Author: Gabriela Dale

We’re voting for a president not for peace

 

Let’s be more than single issue voters. Peace, yes – but what else?

In these elections we’re not really talking about peace, but instead the ‘destruction/demobilization’ of the guerilla groups.

This is a pretty limited view of what the word peace means, and while, yes it is a key consideration in these elections, we must not forget that peace has been the buzz word for every election for about the last 100 years. Read more…

Colombia`s paradise complex

bandera

These past weeks I have followed the National Agrarian strike and protests from abroad. The protests and blockages might have been lifted, but the problem is not going to go away.

But it won’t go away not because the issue is too big or complicated, but because Colombian politics are not effective at solving the nation`s problems or resolving her conflicts. Good government is based in pro-active, initiative taking behaviours. What we have in Colombia is a “rhetoric of paradise”. We have pie in the sky instead of public policy.

Paradise is the promised land; in many ways paradise is a place, but is it a place of fiction?

Ask any Colombian about the FARC, drug production and smuggling, poverty or even the agrarian strike and instead of engaging in conversation or debate we deflect any serious answer into an advertisement to visiting Colombia.

We don’t have a culture of political dialogue.

People shy away from having, or expressing opinions. We are perhaps scared of debate and conflict as a nation because of our history, but we need to have practice. If we are not encouraged to comment and give opinions on the crisis we will not learn how to deal with people or groups that disagree with us – this can be at a personal level or within government.

Our culture of deflection also weakens any potential for accountability of government. Take for example Santos’ early morning speech last Thursday.  Rather than focusing on policies and measures that will appear as concessions to farmers and peasants, he repeatedly commented on how the strike was affecting Colombia’s image. He said he did not want to give the wrong impression to the outside world who are gathering in Medellin in 2015 for the World Tourism Summit.

He is allowed as president to use this as an argument because as Colombians it is what we do every day. Of course we do it as a coping mechanism as it gets too much to engage in serious debate every time somebody ask you where you are from. But it is no longer just a coping mechanism but a good example of how we see the solutions to our problems as a country not within or reach, unable to influence and even comment on what is happening.

As Colombians we are proud of our country and that is why we want to tell people all about the good things. How bio-diverse we are, how happy we are as a nation and even how some people believe we are the nicest people on the planet. However can we talk about paradise before arriving?

The best way of becoming the nation we want is by participating as citizens to keep the government´s decisions and policies accountable.

Give people like the farmers and peasants the chances and platforms to voice their grievances, listen to their proposed solutions. Yes, dialogue and negotiation are long term and will involve political and emotional investment from the country, but is it not worth it when thinking that being able to talk proudly of our country is not a deflection or an alternate reality but rather the truth?

So let`s be honest, let`s talk about our problems and start to find their solutions.

Colombia, a country without memory?

historiaGR

I have recently fallen prey to ‘La Pola’ a historical drama, cum soap opera, cum series which first appeared on Colombian TV in 2010. It tells the story of the life of Policarpa Salavarrieta, who was one of the few female leaders of the Independence movement in Colombia. Even though I am clearly a bit slow to get on the bandwagon it has made me think about the way history in Colombia has been and is being written. And as I was writing this piece, the news broke that Alvaro Uribe Velez had been voted the greatest Colombian – as did the following backlash.

The old saying goes that “history is written by the winners” and this is certainly true in the Colombian case.  Take for example Independence. It has traditionally been thought that Independence returned the Colombian nation to its original state, a ‘state of sovereignty’. Popular history too, like ‘La Pola’, also make the claim Colombia already existed.

This however is not only unlikely but anachronistic.The idea of the nation-state was only being developed abroad.

Independence marked the point at which the Colombian nation began to be developed and created, not the point in which we returned to the natural state.

Of course there is good reason why history is remembered in the way it is. In the two centuries following Independence we have forged a national identity whose potency is greater if it reaches back to a time before colonization and before independence. The interpretation of history, and of course the writing of history, defines national identity and memory.

To give the “Pola” series credit, it successfully deals with many of the dimensions of history, from the representation of minorities within history (women, afro-colombians) very differently to the way mainstream history approached the period.

This led me to think of more contemporary events and the way history is being written now. I have always had a feeling that time in Colombia goes by faster and because of this people forget events with a certain haste. There is a sense that in fact nobody is writing history.

Semana Magazine even ran an article this week which included “historical alzheimers” in the title, referring to the election of Uribe Velez as the “greatest Colombian in history”. But why is this the case? Perhaps there is too much history, too many massacres, too many deaths to keep records and tolls. Perhaps everyone is too busy with their personal survival and safety to be able to worry about the wider picture. Perhaps it is all a bit too much, and it is a bit too difficult (both physically and emotionally) to put down in paper all the happenings of the last hundred years.

They say that Colombians are some of the happiest people on earth, and perhaps our willingness to forget has something to do with this.

The thing is, no one really forgets. But by not sharing and not commemorating we are running the risk that events will not be remembered in the future, and in many ways that is when they will matter.  This idea reminds me of a quote by a great British Parliamentarian, Edmund Burke, who said: “Society is a contract between the past, the present and those yet unborn”.

As “the present”, we have both a responsibility to commemorate past events and record contemporary ones for posterity. Many argue that in the case of the violent conflict that has plagued Colombian life, politics and history for the past 60 years, we should wait for peace to arrive in order to revise the events historically. However as a country we are already making history and setting a precedent for not remembering. We should avoid history being written by the victorious, since it will take about 100 years for an eager revisionist historian to figure out that the story perhaps wasn’t as one-sided.

Remembrance is also a key to justice, and as the prologue to the new “Ley de Victimas” cites: “Reparación, justicia y paz son, pues, requisitos indispensables e inescindibles para la terminación definitiva de un conflicto armado” (Reparation, justice and peace are indispensable and inseparable for the definitive end to the armed conflict). For many of the families who have lost relatives in the period, the Ley de Victimas might be the first step towards recognition of injustice, and in many ways one of the first moves at recording our difficult past and present. However this law may also be the first step towards the “winners” finally writing history and thus the experiences and suffering of the minorities in Colombian history being undermined, if not forgotten.

Perhaps the way forward can be found in history itself. Every 11th of November Remembrance Day is celebrated in the UK. It now commemorates the lives lost in British Wars, but it originally started as a date that marked the end of WWI. After the war there was a huge social movement towards the building of monuments erected in almost every town around the country, marking the names of the people from those towns that had lost their lives. This was also replicated by companies who raised monuments in the memory of their employees. Another form of remembrance that appeared was the grave of the Unknown Soldier, a monument that acknowledges the impossibility of keeping all records, and in the case of Colombia, could ensure objectivity and avoid the term “victim” being applicable to only one side.

We too can learn from this form of commemoration that has now become tradition. Of course it will not be the same, and in many ways it will transform into a form of commemoration that will suit our own history. Perhaps time has come for Colombia’s own Remembrance Day, a day in which we can remember, a day that will force us all not to forget. History can be taken into the hands of the witnesses and the victims, not just the winners. Peace will not arrive if we forget our troubles and forget what brought conflict along, peace will come from acknowledging our past and coming to grips with it. As Colombians, we should feel a responsibility to remember.

Picture, colombia.com

Colombian welfare: Family Subsidy by the Box

cajas

In Spanish there´s no literal translation for “benefits” but in Colombia there are policies and institutions that work for citizens’ welfare. But if the welfare state is a mature beast in European nations like Britain, Colombia is nurturing a new-born; and the truth is, her policies and funding remain to be decided.

Nevertheless, Colombia´s welfare system deserves attention, and demystifying. And so this article will focus on a policy at the heart of the new politics of welfare – the ‘Cajas de Compensación Familiar’ (which roughly translates as ‘Cashdesks of Family Compensation’).

The ‘Cajas de Compensación’ came into being in 1956 as a type of non-profit cooperative to which businesses are legally obliged to affiliate their workers. Business contributes 4% of its payroll to the ‘Caja de Compensación’ which in turn gives the workers subsidies in money, physical subsidies (such as food, clothes, medicine, text books, etc.), or subsidies in services (such as access to recreation facilities, holiday facilities, education scholarships, loans, and subsidised housing).

The scheme was originally obligatory only for medium-sized and large businesses, but now a business with only one employee has to affiliate its workers. And the model which was originally created for a limited number of industries, has been expanded to cover the public sector and agricultural industry.

The “cajas” are institutions that have not only survived Colombia´s economic, political and social crises of the past 50 years, but have grown and expanded into different areas of business and services.

Perhaps their longevity is down to the fact that because they are legally non-profit businesses, they are also tax exempt, which allows money to be re-invested into improved provision of services and allows many workers to access facilities that would be out of reach if they were privately owned and managed.

This is where the genius of this system lies: By being both a private but non-profit enterprise this area of social security has been protected from the worst economic downturns and has been able to maintain its service.  Crucially, the cajas have also been able to direct investment according to the country’s needs without being a slave to the political compass.

As with the health service provision, by maintaining their identity as private businesses, the cajas work under a competitive framework which ensures that their services are being continuously improved and diversified.

The cajas´success has led the institutions to grow their services, with social housing provision being one the fastest growing areas. Whilst the cajas fund the construction of the housing, the government provides funding for workers who earn up to as much as four times the minimum legal monthly salary. To a worker earning the minimum monthly wage, the government will provide funding of as much as 16% of the total cost of a new house.

In 2003 the cajas were chosen to provide the unemployment subsidies introduced that year, also helping to provide financial assistance to heads of family who find themselves out of work.

This new “benefit” is imperfect, it takes on average 6 months to apply and be authorized the subsidy, the funds are finite and provided by the FONEDE (Fondo para el Fomento al Empleo y Protección del Desempleo/Fund for the Promotion of Employment and Protection for Unemployment), and it is only available to those affiliated in the past 3 years (and to a caja for at least 12 months). This leaves the long-term unemployed vulnerable and informal workers completely unable to access both the cajas and subsidies of this sort.

An unlevel playing field?

Cajas´ tax free constitution means they have been criticised for holding an unfair advantage over fully private entities when providing recreation, tourism, credit banking services. This is a clear flaw, but it would be to throw the baby out with the bath water to react by transferring the cajas´ services to the state, as some propose.

The purpose, mission and vision of the cajas is not the creation of profit but rather social welfare.  And as the budgets remain independent from the national Treasury, the cajas are an efficient and successful provider of welfare.

Yes, Dignity of life is a state responsibility, but the Colombian government has been able to outsource this to its advantage. Citizen welfare is not and does not have to burden the state.

Independent from government, the cajas and their budgets have not been the pawns of political parties or politicians. Despite years of conflict and economic downturn, these services remain afloat, providing much-needed relief for employees even when the country and the state was failing.

Welfare for all?

A concern lies in accountability. In providing a multitude of services under the umbrella of the cajas, the middle class and upper working class are afforded a certain stability which those who are unemployed or informally working will not be able to achieve.

What the ‘Cajas de Compensación’ show us is that instead of a horizontal expansion of services, what is really needed is to make these services available to different sectors of the population, in other words, make their expansion vertical.

Nevertheless the use of cajas in welfare provision has been an innovative policy and one that has been sustainable and efficient.

Perhaps we are on the right path – we just need to feed a welfare system suffering from stunted growth.

Photo, ColFenalco

The Colombian ‘Welfare’ System: Healthcare

f8cb9749-428a-4b54-86c6-bbfc59c11705_zps6532b1a4

I have always thought that in many ways most of the problems related to underdevelopment in Colombia are due to an inferiority complex suffered by much of Latin America. Even though as Colombians we are proud patriots, we shrug our shoulders in embarrassment when it comes to questions about the government’s foreign policy or our view of the nation´s institutions. We like to believe that there are certain things that we don’t do well, and that we probably will never do them as well as those first world, ultra-developed global powers.

How, then do we see the country’s welfare system? What do we think about policies on healthcare, education, benefits and housing? Are they as bad or as good as we like to think, and how do they compare with the offer in other nations?

Opinions about the welfare system as a whole are neither black nor white, but mostly a shade of grey. For example, it is not hard to hear politicians, the media or even family and friends praise our health system while, in the same sentence, expressing disdain for policies on housing, or just as easily, vice versa.

This article is the first in a series looking into the workings of the Colombian ‘Welfare’ system, its strengths and its weaknesses. Today, we´ll look at the state of healthcare – both that provided by the state, and the private sector in the wider context.

Much of what the health services provide now are based on the infamous Ley 100, which was passed in 1993 as a top-up law to the 1991 Constitution. The first thing to know about healthcare in Colombia is that it is plagued with the most confusing set of acronyms which are widely used by the media and politicians (beware of the EPS, IPS, ARL and POS).

What is different about healthcare provision in Colombia is that is intimately linked to employment law and conditions. Healthcare in Colombia works through an insurance system that is provided both by private and public companies in order to avoid one sector gaining the monopoly over it, and this in turn has ensured competition and a high standard of service.

The Entidades Promotoras de Salud (Health Promoting Entities) ‘EPS’ are the insurers, who then supply services when they are needed through Instituciones Prestadoras de Salud ‘IPS’ (Health Providers). The EPS contribution, or insurance, is part of any employees salary and an employer has to affiliate its employees to an EPS by law.

This is not only effective as a means of covering a large proportion of the population, but furthermore it is a cunning plan by the government, since most of the funding for this comes from employers, not from the treasury. As a top-up measure to this system, there is optional private pre-paid healthcare which is provided by the same EPS companies, this gives some the opportunity to access separate facilities.

However there are many problems with the system. The close relation between the healthcare system and employment law has both positive and negative effects. Big labour groups in Colombia have gained access to healthcare as their work is standardised, forcing employers to make their work legal and official while the flip side of this principle is the growth of the informal labour sector. And as with many aspects of life in Colombia, there is a sharp difference between the healthcare provision between rural and urban areas; for example, infrastructure deficits makes access to hospitals and doctors tricky for the more rural populations.

Another problem is access for the elderly, the unemployed and the poorest sections of society. Whilst healthcare provision for the elderly is closely linked to the pension programme, it is not as clear for the unemployed (but we will deal with this more closely in a future article on benefits), leaving this significant group particularly vulnerable.

Even though it is far from perfect it is a system that can be improved and reformed with relative ease when compared to, say, the UK or the US . We have not gone as far as the British with welfare reform, but our has been a process of compromise, perhaps in the name of the national purse (a wise move when looking at the bills the UK National Health Service generates). At the same time, unlike the US, we already have taken the “big steps” towards a fairer system that can actually  ensure dignity of life for the majority of the population.

The state has a long way to go to provide fair and efficient welfare coverage. But we do have a sustainable system that will not break the bank.

As the middle class continues to grow, if it does, pre-paid healthcare will as well, and thus there will be less pressure on the basic EPS, allowing them better to treat sectors, such as the unemployed. The short term alternative is to spend a bigger proportion of the budget on healthcare, and thus swallowing up spending from somewhere else.

We will only know it has become a truly successful system, when our system becomes something we´re proud of, not something we assume is done better elsewhere.