specifically in his election campaign and had attempted to introduce something new into Philippine politics with his truthful attitude, albeit only with a small number of people to begin with. His favourite quote is from Margaret Mead: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.”

Pam Fernandez, professor of agriculture at the University of Los Banos who worked for the Perlas election campaign, summed it up in a message on Facebook: “In the count we did not get it. But we planted the intention, we moved with courage, took risks and acted out of our highest ideals and deepest sources of conviction… All these created a strong “field” and the birthing of the new country is still proceeding. This election was just one means. Let us remember that the cultural realm or civil society will still be more powerful than the political realm. Truly, the future of this country is in our hands, and New Politics means moving beyond campaigns, election and voting.”

END/nna/wsh/cva

Item: 100624-03EN Date: 24 June 2010

Copyright 2010 News Network Anthroposophy Limited. All rights reserved. See: www.nna-news.org/copyright/

More NNA reports at: www.nna-news.org/en/

Life ebbing away from the “new heart of Europe”?

Mega building projects, intended to enhance the prestige of those who plan them as much as anything else, can be found all over the world. That such projects invariably turn out to be controversial if they ride roughshod over the concerns of local people, particularly when there is some doubt about their viability, has been illustrated once again in the proposal by German Railways (DB) to completely remodel the central railway station in the German city of Stuttgart, putting it underground and building a new commercial and residential quarter where the station once used to stand. NNA Correspondent Cornelie Unger-Leistner explains.

STUTTGART (NNA) - “Europe is building stations again,” DB says enthusiastically in its customer magazine “mobil”. Lyon, Berlin, Liege with their spectacular new station buildings designed by well-known architects had allowed “station architecture with its airy designs to soar directly from the nineteenth into the twenty-first century,” “mobil” continues breathlessly.

It was in this spirit that DB earlier this year announced the construction start of its “Stuttgart 21” project – with the difference that a significant number of Stuttgart inhabitants clearly see this project not so much as a “cathedral of mobility” (“mobil”) but as a black hole about to swallow billions of their tax euros for questionable benefit.

Towards the end of the former East Germany, its people began resisting the regime by holding regular Monday demonstrations in defiance of the authorities. The people in Stuttgart have started using the same tactic to stop this controversial project by German Railways.

“This Tower of Babel, this underground labyrinth will fail – I am convinced of that. The only question is how soon,” Prof. Dieter Bodack, transport specialist, tells about 4000 Stuttgart citizens. They have gathered at the north entrance of the station, as they do every Monday, to protest against this mega project. They have been driven to take this action by the fact that “Stuttgart 21” is being realised despite a huge increase of votes for opponents of the project in the city assembly last year. The Greens have become the largest group with 25.3 percent.

Calling for an independent review of the project, the transport specialist calls on the demonstrators to make their views known to their representatives. “Stuttgart 21” was approved by the city assembly and regional parliament and in his view it should also be they who now put a stop to it.

According to Bodack, the prestigious project, which according to DB will turn the run-down station quarter into the “new heart of Europe”, has all the hallmarks of a bad joke. As evidence, the expert cites the routing of single tracks, a way of doing things which belongs in the last century, junctions which will not be passable without delays, ecologically indefensible gradients and a connection volume which is much too small with only eight tracks. And a special dispensation would be needed to lay inclined tracks in the station – a solution which has not so far been used in Germany and which is notorious in other countries as a cause of accidents.

The members of the assembly and parliament had something completely different in mind when they approved “Stuttgart 21”: quality improvements, routing leading to better timekeeping, and better regional links. “It was never planned like this,” says Bodack. The planned construction period of 10 years was an illusion, he adds, the costs of approximately four billion euros as well. Ten billion would be a more realistic figure, he concludes, also taking into account all the tunnels that would need to be built.

A much more sensible alternative would be simply to completely modernise the current station, but that would mean a smaller contribution from public funds, for DB itself is responsible for modernisation projects. At present, German Railways, the federal government with the region and the city, and the airport are bearing approximately one third of costs each.

“How can Stuttgart afford that?“ asks the journalist Prof. Hannelore Schlaffer. She thinks a feeling of inferiority among local and regional politicians has been a driving force of the project: from provincial town to cosmopolitan city is their slogan. „Stuttgart is a modern city with a wealth of culture, it does not need such a project,” she emphasises to the applause of the demonstrators.

A whole new commercial and residential quarter is to be built on the site of the former station. The fear is that during the period that the new underground station is built the popular Schlossgarten city centre park will, for the foreseeable future, be turned literally into a big hole. Hundreds of ancient trees would have to be felled. Environmentalists have already announced that they will chain themselves to the trees if it ever comes to that.

Although the start of construction was officially announced by DB and local and regional politicians in April, the members of the “Stay on top” initiative, the motto of the “Stuttgart 21” opponents, are optimistic that they can still stop the project.

In this they might receive backing from the federal parliament in Berlin. The transport committee of the lower house became alarmed in March when it discovered that urgent track work was having to be delayed for lack of funds. The Greens chairman of the committee demanded a moratorium on all mega projects like “Stuttgart 21” because they were taking up scarce resources which were needed more urgently elsewhere.

There was a similar response from consumer organisations who have demanded a completely new rail policy. Year after year billions of taxes were being wasted because the money was not going to where it was needed but where it would bring the greatest prestige, they say. Rail passengers were forced to suffer the result with overcrowded lines and daily delays.

The opponents of “Stuttgart 21” with their regular and sustained protest might well become an example of how people themselves can bring about the cancellation of such mega projects which, given empty public coffers, are no longer seen as appropriate. At a time when local councils are having to close theatres or swimming pools because they no longer know how to keep their continuously rising debts under control, such a movement has significant public resonance.

END/nna/ung/cva

Item: 100624-02EN Date: 24 June 2010

Copyright 2010 News Network Anthroposophy Limited. All rights reserved. See: www.nna-news.org/copyright/

More NNA reports at: www.nna-news.org/en/

The fight over raw milk: a matter of choice

By Christian von Arnim

DURHAM, Ontario (NNA) – A Canadian farmer was back in court today having to defend himself against charges of having sold raw (unpasteurised) milk in breach of the law.

Michæl Schmidt, who has been dubbed the “raw milk champion”, runs a biodynamic farm in Durham, Ontario, north-west of Toronto on which he has introduced an innovative scheme to allow consumers who wish to drink raw milk to do so without breaking the law.

Schmidt, who has a master’s degree in agriculture, has been battling for 16 years to legalise raw milk in Canada while the authorities have been doing their best to close his operation down.

While it is not illegal to drink raw milk in Canada, selling it is. So Schmidt came up with the idea of a cowshare programme in which any member of the public who wants to have legal access to raw milk can buy a share in one of his cows for 300 dollars. For this money Schmidt provides the service of looking after and milking the cow; what he is not doing is selling the milk or other products made from it.

Because of the share they have bought, the cowshare members are effectively drinking their own milk, which they are entitled do to under Canadian law.

In fact he has now extended the scheme into a farmshare cooperative “to better reflect the nature of our operation,” Schmidt says.

This David and Goliath battle nearly cost Michæl Schmidt is farm in the mid-1990s when he was charged and fined for providing unpasteurised milk to the public. After everything had been paid off, he was left with 100 acres of his 500 acre farm and three cows. But Schmidt did not give up and built up the farm again.

Then, in 2006, his farm was raided once more by inspectors from the Ministry of Natural Resources and Schmidt was again charged with distributing and selling raw milk, but this time he prevailed. Earlier this year, Justice of the Peace Paul Kowarsky at the Ontario Court of Justice acquitted him of all charges, agreeing with Schmidt that he was working within the confines of the law and that he had done everything in his power to comply with it.

One might have expected the matter to end there, but the Ontario authorities were not willing to give up their campaign to stop Schmidt and appealed the judgement on the grounds that the judge “misapprehended and misapplied evidence” and “erred in law”. Hence Schmidt was back in court on 24 June to deal with the appeal.

Underlying the action of the authorities in the first instance is, of course, the debate about the safety of raw milk. Opponents argue that only pasteurisation gets rid of the pathogens which can be found in untreated milk, while supports say that such pathogens are only introduced if the conditions in which the milk is produced are not completely hygienic – and that includes intensive animal husbandry to maximise milk production which, apart from anything else, place unnatural stresses on the cows.

Michæl Schmidt has his milk regularly tested and keeps scrupulously clean production facilities. As a biodynamic farmer, he also keeps his cows in the natural conditions which intensively farmed animals do not enjoy, which also promotes the safe production of raw milk. “Since 2006 we have provided approximately one million servings to our cowshare members without one single reported outbreak of sickness,” he says on the Glencolton Farms website.

What is more, he argues, he is being unfairly discriminated against: “In the meantime cold cuts from government inspected plants have killed over 20 people across Canada. Product recalls from government inspected plants with Listeriosis contamination continues until today. It is noteworthy that no charges have been laid, no ban of cold cuts has been implemented by Parliament and no armed raids take place in these plants,” he says with reference to the strong-arm tactics which were used against him by the authorities.

And that also raises a much wider issue which underlies Schmidt’s refusal to give up the fight, namely basic freedoms and equality before the law: “The increasingly aggressive stand of Government agencies to infringe on the basic right of individuals to make an informed decision for themselves and their children has forced us to be very concerned and on a continuous alert,” he says.

Many people consider raw milk to be beneficial to their wellbeing and health and what right has government to stop them making an informed decision as to what they want to eat and drink? In this sense it becomes a wider issue of basic human rights, Schmidt argues, and government’s attempts, influenced by corporate interests, unreasonably to restrict them.

“The rules and regulations imposed on all of us by fear, misled politics through the corporate lobby and under the banner of freedom and democracy are far beyond the limitations set by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights,” Schmidt argues in an open letter to “Dear Friends in Government and those who work for the Government” on The Bovine website.

“I and many others never gave anyone the permission to decide for us what to eat, what to drink and how to live. Neither will we impose on you our beliefs,” he says.

While “always open for constructive dialogue”, the game has changed: “Please do understand that in the future I cannot and will not anymore co-operate in any actions and proceedings, which are imposed on us IF you are violating our basic rights,” he warns.

“We have the choice to resist with love and determination. We are ready to enter into a new chapter of civil disobedience. There are many of us and there will be more to come as we proceed.”

Whatever the outcome of the appeal, Michæl Schmidt is clearly not going to lay down his unpasteurised milk pail quite yet.

END/nna/cva

Links: http://thebovine.wordpress.com, www.glencoltonfarms.com

Item: 100624-01EN Date: 24 June 2010

Copyright 2010 News Network Anthroposophy Limited. All rights reserved. See: www.nna-news.org/copyright/

More NNA reports at: www.nna-news.org/en/