With parliamentary and presidential elections drawing ever closer the debate over the future of Egypt's political system, allegations that the office of president is about to be bequeathed, and criticisms of the government's performance are all reaching fever pitch. Ahead of the sixth annual conference of the ruling National Democratic Party, scheduled to open tomorrow, Assem El-Kersh and Mohamed El-Sayed speak with Alieddin Hilal, secretary-general of the NDP's Media Committee, about these and a host of other political issues How would you evaluate the party's achievements since the fifth annual conference? The past year has been exceptional. It has seen the global financial crisis, and was preceded by skyrocketing prices of food and oil. The government has achieved an annual growth rate of 4.5 per cent which is a good one when compared with the rates achieved in other countries. What is needed now is for Egypt to emerge from the current financial crisis quickly. As far as the electoral platform of President Mubarak is concerned, projects in many sectors have been accomplished, while projects in others have yet to be implemented. What will be the main task of the coming conference? The sixth annual conference has two main tasks. It must formulate a set of incentive programmes capable of getting the Egyptian economy out of the current economic crisis quickly. The government will continue investing in the economy over the coming five years. The challenge is to bring the economy back on track to achieve an annual growth rate of eight to 10 per cent. The second task is to engineer more equal distribution of the fruits of economic growth. Economic liberalisation has had a negative effect on social disparity. We want to promote a far greater trickle-down effect. That is why we are trying to improve conditions in the most deprived villages. LE9 billion has been allocated to implement drinking water and sewerage projects, mostly in rural and deprived areas. The funds earmarked for developing slum areas will be spent starting from this year. Supporting farmers is also a priority. These policies are aimed at protecting the poor and those on limited incomes. What are the main changes that have taken place in the NDP since 2005? The most important, though inconspicuous, change is the re-organisation of the party. We have re-ordered the party from within. We started under the 'New Thinking' banner in 2002. Since then we have changed the composition of the party's leadership. There have been organisational innovations such as the allocation in 2007 and 2009 of special seats for women and for young people per constituency. The result has been a 68 per cent turnover in membership of the party's committees and between 37 to 38 per cent change in the membership of municipal party units. There has also been a change in the party's leaders as senior ranks have been opened to the young. In addition, out of more than three million members, we have verified the membership of 1.5 million. The party's thinking has evolved. Decentralisation is now seen as key to political and administrative development. Our focus has changed, too, in terms of social and economic development. The empowerment of women is one pivotal change introduced by the party, reflected in the allocation of 64 seats for women in parliament. During the first two or three NDP conferences you wouldn't have been able to find sessions addressing social justice. The emphasis then was on investments and the private sector. The past three conferences have seen a growing interest in social justice issues. Are you satisfied with what has been achieved so far? If you look at the government's handling of the global financial crisis and the way it has minimised any negative impacts, then the answer is yes. The infrastructure is being developed. There is major expansion of the ports of Alexandria and Damietta. Yet the NDP remains the focus of a wave of criticism, to the extent that it often appears we are passing through an attack-the-party season. The NDP's ambitions and aspirations extend beyond the government and its performance. We always have the feeling that there is more for us to do, that many problems remain unsolved. People's dissatisfaction [with the government] is the result of the gap between their aspirations and what is possible. And it is not true that complaints come only from the poor. People who are many times richer than you are also complaining, and they do so because their ambition outstrips their abilities. Public discontent stems from relative, not absolute, deprivation. One result of the information revolution is that inevitably people compare their situation with that of populations abroad. The public needs to adopt a balanced view and not succumb to frustration. Do you think the NDP should better market its achievements? The government should better market its achievements. The party is initiator of policies, it proposes ideas and finds the resources the government may need through its majority in parliament. Through party support, for instance, the government can impose new taxes. But it is the government that is constitutionally accountable for its own performance. How do you see the ongoing debate over who will be the next president? To me it seems part and parcel of the open season on the NDP. Our annual conference begins on 30 October. In the preceding weeks it is only natural that NDP leaders should appear in the media to promote the party's agenda. And it is normal that their words should attract different reactions. If you look at the recently launched anti-presidential succession campaign you will find that none of the legalised parties is taking part. The only party member who has participated in the campaign is Tagammu's Abul-Ezz El-Hariri, and he did so as an individual, not as a representative of his party. The anti-bequest campaign looks suspiciously like it is being staged simply to attract attention and throw the spotlight on some [opposition] figures. Is the party sponsoring the counter campaigns defending the NDP and Gamal Mubarak? Any counter campaigns are individual initiatives with which the party has no connection. We sponsor some activities on the Internet like the party's own website, the Youth Who Love Egypt group, which has 20,000 members and a group called the NDP Friends, in addition to www.sharek.eg [which transmits live discussions with the party leaders]. The NDP is not responsible for every campaign that emerges in cyberspace. What is the party's position on the idea proposed by veteran political analyst Mohamed Hassanein Heikal that a board of trustees should be formed to formulate a new constitution? And why don't you discuss it at the party? I'd like to place the idea in a political context. It is an extension of the anti-bequest campaigns that have been adopted by a number of political movements and media organisations. These activities are either coordinated or else overlap with one another. You only need to glance at the headlines of newspapers like Al-Masry Al-Yom and Al-Shorouk to see they are the same. These campaigns are aimed at detracting attention from issues such as combating poverty, improving slum areas, supporting farmers and the cinema industry, proposed by the party for discussion at its annual conference. They seek instead to divert attention towards a debate of articles 77 and 76 of the constitution [that state the conditions and procedures of running for presidential elections and the number of terms a president shall remain in power]. The party will not be dragged into this. The NDP has its own agenda. We respect those who propose different views but we will not dance to the tunes of others. We will not let others set our agenda, formulated over the past 11 months by hundreds of experts, professors, journalists and civil society organisations. The party will not abandon its agenda to discuss subjects proposed by others. Heikal's idea ultimately withdraws legitimacy from all political institutions. The idea supposes that there is no constitution, parliament, or government, or else it assumes these institutions are illegitimate. It calls upon President Mubarak to establish a board of trustees charged with formulating a new political system, while [Minister of Industry and Trade] Rachid Mohamed Rachid and [Minister of Finance] Youssef Boutros Ghali assume responsibility of running the government. If President Mubarak implemented this idea it would be an abrogation of the constitution, which is the president's only source of legitimacy. President Mubarak was elected in compliance with the 1971 constitution. Should he adopt Heikal's suggestion his legitimacy as president would be undermined. He would be ruling courtesy of the force of the military. If this idea were put into practice, what would the people Heikal suggested should be on the board do about the second article of the constitution dealing with the status of religion in society? We respect the views of others, but Heikal's is a theoretical and unrealistic idea that violates the constitution. I'd be willing to bet LE1,000 that if you asked the first 500 people you met on the street to name the most pressing problems facing Egypt not one of them would answer Article 77. Some figures have the habit of claiming they speak in the name of the people while conveniently forgetting to furnish any evidence that might back up the claim. The elite habitually promotes its own priorities as if they are identical with the majority's. But does this not leave the NDP open to accusations that it is itself posing as the guardian on the people? No. I said that I respect everyone's right to speak their mind and I acknowledge the right of the press to debate these ideas. Talk shows on satellite channels discuss these issues endlessly. What I am saying is that no one has the right to impose his agenda on me. As the 2011 presidential elections draw closer everyone seems to be talking about them, on satellite channels, in the press, everywhere. Yet the NDP has remained conspicuously silent. Do you want me to believe that reflecting public opinion is the exclusive preserve of independent newspapers and talk shows? They reflect only the preoccupations of the gossips. These media outlets promote the interests of their owners. It would be naive to believe that they do not have their own agenda. What I want to stress is that there will not be constitutional void, or chaos, as some people claim. Egypt is a country where institutions reign. It is a mistake to believe that the state is weak. If the state wants to prevent public protests, it is capable of doing so. Whatever protests take place do so with the prior consent of the state. When the state decided not to let demonstrations leave university campuses it was able to do so. When it banned demonstrations from Al-Azhar Mosque, it was capable of implementing the ban. If you look at the way power has changed hands in Egypt since Mohamed Ali, you will find out that it has done so according to institutional rules. The 1952 Revolution was staged by one of the state apparatuses -- the military. It was not the result of chaos or of a public explosion. When asked about when the party will name its candidate for presidency, the ready answer given by party leaders is that it's premature to talk about this. Is there any timeframe for nominating a presidential candidate? The party is preoccupied with its annual conference. Members are busy selecting the NDP's candidates for the Shura Council and People's Assembly elections. When this process is finished, when we have seen whether NDP candidates win the support of the people, when we know the presidential candidates of other political parties, then the party will nominate its own candidate according to its statute. An ad hoc conference will be organised to elect the party's nominee through a secret ballot. Any member of the party's Supreme Council can run. Obviously, if President Mubarak declares that he will seek a new term, then he will be the NDP's candidate. What has happened to the anti-terrorism law, the political rights law and the local governance law, all of which were included in President Mubarak's electoral platform? The local governance bill is pending but we must wait for an atmosphere more conducive to its enforcement. Cadres are not yet qualified to enforce the law. Having said this decentralisation is one of the NDP's core policies. As far as the anti-terrorism draft law goes, we are seeking to accommodate the criticisms levelled by opposition parties who claimed, when the legislation was first mooted, that it would serve only to constitutionalise the current emergency law. What conditions should the Muslim Brotherhood meet in order to form a political party? The Muslim Brotherhood has never applied for a licence to form a political party. If they abide by the constitution, then there is no problem. But any would- be party should not have a religious reference. I am against using religion as a political tool. I'm also against seeking legitimacy via religion. Every example of situations in which religion has been enmeshed with politics has resulted in the corruption of both. How, I would ask, in the 21st century, can a group argue that a Copt or a woman is not entitled to run for presidency?
