BRINGING TOGETHER MPS AND BUSINESS
fishing trip. It is critical to Dialogue Centres that no one feels threatened or that they are going to lose face. As a participant in the process, the Governor of Tusheti came to understand that engaging with the Dialogue Centre was beneficial to all parties involved, and could be a useful process for him.
Chechnya and Dagestan. In general, all Dialogue Centres build up the good will of a network of people who can provide pro bono assistance. In this case, we persuaded the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe to provide a flight in a helicopter they used to patrol the border of the conflict area, and the British embassy to pay for the fuel. As a result the journey took 45 minutes instead of nine hours by road and we secured a full complement of committee Members for the visit. Next we had to gain the confidence of the Governor of Tusheti who was deeply apprehensive and suspicious of interacting with Parliamentarians and wanted to divert everyone to a
Tushetians, like most mountain people, are self-sufficient and know exactly what would help them overcome their problems. It was therefore not difficult to find individuals willing to speak who would not be intimidated by the circumstances and could involve the committee Members in the realities of the situation in Tusheti. The approach we used in Georgia was like a select committee of inquiry. In general, we use parliamentary procedures in programmes whenever we can, as often it helps to strengthen the procedure of a Parliament in transition. In this case, the issues raised in the Georgian Dialogue Centre were all economically based, ranging from restrictive procurement regulations requiring the large army base to buy all its foodstuffs from the capital instead of locally, to the local administration allegedly pocketing the money provided by the government to keep the roads passable in the winter.
In the final analysis, it is the
Parliamentarians and entrepreneurs or civil society representatives using the Dialogue Centre who will achieve the outcomes. In Georgia, they showed a review of issues through a Dialogue Centre can achieve practical benefit:
1) Regulatory changes were made in Parliament enabling the purchase of food by the army locally.
2) A transparent tender process for the annual road renovation and clearance was established resulting in the road being open for much longer,
benefiting family’s incomes.
3) For the first time, the Tusheti villages were provided with first aid medical kits.
4) For the first time the region was provided with an ambulance.
5) The Governor’s office provided U.S.$5,000 to fund a pipeline construction for a micro hydro power station to generate power to the region.
6) A bridge is being constructed over the River Shenko by the Ministry of Defence and the Governor’s office.
7) New staff appointments have been made to the national park personnel, more in tune with the problems of Tusheti.
8) A non-governmental organization, the Union of the Development of High Mountainous Regions, has been created.
9) As a result of their observer status, the French embassy has funded a local nursery; and
10) Proposed legislation changing the historic boundaries, a sensitive issue, will be reviewed.
Driven by principles As a number of Parliamentarians have recognized, the process was as important as the outcome. For the first time, MPs experienced how they could be effective economic champions for a region and could see very practical outcomes to their work. “I am delighted that the European Union supports the development of the Business and Parliament Scheme of Georgia as a transferable model for other emerging democracies,” said HE Mrs Nino Burjanadze, then Chair of the Georgian Parliament. “Economic and democratic development should go hand in hand. I support the work that Dialogue International has been doing to build the capacity of Parliaments around the world,” said Mr Henry Bellingham, MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
State in the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office responsible for Africa, the United Nations, Overseas Territories and Conflict Issues
Dialogue Centres in
established or new democracies adhere to the Code of Principles developed by the first six Dialogue Centres from the U.K., Belgium, Holland, New Zealand, Sweden, Finland and Spain. Participating businesses and
Parliamentarians give an undertaking to their respective Parliamentary Boards to adhere to it. It has been recognized by the EU and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Parliamentary Assembly as a benchmark in transparent, non- corrupt relationships between enterprise and politicians.
• The programmes are independent and non-partisan.
• The programmes are mutually educational and informative.
• The participants must receive no fee nor be liable for any expenses related to the programme.
• The participants undertake to honour the time commitment required by the study programme.
• The participants undertake not to promote partisan views while on a programme.
• The Dialogue Centres support those outside the Parliament in being actively engaged in the democratic process in a legitimate, non-corrupt and transparent way.
• Enterprises undertake not to use their participation for lobbying.
• The programmes ensure that enterprises undertake to be as open and frank as possible.
• Participants undertake to keep in confidence anything of a sensitive nature; and
• It is the responsibility of each national organization to monitor its programmes and to ensure their quality.
The Parliamentarian | 2011: Issue Four | 325
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160