Healthy debate on privatisation rages in Kuwait's Parliament

A new law proposed in the Kuwaiti Parliament (Majlis Al Umma) on the privatisation of public outlets has witnessed stormy discussion and debate there. The following is a closer look at the issue and the debate that ensued.

Privatisation Law stirs argument

When it was presented for discussion, the Privatisation Law divided parliament into supporters and those who oppose it. A number of Members of Parliament criticised it sharply. Parliament members Musallam Al Barrak and Waleed Aljree said their refusal to pass the law stemmed from the fact that they feared that Kuwait would be 'sold out' to a minority at the expense of the majority.

Al Barrak added the "last party the government is concerned with is those with limited income. If the government is not able to run such utilities then the public should not carry the burden of such a failure. The easiest thing for the Minister of Finance is to give up his role as minister and hand over all the public sector departments to a private sector."

Member of Parliament, Khamees Uqaab, also agreed and said he refused to approve the law because he believed that the goal behind it was to 'sell the country' and 'steal the people's money' for the benefit of three or four people.

Uqaab bolstered his argument by pointing out how oil companies are employing 15,000 workers, of which only 1,000 are Kuwaitis. "This is a disaster for democracy. Do you wish to turn all Kuwaitis into sweepers and cleaners?". Uqaab's accusations and questions were directed at one of the oldest Members of Parliament, Abdallah Al Neibari.

Uqaab questioned Al Neibari's support for the law and how he had suddenly changed and become concerned about the rights of the Kuwaiti working class. He added: "There are those who do not like this country to prosper. There are also those who have accumulated huge amounts of wealth, this is a new creed that wants to take over the country by stealing its money."

In his defence, Al Neibari said he supported the law because it provided an organisational framework for the procedure. "There is no one in Parliament, and for that matter in the whole of Kuwait, who can match my sincerity in defending the rights of the Kuwaiti working class," he said. "I have always supported the need to find jobs for Kuwaiti nationals. Over the years, this has been my belief and my duty."

Al Neibari further said that no one could question his liberalism or his history in defending and working for the benefit of the working class in Kuwait. At this point, many members intervened and demanded that they be allowed to respond to Al Neibari, a request that was rejected by the Majlis president, Jassim Al Khrafee.

Reactions in the press

Turki Al Aazim, writing in Al-Rai Al-Aam, says it was expected that when a law such as the one on privatisation is discussed, a heated debate would ensue. He said it was commendable that member (Uqaab) raised his reservations regarding the law, but there was no need for him to have used words and accusations such as those he had in the debate, believes Al Aazim. All discussion, he said, should be governed by a moral and ethical framework.

Abdellateef Al Du'aij, writing in Al Qabas, says that the public display of emotion in Parliament hurt Al Neibari and other members as well as the concept of democracy, nationalism and liberalism which he claims to respect and belong to.

Al Du'aij added that Al Neibari has defined nationalism in his own terms. Any disagreement with such a definition would be as if one is laughing at democracy and an insult to the Parliament, according to Al Neibari's definition.

Al Neibari is not the same person he used to be years ago, says Al Du'aij. He still holds on to some beliefs and ideology. Yet these days he takes a stand against issues he used to defend in the past. This may be his right, but it is also his duty to give others a chance to criticise what they see as changes in the stance of a mentor and teacher. Those who have attacked him are indeed students of his philosophy and beliefs.

Everything changes and develops, believes Al Du'aij. It is good that Al Neibari's opposition has reminded him of how much he has changed and switched positions, although, in doing so, they have hurt the country's interests.

Ahmad Al Baghdadi, writing in Assiyasah, also strongly rejected the privatisation law. Reality has proven many times that the government is not concerned enough with the interests of the Kuwaiti national in terms of job security.

Many senior officials run government departments according to their moods. The government neither questions nor evaluates their performance, he said. How can we trust that the privatisation law will protect the Kuwaitis when we see with our own eyes what has taken place in the oil sector where Kuwaitis are a minority and their rights not protected? asked Al Baghdadi. This is a disaster for Kuwait's youth while the sons of wealthy families who will benefit from passing such a law should rejoice, he said.

Al Baghdadi admits that globalisation will forcefully bring privatisation into being and that in the end Kuwait is a third world country and will follow suit. But this does not mean that precautions should be taken to protect the dignity of Kuwaiti nationals in terms of having a decent job and to eliminate any discrepancies in society when unemployed numbers start increasing.

How can a government that is not concerned with public money be concerned with the issue of job security for Kuwaitis in the private sector? asks Al Baghdadi. This sector is not obliged to employ Kuwaiti nationals or train them to hold jobs.

Privatisation is a dangerous issue and cannot be ignored because it will be imposed. But there should be caution in discussing all the law's stipulations before it is passed. It is not a solution to throw people on the streets because of privatisation and a non-Kuwaiti takes the job instead of a Kuwaiti because of an unfair requirement to a job description called 'experience'. This is an insult to the Kuwaiti national, adds Al Baghdadi.

But Wael Al Hasawi, writing in Al-Rai Al-Aam, takes a different position. All modern states have opted to privatise their public utilities so as to advance and develop their economy, eliminate bureaucracy and stop squandering money.

But those that have claimed that privatisation is 'selling Kuwait' are also right, says Al Hasawi. Our experience in Kuwait has taught us that when government-owned establishments are privatised, a few individuals reap the financial benefits as it becomes a monopoly. When this happens, it will lead to the replacement of Kuwaiti national workers with cheaper labour so as to earn the highest profit from privatisation, he adds.

Al Hasawi says he considers the current debate on the pros and cons of the privatisation law a healthy one.

Kuwait's economy needs to be evaluated in terms of what it is and where it stands today. It should be overhauled and restructured completely before there can be any kind of talk about privatisation, says Al Hasawi.

Dr. Shamlaan Al Essa, writing in Assiyasah, described the debate in parliament as infertile. It showed that some parliamentary members are clue