“A NEW DEMOCRATIC SPRING?”

Remember the Prague spring when a bright spark, a hopeful beam of enlightenment shone briefly from the shadows of Soviet occupation, illuminating the true nature of Communist imperialism?

Comparisons have been made with recent democratic movements in the Middle East - an Arab spring?

History is on the move in the Middle East, the streets of Lebanon, an open Egyptian Presidential election, municipal elections in Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan and Iraq have had elections where the turnout of voters puts to shame many Western democracies, where the non-vote is the biggest party. OK, OK - it’s not a “done” thing, there’s a long road ahead. More dramatic, less reported, more organised and focussed are the changes being introduced in the smaller nations of the Gulf.

I recently discussed these issues at a conference on democracy and free trade in plucky, lucky Qatar. The issues raised and arguments held more were startling in their openness. Democracy is more than having a vote where the biggest tribe may win and that’s that. Voting is a necessary, irreplaceable part of democracy. Voting decides who is in Government, constitutions determine how Governments function. A true franchise which eventually gave women the vote is relatively new. Women didn’t have the vote in Britain when Churchill was first elected. Before full democracy in the West was achieved, institutions were built. Independent courts, professional civil service, property rights, free media, an active civil society - all these things make up a democracy. There are many types of democracies but all have in common the peaceful transfer of power through the will of the people. The best democracies have installed the concept of a loyal opposition. That is those who lose and those who seek power are loyal to the country, their opposition to their Government is not an act of treachery.

I was the Leader of the Opposition in New Zealand and said it was a splendid system when you were paid to overthrow the Government. This is hard to explain in some places. How to handle minorities is a difficult path to navigate in many societies which have deep differences in religion, race, language, and customs. Some seek solutions to ensure a majority does not overwhelm minorities by embracing Federal systems. Others seek proportional representation to ensure all opinions sit in Parliaments and no one party can easily have a majority. Proportional representation sometimes means candidates only mobilise their own communities, creating polarisation, sometimes provoking nationalism and tribalism. It’s not easy, clever little Mauritius has evolved a unique way of ensuring that their large Muslim, Hindu, and smaller Christian communities are represented in their Parliament. It’s called “the best loser” system, not the most snappy or dignified title. It means that individuals from different communities must seek support from across all groups. The best loser gets into Parliament by gathering the most votes in a constituency but doesn’t win the seat. A constitutional quota demands a certain number of members of Parliament from each community.

Once a hereditary King was seen as the polar opposite of democracy. Not so. Good Kings, operating within constitutional limits, have often in recent history preserved the constitution and democracy.

Economic democracy demands property rights, transparency and competition. Political democracy demands institutions, impartial bureaucracies that give fair and fearless advice, and then implements the will of the people through their elected leaders.

The other leg in this tripod of political and economic democracy is social democracy. That’s to ensure people have other freedoms - freedom from the fear of sickness, accidents, or old age. This creates social mobility so necessary in a modern society. The Gulf states will show the way, they are the small laboratories of change. There is however, an elephant in the living room, a dog that has yet to bark, that was not raised at the Doha Conference. Small states face a challenge unique in modern history. No independent nation has recently faced a demographic reality where guest workers outnumber, many times, local citizens. A democratic solution based on a vote by everyone is a non-starter. In some places it would be like the United Kingdom having 300 million guest workers and letting them decide Britain’s future. Sovereign nations will always preserve the right to decide who is a citizen. This issue strikes at the heart of National identity and social cohesion. That’s why it is a question of intense public and political controversy throughout the world. There is no crisis, no big problem ........ yet.