Cabinet countdown?
Will it stay or will it go?
Amira Howeidy reviews the debate over the fate of Nazif's government
Can the famously autocratic, not to mention wealthy, cabinet of Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif survive the political and economic tension that is currently making Egypt headline news the world over? The question began to emerge on the politically cautious talk shows broadcast by privately owned Egyptian TV channels over the last week, spurred by the 6 April strike and the subsequent violence that rocked the northern industrial town of Mahala Al-Kubra.
The debate was kick-started by Al-Mehwar channel on Wednesday 9 April, a day after Nazif paid a surprise visit to Mahala and promised workers at the Misr Spinning and Weaving Company a month's bonus. It was then picked up on Saturday by Dream channel's popular 10 o'clock show, in which Press Syndicate Chairman Makram Mohamed Ahmed said that despite the seven per cent growth rate achieved by the Nazif cabinet the government had failed to engineer the kind of socially responsible policies that would allow for a trickle down effect. On the same programme Mahmoud Abdel-Aziz, a former chairman of the Federation of Banks, hailed the present cabinet as "the best since the 1952 Revolution".
Mumtaz El-Qott, the usually pro- government editor of Akhbar Al-Yom newspaper, waded into the discussions with a series of articles criticising the government which he began to run before the Mahala events. On Thursday 12 April he published a column under the title "The 'missed call' cabinet" arguing that the government's "belated and unsuccessful" handling of the 6 April strike made it "fully responsible" for the events of the past week. In the same issue the paper published a cartoon depicting a very tall Nazif standing next to two short men. One of them is carrying a mobile phone and tells the other: "We've called him a million times but he never picks up. It seems he's frozen. I'm afraid next time we call him he'll be out of service."
This is not the first time the four-year- old Nazif government has faced rumours of a major cabinet reshuffle. Last September President Hosni Mubarak intervened to quash fevered speculation, issuing a public statement saying he had continued faith in the performance of the government. Now, though, claims independent MP and editor of the weekly Al-Osbou paper Mustafa Bakri, things have changed. "The president is disappointed," claims Bakri, who is close to the ruling National Democratic Party's secretary-general and head of the Shura Council Safwat El-Sherif.
The changes began with the scarcity of subsidised bread two months ago and were compounded by last week's disturbances in Mahala. Now there is "serious concern" over the economic situation in Egypt, says Bakri, who points out that Mubarak was forced to call on the army and police force to supervise the production and distribution of bread "when the government failed to handle or anticipate the bread crisis".
"The president then requested that influential administrative control authorities provide him with an evaluation of the cabinet's performance and based on their feedback he now believes a cabinet reshuffle should take place."
According to Bakri, whose paper published devoted its entire front page story on the issue last Saturday, a reshuffle is inevitable. The question is when?
"An immediate reshuffle would have been ideal since it would help absorb public discontent but the cabinet still has to complete the budget so any change is unlikely before the end of the current parliamentary round in June," he argues. The violence in Mahala, though, where demonstrators chanted anti-government slogans for two days "might mean that a limited reshuffle could take place within a month while a full reshuffle could happen by November".
An informed source who requested anonymity told Al-Ahram Weekly that Mubarak is already considering new candidates for the post of prime minister and while nothing has been decided yet the inclination is to "stay away from businessmen".
When it was formed at the end of 2004 the Nazif cabinet attracted attention, and criticism, for including several influential businessmen. Supporters of the market- driven economy favoured by the cabinet argue that the government increased Egyptian exports by 22.8 per cent in the fiscal year 2007/2008 and, by passing investment-friendly laws, has almost doubled foreign investment in Egypt.
"This cabinet has made a lot of money for the state. Egypt's net reserves are now $33 billion," says Abdel-Meneim Said, head of Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies. "And wages have gone up by 12 to 13 per cent." The problem is that the 13 million Egyptians on fixed incomes, including government employees and pensioners, have not felt any benefits. "The government should improve their income, and it can afford to do so," he adds.
Critics of the government, though, question the realities that lie behind the attention grabbing statistics.
Hossam Eissa, a professor of law at Ain Shams University, told the Weekly that in calculating the growth rate officials included the proceeds from privatisation and the money from the sale of Egypt's third mobile phone licence. The resulting figure, he says, fails to reflect underlying growth since it includes so many one-off items. As for the unprecedented level of foreign reserves, Eissa points out that $33 billion is unlikely to last long given the rises in international commodity prices, including food. Egypt is the world's second biggest importer of wheat.
"Exports have increased," Eissa concedes, "but imports are running at LE33 billion while exports are just LE18 billion. It leaves a LE15 billion gap."
Earlier this week the World Bank forecast that international food prices will continue to rise for the next seven years. This does not bode well for Egypt, points out Eissa. "We already face a serious problem in food security given the absence of a responsible agricultural policy. At least 40 per cent of Egyptians live below the poverty line and 20 per cent suffer from liver disease."
"Any cabinet reshuffle that is not accompanied by a major change in policies that prioritises the expansion of agricultural production will be meaningless."