The Tribune

TO FOLLOW up our online editorial earlier this week about developing events in Catalonia, we look today at the affect on democracy of globalisation and political and economic centralisation in an increasingly interdependent world.

It can be reasonably contended that people accept that they need to work together with others in order to survive and prosper, with all contributing to a common good. But somebody has to be in control to make things happen. Democracy has been shown to work most effectively within a defined territory where people have similar interests and are prepared to be bound by a common set of laws formulated by elected representatives answerable to the people concerned. In this way a nation is built.

Despite the influence of vested interests, most agree that, in principle, it is desirable for decisions to be taken as closely as possible to the people they affect and that decision-makers should be directly accountable for their actions. However, globalisation has meant the gradual centralisation of political and economic power as well as the rise of supra-national institutions and international conventions and organisations regulating cross-border activity.

This is designed to bring order and stability to the world and appears to be beneficial. But one unintended consequence has been increased concern and resentment amongst ordinary people who feel detached and excluded in the face of decisions by unidentifiable and unaccountable bureaucrats.

The impetus for globalisation has been partly the ‘new world order’ proclaimed by the first President Bush in 1990 which was originally a call for universal or global governance and unification of the world economy. The proliferation of supra-national institutions imposing obligations on individual countries takes power away from ordinary people since the emphasis is on avoiding conflict and achieving stability rather than strengthening democracy as an aim.

As such, proponents of globalisation look askance at secessionist and separatist movements within recognised states that are fuelled not only by resentment of the inequalities caused by the process but also by political grievances and resulting antagonism towards governments. However, with so much current conflict – to name just a few, anarchy in Somalia, Libya and parts of the Middle East and demands from the Palestinians and the Kurds in Iraq, as well as Catalonia, for independence – the prospect of any form of world government is surely remote.

Theoretically, international treaties, conventions and agreements should not supersede national laws. But smaller countries in particular do not generally have the capacity, resources or even the will to question systematically the substance of new international obligations or to resist their imposition insofar as individual nations are affected by them.

The debate about globalisation can, therefore, appear purely academic to us here in The Bahamas since we are ill-equipped to do battle on the international stage, though we need always to be fully aware of our commitments and responsibilities at that level.

It behoves us, however, to do what we can in our own country to improve our level of democracy by pushing decision-making as close to the people as possible and ensuring governmental accountability on all fronts.

In these columns on Wednesday we drew attention to the poor condition of our capital city and to the need for a major rethink about how it should be run, in particular the importance of identifying and determining responsibility and accountability. Given the current confusion, the key must be to establish a local authority and a mayor directly involved at the local level and with responsibility for all aspects of the city’s activity. Dependent as we are on tourism for our livelihood, this should be top of the government’s agenda.

At the same time, we urge the government, which now has its feet under the table after some five months in office, to take a hard look at devolving power and responsibility across-the-board to levels closer to the people throughout our nation.

Greater development of local decision-making in an archipelagic state such as ours, with some local island communities far removed from the capital, should be a priority. Proper funding of local authorities may be difficult at this stage as the government seeks to improve the country’s poor fiscal position left by the PLP administration, but that should not deter it from starting to consider how such a process might work for the benefit of all.

Even if, as a small island state, we lack power and influence on the world stage, in the interests of democracy we should be more inclusive at the local level in our own country. We need now to recognise the importance of this and take action accordingly.