PERU: Desarrollo Local con Democracia en Santo Domingo

PRIMERA PARTE:

SEGUNDA PARTE:

TERCERA PARTE:

VENEZUELA: Direct Democracy - The Case of the Consejos Comunales

Venezuelan Direct Democracy – The case of the Consejos Comunales

November 21st 2008, by Michael Albert and Adam Gill - ZNet
Source: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3967

In 2004, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez created a movement named the consejos comunales (communal councils) aimed at creating more responsive local governance by handing local budgetary and legislative power to the councils. This movement was seen by Chavez as one of the most important of the five motors of the ‘Bolivarian Revolution' in that they should influence policy from the grassroots upwards. Great interest in the councils was evident between 2004 and 2007 in that thousands formed quickly and $5 Billion was given to them during this period. Communal banks are a pre-requisite to receiving funds from the government so as to avoid clientalistic relationships of dependency.

Local councils have the power to vote on issues directly affecting their community and have used this to make significant changes. Major improvements have included building social housing and repairing roads. The local councils are formed with 200-400 families with members aged 15 and above and have an executive council and representatives of groups within the community.

I asked Michael Albert if he might be able to offer his opinion on this movement in Venezuela.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you feel the role of the Communal Councils is strategically and politically?

Well, I believe they are partly intended, in the present, to push forward the whole revolutionary process by increasing current participation, raising consciousness, etc.

But I also believe that for a great many folks in Venezuela, both inside and outside the government, the councils are the evolving infrastructure of a new polity. The idea is that people should govern their own lives, and in that context local councils are the proposed vehicle for doing it. As such, they are intended to become an alternative to rather than just being an adjunct to local governments of mayors and governors and the like.

Would you say the councils have created social change or more that their energies are being pulled in other directions?

I don't feel very equipped to answer this question, and I am not entirely sure, in any case, what you mean by "other directions." I can judge only from a very great difference and based on talks with only a limited number of people what the councils are up to.

My impression, and it is tentative, is that the councils are a vast and evolving experiment and project, by no means final in form and by no means fully up to speed, but coming along, though many problems still exist. First, for example, there is a population which - like our population in the U.S - has almost zero experience prior to this experiment with serious democracy much less participatory self management. So the councils and their members are learning in practice, and for many people that has ups and downs. But second, and less benign, there are obstacles as well having to do not only with past habits or current doubts, but also with real opposition, as in local governing and corporate elites not wanting this experiment to work.

Venezuela seems to me to be uniquely seeking a gigantic revolution in structures and relations - not just economically but also politically, socially, culturally - all non violently and even without much confrontation, none provoked by the agents of change. That is historically ambitious, to say the least.

So in one corner you have corporate media continuing, and corporate ownership in many realms, and governors and mayors and whatnot from the prior history of the country, all also still in place, nearly all still hoping to resurrect that prior history. In the other corner you have the Bolivarian activists, and Chavez, and a large proportion of the non elite population, instead trying to escape that past into something fundamentally new.

Venezuala is, in other words, a daily economic, political, social, and cultural cauldron of experiment and opposition - and thus a site of intense struggle. Or that is how I see Venezuela, at any rate, and in that context the local communal councils are partly a tool of the struggle but are also partly seeds of a new future being built in the present.

Should Communal Councils be free of political party influence?

This depends, I think, on what you mean by party influence. So, for example, it wouldn't make sense to say there should be no party influence. Imagine a council with people in it, of course. Some people are in one party, some people are in another party. The parties they are in influence those people's desires (and vice versa). The people then bring their desires to the councils, so through their members the parties influence the councils as well. That much is fine, in my view. It would make no sense to say that shouldn't occur.

So, for example, there are councils in communities that are very Bolivarian, and they have views and aims quite like those of the Bolivarian revolution. There are other councils in communities that are opposed to Bolivarian projects, and those councils reflect those opposition views. The parties are in part carriers of the views and the people form parties, in turn, influence the councils.

On the other hand, I think you might mean should parties as entities be able to themselves direct or otherwise impact councils, other than by the fact of their members indirectly doing so. Here I think the answer is no, they should not be able to do that.

Your question is a bit like asking, in the U.S., should local government (just imagine, for the sake of the discussion, that it was actually grassroots and participatory) be in any way at all subject to instruction or control by political parties (other than being impacted by the local members of the community who happen to be in parties)? Well, of course it shouldn't, and ditto for Venezuela. A party should impact councils simply by impacting the population that composes the councils, but not by some sort of collective or structural authority.

Do you think that party influence and political movements still operate as clients of central governments?

I am not sure I understand this question. In Venezuela, at present, the Bolivarian revolution is very much a manifestation of the ideas and will of President Chavez. We might prefer that the movement had bubbled up, instead, from the population, and that Chavez was merely one among many carriers of their intentions - but that isn't the case. In fact, Chavez is constantly trying to impact what the population thinks and wants, not just to hear from it. The government is not only administering Venezuela, as it is seeking to use state power as a tool to build social involvement and activism. It is very unusual, of course.

So in that context, the recently created revolutionary party Chavez is in is certainly affected greatly by him, as are the social movements whose members typically consider him a repository of valuable ideas and plans, as is the government. Again, this is arguably not an optimal picture, and it is certainly an unusual one - a president seeking to build movements that will replace authorities, including the old government structures, including himself - at least that's the current agenda - throughout the country - but that is what is happening, or so it seems to me, from my admittedly limited contact.

Can the Communal Councils in your opinion, become the only form of local government in Venezuela? What obstacles do you perceive to be happening now and possibly in the future?

I certainly think that is possible, and that that is the goal, not just conceivable, at least in many people's minds, including in the relevant political ministries. I sat in offices and heard them explain their hopes for these councils becoming the seat of governing power throughout the country, describing the 50,000 councils that were needed - with about 30,000 currently formed - and describing the gains in confidence and methods also needed within the councils, and explaining that yes, these would be above majors and governors and even the President. So, yes, having them be the primary locus of government power is the aim. Might that aim be swept aside as a goal? Sure, it might. But it also might come true as a reality.

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL ARTICLE

VENEZUELA: The Struggle Continues

The following article dicusses some of the stumbling blocks in the process of bringing participatory democracy to Venezuela, while recognizing that the country is slowly advancing the transition of power and control of resources to the people. - Editor








Sounds of Venezuela: Part 8
Grass Roots Democracy

by Ron Ridenour / October 25th, 2008
Source: http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/10/sounds-of-venezuela-part-8/

Participatory democracy: people actively organizing in the communities and attending meetings where local issues are discussed and solutions are proposed and voted on—is a major element of the Bolivarian Revolution. By August 2007, 2.2 million citizens were organized in 25,000 community councils (CC). In February 2008, community councils, their elected spokespersons and municipal officials and advisors engaged in lively meetings to evaluate progress and lay a course for the future. These meetings were followed by gatherings of two of the three largest and most important political parties backing this process: the new PSUV and Venezuela’s oldest, the Communist Party (PCV). I attended some of these events.

In Las Mercedes district, where I lived, nearly 100 members of five CCs gathered at a local hall. A large majority were women, mostly 40 years old and over. They met to consolidate their social organizing and take a position on a structural change proposal. Direct participation had allowed each CC to take individual directions but this was leading to a bit of chaos: differences in how to use resources, what programs took priority, which CC should house the local bank that distributes the funds allocated for community councils. Most of these funds come from the federal government, some from municipalities. These authorities were proposing that the structure be changed to accommodate a bit of centralization and control, which could lead to greater effectiveness.

I was surprised and impressed with how people openly complained about the failure of the municipal government to disseminate adequate information and provide basic training for community leadership and organizers, and about how people’s admiration for Chavez did not hinder several in objecting to the new proposal. A few rose in opposition to the mancomunidades proposal, which would bring several CCs inside an umbrella body that would work with authorities from “above” the individual CCs, as some viewed this.

“There is nothing in the law under which community councils operate that mandates such a direction,” said one opponent. “On the contrary, it speaks of direct power, and resources going directly to each council. Some of the municipal advisors are saying things here that is not the law, nor what Chavez has said.”

Another man spoke sharply from the podium:

“We lack training. We lack information from our local leaders. Some do not know how to manage administratively, either our projects or the moneys allocated. Too many of us are still driven by egoism. We have to learn how to motivate our councils, the spokespersons and our neighbors.”

The issue of where the bank administering CC funds should be located led to a hefty debate. The majority wished to move it from the CC where it was, because that council was not active and there was suspicion that the funds were not well utilized. Representatives from one council said the money they should have received was not forthcoming.

Solutions to these matters would be decided upon at another round of meetings and after street debate.

That evening I attended a local PSUV meeting. The main topic was the current round of CC meetings and the issue of mancomunidades. The general attitude among these one dozen members, mostly over 45 years old, was that “a small group tried to sabotage the assembly”, as the chairman characterized the protest. Not all were caught up in heavy-handed terminology and limited condemnations, and some saw the need to struggle internally to solve significant problems not being addressed by their local government. Among those was the lack of caring and adequate medical treatment at the hospital, which was raised by a retired doctor who volunteers at the local hospital.

After the meeting, five of us went to a café to imbibe in national brews. They asked my opinion on a variety of issues, and what did I see as the number one problem within the revolutionary process. I hesitated to render conclusions after such a short time observing, but they insisted. My spontaneous answer was: the lack of follow through.

Everyone agreed. Example after example plopped onto the wobbly table. I presented one and asked their opinion about the cause. I recalled what a young taxi driver had told me. As a supporter of the Chavez government, Gabriel had applied to take a Francisco Miranda course in Cuba. The idea behind this mission is to create a civilian cadre, which would form a military reserve for defense. The volunteers were often sent to Cuba to acquire a political understanding of revolution and some discipline. So far about 3000 had participated. My driver told me that when he returned from three months “enjoying the generous hospitality of Cubans, not the least the women”, there was nothing to incorporate into, there was no follow up at home. What little he considered he had learned in the brother nation he had forgotten with disuse. Gabriel was so disgruntled he said he would not vote for Rosa León again, albeit mayors have nothing to do with this mission.

Yes, that was all too familiar, the PSUV activists replied. “Lack of infrastructure; most people look after self-interests; some generals don’t want an independent militia; too much talk-not enough action.”

I encountered the same problem with the voceros. At the weekly meeting for all spokespersons of the more than 100 CCs, 17 showed up. They spoke about problems in advancing some projects, about too many activists meeting late or abstaining, problems balancing family, a job and volunteer work. One of the agenda items was an invitation for me to hold a lecture-seminar about communication, how to better reach people in the neighborhoods.

Many spoke enthusiastically about the need for learning. I could also offer advice about a newsletter soon to be launched. Agreement was reached on a day session with lunch and a date set. I prepared for this important initiative. I heard nothing in the week to come. The day before the event, I phoned the municipality’s paid coordinator of the voceros. Oh, he said evenly, no one arranged anything. He did not understand my disappointment and dismay of the frivolous manner of unfulfilling decisions.

Why is making a revolution so difficult?

Ah, imagine your neighbor Sarah. She gets her news from the national and international corporate media. She does what pleases her. If she doesn’t see the fun in doing something she doesn’t do anything. Yeah, we know a lot like her. It might even ring a bell inside. So, what does it take to have Sarah change into a person who wants to cooperate with many others, taking her time, using her energy to create something new, something great for everybody, if everybody works at it? Just what are the tools we need—mental and spiritual as well as physical and emotional ones—and how do we develop them? That is not so easy to conceive let alone practice and transform society in a few years, right?

Already, through the energy generated by the mass behind the committed leadership, wonders have been created. Alongside those I’ve portrayed earlier in these writings, is an essential and historical one. Vicente Vallenilla, the Venezuelan ambassador to Denmark, told me before I departed for his homeland:

“We say that what is happening now is real sovereignty, and for the first time in our history. We are taking our natural resources into our own hands. We are transforming from the sole objective of profit-making for a few to greater distribution of the wealth, commonly created, replacing the raw materialism of today with a more spiritual life tomorrow, one of sovereignty and independence, of wholeness in fellowship and, thus, happiness.”

ARGENTINA: ¿Habemos Comunas?

¿Habemos comunas?

Por Norberto Quaglia de la Proto Comuna Flores

Fuente: http://www.genteba.com.ar/politica/notas/pol_nota.php?id=1808

Recuerdo que el día que se sancionó la denominada Ley Orgánica de Comunas, anunciábamos a nuestros vecinos como si del recinto legislativo se hubiese levantado un tenue humo blanco que nos anunciaba el acuerdo, que desde ese momento teníamos Comunas.

Pasaron cuatro años, tres gestiones, ministros, secretarios, directores generales y lo único que anuncia a las comunas son unos carteles ya viejos que cuelgan de algunos edificios públicos que indican que ahí hay una comuna, nada más lejos de una Comuna que esos carteles, ya que la Comuna no es un edificio. La Comuna es una institución, una institución de la democracia participativa, como lo es también un ejemplo de lo que llamamos democracia de consenso ya que con la integración de un gobierno colegiado de siete miembros, se aleja del tradicional modelo de democracia de mayorías, en la que gobierna la primer minoría, a la que llamamos mayoría con la oposición de las otras minorías, en este modelo, el de las Comunas, tanto la primer minoría como las demás minorías, gestionan en forma conjunta el gobierno comunal compulsando en forma permanente sus políticas con el Consejo Consultivo Comunal, que ejerce algún tipo de control sobre las políticas públicas llevadas adelante por la Junta Comunal.

Cuando hablo de control, me refiero al control de la dirección u orientación que pueden tomar esas políticas públicas, la democracia participativa instaura sus instituciones con el objeto de que la participación de los ciudadanos permita corregir los desvíos que se puedan producir con relación a los objetivos a alcanzar, como así también generar las acciones que sean necesarias para que la gestión atienda las crecientes necesidades de los ciudadanos. “Todos los que se ven afectados por una decisión deben tener la oportunidad de participar en la toma de esa decisión”.

Entonces, las Comunas son eso, una Junta Comunal de siete miembros, integrada por personas elegidas a través del voto popular y provenientes de diferentes fuerzas políticas que conforman un gobierno colegiado, un Consejo Consultivo Comunal al que concurren los vecinos de los Barrios que conforman esa Comuna para intervenir en la planificación y en el control de la ejecución de las políticas públicas de esa Comuna y finalmente el territorio, o sea los barrios que conforman esa Comuna, ninguna de esos componentes por sí solo son las comunas, conformando un nudo borromeo en donde “tres ya no son tres sino uno”.

Hoy, sólo tenemos el territorio y un cartel en un edificio.

Los vecinos estamos haciendo esfuerzos para conformar los Consejos Consultivos, que es otro de los componentes, pero estos Consejos Consultivos no pueden ser comunales, si no hay Comunas.

Es la conformación de la Junta Comunal la que dará vida a los Consejos Consultivos Comunales, ahí si ya hay tres que son uno. La existencia de la Junta Comunal es tan importante para el Consejo como lo es la existencia del Consejo Consultivo Comunal para la Junta, ya que la ruptura o la no conformación de este nudo impediría la existencia de la Comuna como una institución de la democracia participativa.

La Constitución de la ciudad es una Constitución de avanzada, tan de avanzada que las gestiones que se sucedieron desde 1996 no la han podido alcanzar, por eso es muy probable que la quieran derogar, pero sólo por incapacidad para alcanzarla y no por otra cosa. Debemos tener cuidado en este tema, ya que como son muchos los que están incapacitados para alcanzar a esta Constitución, muchos serán los que se adherirán a su derogación, soslayando una vez más a los vecinos que reclamamos una ciudad de avanzada que de cumplimiento a sus normas.

26 de Julio de 2008

Venezuela: Community Councils vs. Bureaucracy

The following piece gives an interesting assessment of the basics behind the communal councils in Venezuela and how they are creating a grassroots based system of government while at the same time providing channels by which the bureaucracy that has traditionally stifled that participatory democracy can be bypassed and rendered harmless to the process of strengthening the people's power. - Editor




Reconfiguring Democracy: Venezuela's New Communal Councils Confront Bureaucracy

From
Issue 381 - December 2007-January 2008

Source: http://www.peaceworkmagazine.org/reconfiguring-democracy-venezuelas-new-communal-councils-confront-bureaucracy

Authors: Kendra Fehrer Ponniah

Kendra Fehrer Ponniah is is a Ph.D. student in Development and Anthropology at Brown University, in Providence, RI. This article is based on research she conducted in January and December of 2006 and June of 2007, interviewing communal council members from seven communities near Barquisemeto, Venezuela.

Pro- Chávez demonstrators, September 5, 2006. Photo: Cesar Aponte

In mid-2006, several months before the presidential elections, the Venezuelan government headed by left-leaning President Hugo Chávez passed a new law. The law was called the Law on Communal Councils, and it was a cornerstone of the new political strategy to deepen democratic participation in Venezuela. As of June 2007, there were 20,000 registered communal councils across the country, plus tens of thousands more in formation. Televised speeches from the floor of the national assembly referenced the communal councils as the pivotal means of social change in Venezuela. On the tall walls of the subway stations in Caracas, gigantic red murals proclaimed the communal councils as an engine of Venezuela's transition to 21^st century socialism.

From Representative to Participatory Democracy

The communal councils are essentially neighborhood assemblies with political and fiscal powers. As described in the law, they function as neighborhood planning councils, responsible for decisions regarding infrastructure and planning-for example, where to set up the new multi-purpose sports court or what sorts of services to request for disabled youth within the community. In addition, the councils can initiate their own projects with funds obtained from the federal, state, and municipal governments and they are expected to bring together under one umbrella representatives from various community groups.

A typical communal council is made up of about 20 people, elected by a community of no more than 400 families. The geographic basis of the communal council allows members to know each other, precipitating an accountability that most representative politics fail to achieve, and furthermore ensuring that political and economic decisions made by the council are embedded in the social framework of the community.

The communal councils diverge from the typical representative democracy in one other significant way. All decisions made by the communal council can be reversed by popular vote. The vote, taken in assembly (at which 20% of all persons over 15 in the community must be present), is binding.

Community members seem to sense that this emergent form of local government is profoundly different from the previous form, in which political participation occurred once a year at the voting booth. A sentence heard over and over among community organizers is that the communal councils are transforming Venezuela into a "participatory" democracy, rather than a "representative" democracy. The communal councils provide a structure for direct democratic participation.

The potential impact of communal councils to transform the Venezuelan social and political fabric is no doubt exciting. However, like all processes of change, this one is not without challenges.

Confronting Bureaucracy

The situation faced by La Tamaca*, a neighborhood outside the city of Barquisimeto is emblematic of the challenges many community organizations face. The residents had pooled their recourses to construct a wall that would separate their community from the uninhabited land behind their homes. Together they had raised over $30,000 Bs. (10,000 USD) to complete half the wall. Once the community established a communal council, they applied for funds from the municipal government to complete the construction. The municipal government granted those funds, nearly twice what the community itself had raised, to complete the second half of the project.

The catch was, despite strong objections from the community, that the municipal government declared that it would now manage the project.

Instead of hiring workers and contractors from within the community, the municipal government hired its own contractors and suppliers. Five months later, the funds had run out, and the remaining half of the wall was only partway done.

Even with the many pro-poor initiatives over the last decade of Chávez's administration, communities are still fighting for a voice. The efforts of many, like La Tamaca, are being frustrated by the "politics as usual" attitude of many municipal and state governments. In the words of one community member: "We have a lot of public officials who are reactionaries dressed up as revolutionaries. They are more interested in their jobs than in this [revolutionary] process."

One of the purposes of the communal councils, according to a high ranking government official, is precisely to address this problem. By creating a direct link to the president and federal ministries, the communal council structure allows organized communities to bypass, or at least challenge, the clientelistic bureaucracy of municipal and state governments. Under the new law, communal councils can apply for funds directly from the Ministry of Participation and Social Development. However, some critics argue that this structure creates the danger of too much national control over grass-roots community structures.

City Council or Social Movement?

At their best, the communal councils can be used as political leverage to represent community interests at odds with the local government institutions. "Hidrolara [the public water company] is defunct," proclaimed Ismila, a community organizer in a working class neighborhood to the east of Barquisimeto. For the previous two days raw sewage had been backlogging into the streets along ten blocks of the neighborhood, including the block in front of the community health clinic. Despite numerous calls to the engineer appointed to their area, the engineer had been delaying his arrival. After he missed the appointed time for the second day in a row, five members of the communal council decided they needed to take more immediate action. They called four more colleagues from the council and caught a ride into the city center, where the Hidrolara offices were located.

At the office, they demanded to speak to the person in charge of emergency maintenance. Two hours later they left with an engineer to remedy the problem. Ismila said: "We learned today that Hidrolara is useless as an institution, it does not work for the communities. These officials think they know everything and don't listen to the community until there's a problem."

Some state and municipal institutions in Venezuela serve particular political interests, rather than the public good. When the public institutions do not fulfill their ascribed duties, the communal councils like that in Ismila's neighborhood can apply pressure. Although the council itself did not have jurisdiction over the water system, through their recognition as a communal council they have the political resources to apply political pressure to ensure the democratic distribution of water.

Not all communal councils are as politically astute as Ismila's, but a surprising number are. The community members who participate in the communal council possess a wide range of political experience, from complete novices to seasoned community organizers. Commonly, a communal council will contain five or six long-term organizers who see the communal council as simply the newest framework for emancipatory politics. It is often these more experienced organizers who are instrumental in forming the communal council.

In the case of Ismila's community, the communal council formed out of the Health Committee. The Health Committee was established several years ago, when the community was told that they were eligible to receive a Cuban doctor in the community. "There are lots of rumors that the doctors are there to hurt people, they don't have proper training, etc. We had to educate the community that this wasn't true. Thankfully, the doctor we got was very good and little by little, people stopped being afraid and came. When we heard about the communal councils law, we knew we had to get involved. Now the Health Committee is a working group of the communal council." The communal councils serve the powerful political function of coalescing a variety of community efforts.

Does Pluralism Include the Anti-Democratic?

Contrary to the perception by many of Chávez's critics, the communal councils are not composed exclusively of flag-waving Chávez supporters. In the town of El Cují, communal council member Mirabel identifies as the opposition. During the last elections, she transformed her home into a "hot corner," a common opposition protest tactic, which involves blasting anti-Chávez music onto the street and blaring sirens every 15 minutes to signify that Venezuelan democracy "is under attack." Why does she participate in the communal councils? "To keep an eye on the Chavistas," she responds, "to make sure they're not mishandling funds."

Opposition to President Chávez is located mainly, but not exclusively, in the small, active, and largely unencumbered middle and upper classes. Although some communal councils have been formed in elite neighborhoods, these do not represent the majority. The majority of communal councils are in poor and working class neighborhoods.

Still, even within poor communities, a minority do tend to identify as opposition, often because of enduring affiliation with the previously dominant parties. So, not infrequently, a communal council will have several staunch opposition members.

Despite the highly charged political rhetoric around the communal councils as a key element of the Bolivarian Process, within the actual meetings of the councils party-politics are seldom discussed. More often, topics of discussion deal with urgent community needs. Instead of playing a divisive role in the community, the communal councils appear, in some cases, to be fulfilling a reconciliatory role. Through regular interaction in meetings, often accompanied by socializing outside formal gatherings, the communal councils are becoming a space for breaking down political barriers.

Although pluralism is a central tenet of a democratic society, when some of those diverse constituents are actively anti-democratic the situation becomes a bit more complex.

While the minority opposition represents its position as one of advocating for democratic rights, the democracy for which the opposition advocates is essentially a liberal democracy, bent on the protection of private property and individual rights. It is precisely this form of democracy that has prevailed in Venezuela historically, and which the current government is trying to transform. The model proposed by the opposition conflicts with Venezuela's emergent radicalized democracy, which seeks to expand collective rights and responsibilities. For example, the constitutional reforms rejected in a referendum on December 2, 2007 included language to create three new types of collective property.

Why do political frameworks matter to the communal council? Although opposition and pro- Chávez residents can agree on addressing urgent community needs, the types of solutions offered to neighborhood problems could be vastly different. A liberal democratic model is not incompatible with the neoliberal framework that dominated the country for the last decades. Under this model, a communal council could offer micro-credit for individual businesses, without precipitating any shift in consciousness towards new notions of collective responsibility and social development.

One project I observed did just that. An organizer from another council explained, "The communal council gave out loans for everything, to start a phone stand, to buy motorcycles to use for ëmoto-taxis', to start hair salons… there was a lot of individual profit, but not a lot of community benefit." In contrast, a reconfigured democratic model would value not only the material benefits to the individual, but how the collective would benefit, both materially and in terms of participation.

The communal councils do not have an easy task. They face the challenge of maintaining political pluralism, challenging entrenched political and economic interests, and responding to the demands of a population whose basic needs have been ignored for decades. As one long-time activist said with both optimism and concern, "The communal councils are our primary hope for the long-term success of the revolution. They have the potential to change the very fabric of this country."

From Issue 381 - December 2007-January 2008

People's Power in Venezuela: Communal Councils Advance in Libertador

As always we keep a close eye on the building of participatory democracy in Venezuela. The article below gives an account of the progress made in the municipality of Libertador, some of the challenges faced by communal councils, and the national policies regarding participatory democracy. Following the article, find a link to an audio clip of a program that covers the Venezuela Solidarity Symposium that took place in Washington DC in April. Activists and Venezuelan leaders united at the conference and shared important information and analysis of the Bolivarian Revolution, US-Venezuelan relations, and most importantly, participatory democracy on the streets and in the workplace. If time is limited, skip the first 10 minutes of the program. - Editor

People's Power in Venezuela

by John Riddell
January 10, 2008

Source: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=14695

"If we want to talk of socialism," says Argenis Loreto, "we must first resolve the people's most urgent needs: water in their homes, accessible health care, easy access to housing."

In the Venezuelan municipality of Libertador (state of Carabobo), of which Argenis is mayor, "we have 90% poverty. Ending that is our first task. I am convinced that the existing state cannot do this." It's essential that "the majority of the people become part of the decision-making process."

But when Argenis was elected in 2000, the second year of the Bolivarian government headed by president Hugo Chávez, he found that "the people did not possess the tools needed for their participation."

That insight led Chávez and the Bolivarian government to initiate the formation of neighbourhood councils across the country—councils that they view as the embryo of a new people's state.

Suzanne Weiss and I spent two days in Libertador, one of the first municipalities where such councils were formed, talking to Argenis and dozens of others. This report is based on what we saw; it also draws on Marta Harnecker's outstanding study of the Libertador experience.*

A devastated community

With 200,000 residents, Libertador sprawls across a mainly rural territory the size of Metro Toronto (20 km. x 30 km.). Most of its employed population works in nearby Valencia, the country's heartland of privately owned industry. Jouncing over its ruined roads in the back of a pickup, we saw a district that had been devastated not by natural catastrophe but by a social calamity— decades of systematic neglect.

"Before we had many problems," recalls Félix Hernández, member of a community government. "The roads were super-awful. The electricity worked one or two days and then shut off. Health service was chaotic. Water service was complete chaos."

Appealing to city hall was a waste of time. "It was horrendous," says another council member, Virginia Diaz. "We'd go with petitions and explain. They'd visit and approve the project." But nothing would happen. "When we went back to the office, they'd never heard of us, didn't know anything…. As useful as tits on a bull."

The result was public apathy, says municipal social activist Fidel Hernández—like Argenis, a published poet. "The people had let itself be convinced that it could not govern. There was a deliberate policy for this … that's why we had 1½ million who were illiterate."

Tools for people's power

Of peasant origins, Argenis Loreto finished only six years of schooling before starting his working life in factories, industrial management, farming, and again in factories. He joined a revolutionary group at age 17, took part in the Bolivarian movement's unsuccessful coup in 1992 and became mayor after two decades of underground activity.

Convinced that only the poor and disenfranchised could reconstruct his municipality—and his nation—he sought to bridge the gulf between them and the instruments of government. Argenis and his colleagues set out to do this by extending governmental structures to the community level and by delegating power to community governments. Such a shift was authorized by a decentralization clause (Article 184) in the Bolivarian constitution adopted in 1999.

Progress was slow at first. The right-wing coup and bosses' strike of 2002-2003 delayed restructuring. The Libertador plan ran into strong opposition from some Bolivarian national legislators, who accused Argenis of "creating illegal associations."

Finally, in 2006, the community structure was in place: 35 "social territories," which united residents that shared similar problems, a common project, and a sense of belonging to a common environment. They ranged in size from 1,000 to 15,000 residents. Each territory elected a government through assemblies of its residents, usually choosing between competing slates of candidates. All community government work is voluntary—no salaries are paid—but relevant expenses are reimbursed.

In one of the social territories, skeptical residents declined to name a council. In another, a centre of Libertador's small middle class, the opposition slate was elected. "Many right-wing oppositionists join in community council activity," says Argenis. "They feel they cannot stand aside from the social programs and local projects that the councils carry out…. The opposition's role in local government has helped ease political tensions here."

The people's power structure has two tiers. Each social territory or commune includes smaller and more homogenous communities, each of which has its own communal council. The size of component communities is determined by social geography: urban councils typically unite 200-400 families; rural councils, 20-50 families. The smallest social territory by population (Mont Vernont), is composed of dispersed mountain hamlets: it therefore includes the largest number of communities. In Libertador, there are 204 such communal councils.

Participatory budget

Each communal council and social territory holds assemblies to choose and prioritize its ten most needed projects for the coming year. The municipal planning council then evaluates the top three proposals from each territory—more than three, if finances permit. A value of 1 to 9 is assigned to each of a number of criteria: number of residents, number who will benefit, cost, how long the request has been pending, the number of previous projects in this community, etc.

This ranking creates a proposed project list that is presented to an assembly in each territory, which can change its priorities and request reconsideration—if for example a favored project turned out to be impossibly expensive.

Once the project list is decided, the required funds are allocated to the community bodies, which handle administration, buy materials, and engage workers or contractors, giving preference to cooperatives. Community networking and know-how helps keep costs down, and any savings stay in the community for other purposes. Argenis estimates that $1 million a year is saved simply by eliminating private profits.

"For example, a flood control project was approved with a budget of 184 million bolivars [about $90,000]," says Fidel Hernández. "But in fact the community councils did it for 47 million and had lots left over for fixing roads.

"In another case, the local council got a price of 80 million to bring electricity to a district. But in fact they managed to do three districts for that price.

"Last year the community councils spent 84% of the municipal budget [for projects]," Fidel notes.

Accomplishments

Popular control has steered funding toward small, plain, and inexpensive projects densely spread through local neighborhoods. Urgent human needs have taken priority over infrastructure requirements like road upgrades.

Argenis highlights the 74 primary-care health centres built by neighborhood councils, which at first sometimes even manufactured the bricks. "We had only nine centres before," he says. In addition, Libertador boasts four Integral Diagnostic Centres—small hospitals—"the pride of our community," according to Felix Hernández.. Another community government member, Aixa Silvera, calls the Cuban doctors working in these centres "the most spectacular thing we have in the communities.

Indeed, Libertador led the way in Venezuela by arranging for Cuban doctors to work in the communities, before this became a national program.

Argenis says that community governments are building 48 primary schools this year—mostly one-room structures serving a neighborhood. There are also now three university campuses in Libertador—part of a national program to "municipalize higher education."

"As for sports, there are now only two or three communities that do not have a minimal installation" which means a playing field.

The citizens of Libertador are also trying to establish cultural centres in each social territory, usually an "open-air amphitheatre." Eight cultural centres are now under construction In some cases resident assemblies gave building a cultural centre priority over fixing the road or installing street lighting. "You can't have a revolution without beauty," Fidel Hernández says.

The obvious progress is confirmed by two surveys that were taken at the beginning of the community government program and again in May 2007. The first survey showed that the most urgently felt needs were for health care and educational facilities. In the second, no one cited health care as a concern, and almost no one mentioned education. Moreover, "we now have hardly any kids on the streets," says Argenis, "and the problem of homelessness is almost solved."

The Housing Bottleneck

According to official estimates, Venezuela has a shortage of 2.7 million homes, while another 1.3 million dwellings are inadequate home-made shacks. In 2006, 200,000 homes were built—a positive achievement, but far less than what is needed.

Argenis believes that community councils, who feel this urgent need acutely, are best suited to build houses. Sometimes they "build 10, 12, even 15 houses with the money provided for seven," he says.

"But we desperately need raw materials. Our economy was destroyed, and now we don't have the capacity to make the cement blocks, the paint, the ceramic toilets. We're working with Iran, China, and Brazil to meet these needs."

And Venezuela is building six factories to produce plastic building materials—"we have oil, after all," says Argenis. This project, called Petrocasa, will supply materials for 15,000 new houses a year. One of these factories, is close by, in the state of Carabobo.

National expansion

In 2006 Hugo Chávez endorsed the establishment of communal councils as a priority across Venezuela. In January 2007, he declared them institutions of "people's power," an embryo of a new people's state. An enabling law was passed in April, and there are now more than 10,000 councils across the country.

While vindicating the innovative program in Libertador, this expansion also caused the municipality many headaches. The national government intended the councils to be free of the deadening hand of the traditional state bureaucracy. Among other things, word went out that mayors should not get involved with these people's organizations. This directive might be appropriate in the nearby industrial city of Valencia, ruled by the opposition, but in Libertador it was totally at odds with reality.

Unfortunately, the Carabobo state government, led by critics of Argenis's initiatives, seized on this opening to create problems for Libertador's government. Utilizing its own statewide network of paid social activists, it promoted the notion that communal councils don't need to work with Libertador's larger social territories or with the city government.

"That caused a terrible process of fragmentation and division between the two levels of popular power," says Argenis.

Much effort has gone into knitting the two levels of people's government back together, Argenis says. "When they work together they're unbeatable."

People's power was an element of the constitution reform narrowly defeated in the December 2, 2007, referendum. The communal councils are still authorized under Article 184 of the constitution and the April 2006 legislation, and there is no legal barrier to expanding the structures beyond this framework. However, the referendum setback may encourage the councils' critics.

Bureaucratic obstruction

The community government bodies in Libertador aren't perfect. Among the occasional abuses noted by Argenis:

· Only one community is represented in a social territory council.
· One slate takes all the leadership positions.
· Elected officers take decisions on their own without convening the residents' assembly.
· The assembly functions poorly because of lack of interest.

These can be viewed as growing pains. As community government officer Omaira Carvallo comments, "When people see what is accomplished, it will break through their apathy."

More troubling is the conduct of other branches of government, such as the problems with Carabobo State. Among the many stories of this sort that Argenis tells, the pig manure episode is enough to illustrate what people's power is up against.

The city government makes special efforts to help Libertador's many farmers, a number of whom raise pigs. Some time ago the Ministry of the Environment banned hog-raising in the municipality because of concerns for water quality, but did not enforce the regulation. Libertador tried to help farmers solve the water problem on their own, by providing septic tanks for environmentally safe treatment of pig manure. The manure's polluting gas discharge was captured and burned for cooking. "This is a miracle," says Argenis. "It cuts out the smell and uses the gas!"

But the ministry intervened and nixed the project, which they said broke their rule against raising pigs. The bureaucratic method could not be better demonstrated: only the formal regulation counted; the real-life problem of manure pollution was of no interest.

What explanations do the ministry provide? "None whatsoever," says Argenis. "Just as we always say: this bureaucracy is eating us alive… We can't change things with this type of state."

Even among inherited municipal officials, "the apathy is barbaric. We have to establish a new conception of a staffer," Argenis says. "I'd like to dissolve the municipal administration … and create a confederation of community governments."

Reflections

At first glance, Venezuela's people's power can seem to be just a formal structure—municipal government on a street level. This is misleading. The councils have appeared and made gains only as part of an immense popular movement on a national level: the Bolivarian revolution.

This revolution was born in the mass mobilizations against the U.S.-backed oligarchy's attempts to overthrow the country's elected government—by a military coup in 2002, by an economic shutdown in 2003, and by an anti-Chavez referendum in 2004. All were defeated by the initiatives of masses of working people.

In Libertador, Argenis recalls, the embryonic community governments acted as defense committees, struggling to ensure that food, cooking gas, and gasoline reached the people. "That was just so wonderful," he says. "Quickly we had a network of more than 200 Bolivarian shops," distributing necessities and helping defend the revolution. Such national struggles were the true birth of people's power.

Venezuela's success at forging constructive ties with other non-imperialist states has also played a role, not just through Cuba's contribution to health services, but above all in building alliances to help fend off, for now, a U.S.-led assault.

The sometimes destructive role of national and state authorities is also a reminder that the power of working people will not flourish at the street level unless it is consolidated nationally.

Yet the community councils in Libertador call us to us, Sí se puede! – Yes we can do it! Enlisting the majority, the working people, in government is indeed possible. Venezuela's people's power—while still embryonic—is a living, viable reality.

John Riddell is co-editor of Socialist Voice

https://mail.zmag.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.socialistvoice.ca).

* Marta Harnecker, Gobierenos Comunitarios: Transformando el Estado desde abajo. [Community governments: transforming the state from below] Monte Avila Editores, 2007. This book is not readily available outside Venezuela. However, its text is available online. Harnecker is director of the "Popular Participation in Public Management" program of the Central Internacional Miranda, a Bolivarian research institute in Caracas.

Audio program from Venezuela Solidarity Symposium: http://calamadison.org/dasa/

Symposium Reflection: Participatory Democracy in Venezuela

One editor of La Esquina Caliente attended the Venezuela Solidarity Symposium in Washington DC at Howard University last week. Inspired (by community councils and democratic mayors) and outraged (by US intervention), she wanted to post the following article to give our readers a general overview of the information shared at the conference. The event kept a very positive outlook regarding the success of participatory democracy in Venezuela. Each speaker emphasized the great gains that the revolution has made toward giving the people more power to control their economic and social realities but also the fragility of the movement. Much more consolidation and organization will have to happen with Venezuelans who are committed to securing their popular power, but democracy within the PSUV will also have to be considered when examining the processes. While consejos comunales represent an institutionalized relinquishment of state power to the communities, the PSUV has much responsibility in shaping popular participation within the government. The PSUV will play a large role in continuing the revolution when Chavez leaves office and must work to defend the Bolivarian Revolution from imperialist attacks while simultaneously building itself in the most participatory democratic form. For more on this specific topic, please see the Spanish-language article by Gonzalo Gomez who spoke at the recent conference: http://mareasocialista.com/psuv-65.html There is much hope for success, but many obstacles were also discussed at the conference. Read the article below for a great summary of the symposium and look for more posts regarding the exemplary status of participatory democracy in Venezuela. -Editor

Venezuela Solidarity Symposium

By Marc Becker

Source: http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/6781/1/330/

Leading academic scholars and grassroots activists gathered at historic Howard University in Washington, DC, from April 18-20 for the national symposium “What’s Up With Venezuela: Participatory Democracy or Democracy as Usual?” The meeting provided an opportunity for 200 solidarity activists from across the United States to study the revolutionary changes sweeping through Venezuela.

In 1998, Venezuelans elected Hugo Chavez as a left-populist president to lead the country. Since then, he has worked toward regional integration and against US domination of Latin America. This has placed Venezuela on a collision course with the US. “Chavez is threatening,” political scientist Steve Ellner argued, “because he shows that there are viable alternatives to neoliberalism.” In a region that seems to produce its share of bad news, Venezuela is an example of hopeful and positive change.

A principal theme that ran throughout the symposium was that the Bolivarian Revolution (so named after Venezuela’s independence leader Simon Bolivar) is not a movement built around one person. James Early, Director of Cultural Heritage Policy at the Center for Folklife and Cultural Heritage at the Smithsonian Institution, said “Chavez is not the revolution, but a conduit for it.” Supreme Court justice Fernando Vegas explained institutional divisions of power in Venezuela to make his point that Chavez is not a dictator and does not control everything in the country.

Instead of emphasizing Chavez’s role, most of the presenters stressed the importance of constructing a participatory and protagonistic democracy to build new relations between the government and popular organizations. “Democracy is not just formal institutions,” labor leader Gonzalo Gomez with the National Union of Workers (UNT) said, “but also the mobilization of people.” Venezuela Solidarity Network organizer James Jordan argued that participatory democracy begins with organizing at the grassroots level.

While the presenters defended Chavez, they did not give him their uncritical and unqualified support. Gomez argued that much of the positive progress that has been made in Venezuela is not due to Chavez’s leadership, but from dedicated activists pushing him in a leftward direction.

Jorge Guerrero, Venezuelan Consul in New Orleans, explained the growing role of communal councils that are leading toward self government. In the future, Guerrero predicated, they would not need mayors because people will solve their own problems. Julio Chavez, the mayor of Torres, Venezuela, said that he was one of those working to realize that goal. “How can they accuse of us being authoritarian and centralist,” Chavez asked, “when we are giving power to the people?”

The communal councils are only one example of the many fundamental transformations in Venezuela. Antonio Gonzalez from the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project (SVREP) noted that Venezuela’s wedding of multi-party, participatory elections with a socialistic redistributive process is rather unique. Not only has this led to success for the Bolivarian Revolution, but hopefully it will also make it much more difficult for the United States to justify an invasion of the country.

Although there have been significant advances, there are still numerous bureaucrats from previous governments who are still in positions of power. Perhaps more dangerous are political opportunists who paint themselves as Chavistas (supporters of President Hugo Chavez), but are not ideologically committed to the Bolivarian Revolution. Increasingly, however, career diplomats and government bureaucrats are being replaced by movement activists who are committed to pushing the country toward socialism.

In addition, institutional interests can also place a break on revolutionary change. The Venezuelan Embassy’s Labor Attaché Marcos García emphasized that leftward pressure comes from people (workers) rather than institutions (labor unions) that too often become bogged down in bureaucratic concerns. Social movements are important so that the government does not sell out a revolutionary and socialist project. Gonzalo Gomez called these social movements the “motor of the revolution.”

Clara Herrera from Venezuela’s Central University observed that Chavez is just the tip of the iceberg of changes sweeping through the country as people become increasingly energized through grassroots popular movements. Omar Sierra and Jorge Guerrero from the Boston and New Orleans consulates discussed the roles of Indigenous peoples and Afro-descendants in the Bolivarian Revolution. Sierra said that changes in Venezuela are not the will of only one man, but the result of 500 years of Indigenous struggle.

Guerrero presented Chavez as a tool that embodies the hopes and aspirations of historically oppressed and excluded peoples to build a new protagonistic and participatory system. Imperialists are opposed to the Venezuelan government because it has allied with the downtrodden. This extends to international policies, as Venezuela has significantly expanded its diplomatic relations with Africa and the Caribbean. For example, students from Mali are studying textile manufacturing in Venezuela so that they can help their country gain value from cotton production rather than exporting the raw materials. These are not vertical relationships of domination, but horizontal ones built around ideas of solidarity.

Economists Adina Mercedes Bastidas and Mark Weisbrot presented data that illustrates dramatic recent economic growth in Venezuela. Chavez’s economic priorities have led to notable increases in health care, education, and employment. Weisbrot responded to an essay that Francisco Rodríguez published in Foreign Affairs that maintained that the poor have been hurt by Chavez’s policies. In a detailed analysis on the Center for Economic and Policy Research website (http://www.cepr.net/), Weisbrot shows how Rodríguez cherry-picked his data to reach misleading conclusions. In fact, poverty has dropped in half. Some of the current economic problems, such as a high inflation rate, are the result of long-term structural problems that cannot be turned around overnight.

Miguel Rodríguez, Vice-Minister for the Environment, discussed the challenges of attempting to improve standards of living while still preserving the environment. Venezuela is energy rich, and seeks to develop a sustainable economy. Although as a petroleum exporter gasoline is cheap, the government has emphasized public transit and produces most of its electricity from hydroelectric dams. Furthermore, the government emphasizes conservation as a way to meet peoples’ needs. “Socialism of the twenty-first century has to be ecological,” Rodríguez said, “and it also has to be materially possible.”

The US government and mainstream media, both in Venezuela and internationally, have engaged in a relentless disinformation campaign against the Bolivarian Revolution. Steve Ellner said that the hostility has little to do with Chavez’s style, but rather his economic and social policies. In Venezuela, the intransigent opposition to Chavez is based on conservative support for neoliberal policies that advocate shifting resources from the poor and marginalized and back towards the wealthy and privileged elite classes.

During the 1980s, Venezuelan governments engaged in blatant censorship of the media. Today, that does not happen, and there are more press freedoms than at any other point in the country’s history. The press remains overwhelmingly in private hands, owned by a wealthy elite deeply antagonistic to Chavez’s socialist project.

Mark Weisbrot gave Francisco Rodríguez’s essay in Foreign Affairs as one example of the constant barrage of misinformation. Without a popular media, Gonzalo Gomez said, a participatory and protagonistic democracy will not be possible. This does not happen automatically, but we need to get people accustomed to using these tools. The Venezuelan government has facilitated a move in this direction by creating spaces for community radio. “If the press is less anti-Chavez,” Olivia Burlingame Goumbri from the Venezuela Information Office contended, “it is because of growing popular support for Chavez.”

Journalist and sociologist Greg Wilpert explained how Venezuela has one of the most safe and secure voting systems in the world. Perceptions of fraud or a politicized electoral council are not based in fact. Wilpert positioned himself as a free speech advocate, and argued that the media is too important to be held in private hands that respond to corporate interests. Rather, public accountability is important to democratize the means of communication.

Attorney Eva Golinger explained how the attacks on Venezuela increased dramatically in 2005 when Condoleezza Rice was elevated to Secretary of State in the United States. The United States creates and funds a right-wing opposition in Venezuela through institutions such as the National Endowment for Democracy.

Venezuelan lawyer José Pertierrra pointed to the hypocrisy in US attempts to classify Venezuela as a state sponsor of terrorism. While there is no evidence that Venezuela sponsors or engages in terrorism, the US military is in the midst of its own torture scandals at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. More blatant is the case of Luis Posada Carrilles who blew up a Cuban airliner with a toothpaste bomb in 1976 as it left Venezuela. Not only was Posada Carrilles a CIA operative, he also currently lives freely in the US. Refusals to extradite him to Venezuela means that the US supports terrorism.

The symposium ended with a Lobby Day, with participants taking what they learned to Congressional Representatives on Capitol Hill.

Marc Becker is a Latin American historian and a member of Community Action on Latin America (CALA), in Madison, Wisconsin. Photos from the symposium are available at http://picasaweb.google.com/marcbecker2/VenezuelaSymposium.

Venezuela: Ley de Los Consejos Comunales Reformada con Participación Ciudadana

Dos articulos sobre la reciente reforma de la ley de los consejos comunales en Venezuela, realizado por un proceso participativo y una consulta publica. Los consejos comunales forman la base del poder popular y la democracia participativa en Venezuela. - Editor


REFORMA DE LEY DE CONSEJOS COMUNALES SERÁ POR CONSULTA PÚBLICA

Caracas 11 de marzo de 2008.
Fuente Minci.


El evento se llevará a cabo este miércoles en los pasillos del Palacio Federal Legislativo y se espera la asistencia de 240 voceros y voceras de consejos comunales.

La Comisión Permanente de Participación Ciudadana de la Asamblea Nacional, realizará este miércoles en los pasillos del Palacio Federal Legislativo, una consulta pública para la Reforma de la Ley de los Consejos Comunales.

La información la suministró el presidente de la instancia parlamentaria, diputado Darío Vivas, quien manifestó que este evento está enmarcado en el parlamentarismo social que implementa la Asamblea Nacional.Destacó que la consulta se realizará con aproximadamente 240 voceros y voceras de varios consejos comunales de todos los estados del país.En cuanto al objeto de la ley el parlamentario indicó que la misma tiene como finalidad la de crear, desarrollar y regular la conformación, integración, organización y funcionamiento de los Consejos Comunales del Poder Popular y su relación con los órganos, entes y organismos del Estado, para la formulación, ejecución, control y evaluación de las políticas públicas. Precisó que los consejos comunales, como se expresa en el artículo 2 de la Reforma de Ley, se constituyen, en el marco constitucional de la democracia participativa y protagónica, para la participación, integración y articulación de las diversas organizaciones comunales, grupos sociales, con los órganos del Estado.Esto con la finalidad de garantizar al pueblo, el ejercicio pleno de la soberanía popular en la formulación, gestión, ejecución y contraloría de políticas públicas, planes y proyectos orientados a responder a las necesidades y aspiraciones de las comunidades en la construcción de una sociedad de equidad y justicia social, en el marco del plan de la Nación vigente.Sobre el funcionamiento de los consejos comunales, se especifica en el artículo 7 de la Ley que los mismos estarán integrados por; el Organo Ejecutivo, conformado por voceros y voceras electos o electas en Asamblea de Ciudadanos y Ciudadanas postulados previamente por los Comités u otras formas de organización de base comunal.También conforma al consejo comunal, el Banco Comunal, órgano económico-financiero, integrado por cinco habitantes de la comunidad electos por la Asamblea de Ciudadanos y Ciudadanas.Asimismo la Unidad de Contraloría Social es otro órgano que forma parte del Consejo Comunal, y la misma está integrada también por cinco habitantes de la comunidad electos por la Asamblea de Ciudadanos y Ciudadanas para ejercer la contraloría social, la fiscalización, control y supervisión del manejo de los recursos asignados, recibidos o generados por el Consejo Comunal del Poder Popular.Se conoció que igualmente este martes, y también enmarcado en el parlamentarismo social, la diputada Haydée Machín, integrante de la Comisión de Participación Ciudadana, realizará un encuentro en la Plaza Bolívar de Ocumare del Tuy, con varios voceros y voceras de algunos consejos comunales de la región, a fin de recoger sus propuestas en torno al citado instrumento legal. Está previsto que el diputado Darío Vivas asista a fin de dejar instalado el evento.

LEY DE LOS CONSEJOS COMUNALES ES DEBATIDA POR EL PODER POPULAR


Fuente: http://www.consejoscomunales.gob.ve/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=192&Itemid=73

Caracas, 13 de marzo de 2008. Este miércoles, en el Palacio Federal Legislativo, se llevó a cabo una reunión entre representantes de Consejos Comunales de todo el país y los parlamentarios de la Comisión de Participación Ciudadana del parlamento venezolano, todo esto con el objeto de escuchar sugerencias, observaciones y objeciones al proceso de discusión que se viene realizando en torno a la reforma de la Ley de los Consejos Comunales.Esta reforma por Ley Habilitante corresponde al Ejecutivo Nacional, pero el Parlamento venezolano ha venido colaborando en este período de consultas. "Lo que hemos hecho con el Presidente de la República y la ministra de Participación y Protección Social, Erika Farías, es trabajar conjuntamente con la Asamblea Nacional y con el Consejo Presidencial, en la idea de la cooperación y en el trabajo de ayudar a conformar, con una visión bastante amplia, lo que es la Reforma de Ley de los Consejos Comunales", destacó el Diputado.En este sentido, el Diputado Darío vivas, representante de la Comisión de Participación Ciudadana, expresó que uno de los aspectos fundamentales es otorgarle, a través de esta reforma, personalidad jurídica a los Consejos Comunales de manera que estas organizaciones puedan comprometerse en el plano administrativo y económico en cuanto a su propio funcionamiento.Asimismo, se refirió a la perfección del servicio de los llamados Bancos Comunales, que a su juicio son las instituciones determinantes para el éxito y funcionamiento de estos Consejos Comunales e indicó que se estima que cada Banco Comunal maneje "entre dos a diez Consejos Comunales".

Vivas también anunció que los diputados miembros de la instancia parlamentaria acordaron cambiar el nombre de la Comisión, así como de las subcomisiones, por lo que ahora se denominará Comisión Permanente de Participación Ciudadana, Poder Popular, Gestión Comunal y Control Social.

Explicó que esta decisión se debe a la concordancia que se quiere establecer entre la nomenclatura y el lenguaje que la gente comúnmente utiliza en función de su organización.

Sobre el Control Social manifestó que en la Ley del Poder Popular aparece una definición de lo que es la Contraloría Social y la manera como se articula la Contraloría Social Local, de manera tal que su acción sea atendida de forma veraz, real y oportuna.

Venezuela: Chavez Urges Increased People Power

The following article discusses a recent call by Hugo Chavez on his Televised Alo Presidente program for a broader and swifter transfer of power to the people in Venezuela. These renewed efforts are at the core of the 'Bolivarian Revolution' in Venezuela, the expansion of the model of 'socialism for the 21st century', and the expansion of popular power through the creation of communal councils and other grassroots power structures. The new additional drive for the creation of socialist communes discussed in this article represents another cornerstone in the movement that will help ensure the strength and permanence of the grassroots power base. - Editor


Chavez Calls For Strengthening of “People’s Power” in Venezuela

March 17th 2008, by Chris Carlson - Venezuelanalysis.com

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez during his talk show on Sunday (ABN) March 17, 2008 (venezuelanalysis.com)— Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called on the country to strengthen so-called "people’s power" on his Sunday talk show Aló Presidente yesterday. The president focused on government efforts to promote popular participation in community organizations, and announced a new program for the formation of "socialist communes" around the country.

"We are dedicating today’s show to people’s power," said Chavez upon opening the show. "This year, 2008, is the year to strengthen people’s power."

Broadcasting from a poor community in the western state of Lara, President Chavez announced that his government will focus on the consolidation of organized communities in 2008. He urged communities around the country to get organized and form "socialist" enterprises to help build a socialist economy.

President Chavez toured the small community and spoke with community leaders about the projects being carried out there, including the construction of housing and a medical clinic. Upon speaking to workers at a community brick factory, Chavez insisted that more of this type of community-owned factory be established in order to put the means of production into the hands of the people.

"We have to aim at the base of the economy, from the bottom up," he said. "We have to multiply this, and put the means of production into the hands of the people."

With this goal in mind, Chavez announced the creation of "Mission April 13th," a new government program for the formation of "socialist communes." The so-called communes, a fundamental part of last December’s failed constitutional reform, are organized communities that collectively manage and operate productive enterprises.

The new program, to be launched in April, will focus on the formation of several model socialist communes around the country to later be reproduced in other communities. Chavez insisted that in this way a socialist model would be progressively implanted in the country.

"The idea is that once a commune is set up, it should later be multiplied so that the model of communes keeps growing. This is the way to the formation of socialism," he said.

Starting this week, nearly two thousand community projects will be granted nearly BsF. (strong bolivars, as the new currency is known) 400 million (US$ 186 million), to carry out activities in their communities, a government minister reported. Most of the community projects involve repairing and building new infrastructure, water systems, irrigation systems, and the formation of new communal economic enterprises.

Chavez insisted that all the money granted to the communities be carefully followed and directed toward the formation of a socialist economy.

"Every penny, every credit that we give out has to go towards the construction of a socialist model. But we have to plan it, and it should be accompanied with socialist ideology," he said.

The president also insisted that the newly formed political party, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), would play a fundamental role in the strengthening of "people’s power." Chavez explained that the candidates for the city and state elections at the end of 2008 must come from the bottom up, and not be designated from the top down. He called on all PSUV party members to help strengthen the power of the communities.

"Anyone who wants to be a candidate has to publicly commit to the government program for promoting people’s power, community participation, and the transfer of power to the people," he said.

Chavez called on the recently elected PSUV party leadership to organize a method for all the PSUV candidates in the 2008 elections to be democratically selected by the party rank-and-file. Elections will be held across the country at the end of this year for state governors and city mayors.

The Venezuelan president also commented briefly on the recent threat from Washington to include Venezuela on a list of state-sponsors of terrorism. Chavez emphasized that the strengthening of "people’s power" and the consolidation of a socialist model is the best way to respond to the attack.

"Now they are trying to include Venezuela in a list of terrorist countries, and they want to try me in the International Criminal Court," he said.

"We should respond by strengthening the Bolivarian Revolution, by strengthening people’s power, and by strengthening the unity among us."

Chavez insisted that the real terrorist is US President George W. Bush and accused Washington of trying to create conflict and divisions between the countries of Latin America.

"There are only two paths here. Theirs is the path of war, and ours is the path of peace," he said.

Case of Carora Exemplifies Success of Community Councils and Participatory Democracy in Venezuela

Participatory democracy is at the heart of the 'Bolivarian Revolution' taking place in Venezuela. A complete restructuring of governance and power structures is under way, shifting the balance of power to the community level and engaging the populace in the political process as never before. The 'consejos communales' or 'communal councils' represent a grass roots form of government that is legitimized and funded at the federal level. This is a unique situation, and it has made Venezuela one of the most dynamic models of participatory democracy in the world today. The government refers to the councils as the 'fuel for the engines of people power,' and the following article illustrates how this deepening of direct and participatory democratic institutions is having a real effect in communities all across Venezuela. - Editor

Building Popular Power in Carora

Community assemblies of all citizens make collective decisions on community priorities and spending. Remarkably, the percentage of participation by women is between 80-90 per cent, and the majority of the councils are in poorer communities.

By Jay Hartling April 24, 2007

Carora's streets are much like other Latin American cities — bustling commerce on every corner, traffic, noise, people going about their daily routine. But there is something that distinguishes Carora and the Municipality of Pedro Leon Torres in the state of Lara, Venezuela from any other municipality I've visited in Latin America, and in particular, any other in Venezuela.

That is, the city is on a path to democratize and transform the entire governance system of the municipality, from the bottom up — led by the current Mayor, Julio Chavez (no relation to President Hugo Chavez).

Carora is a city of approximately 100,000 located in the agricultural state of Lara in Venezuela's northwest. It is the capital of the Municipality of Pedro Leon Torres which makes up 40 per cent of Lara's geography, making it the largest municipality in the state in land mass. It is hot — temperatures in April average around 35 degrees Celsius or more — but what's really hot is the blazing rate at which the mayor has transformed this beautiful city into a microcosm of popular power in such a short period of time.

Julio Chavez, in his early 40s, is an unassuming individual — very friendly and open — known as ¨Julio¨ to everyone. He won the election for mayor in 2004 running on a coalition slate for the PPT (Patria Para Todos), one of the many parties that supports the national revolutionary government. Chavez has immense credibility with the majority of citizens in Torres — he is considered one of them and has a long history of social struggle.

However, to those opposed to the revolutionary process, he is the devil incarnate, and is the target of death threats and intense hatred. This has posed a huge problem for Chavez, as the oligarchy also controls all local media, and therefore, makes it difficult for citizens to find out the truth about the remarkable achievements of the municipal government.

Chavez came to office with only one goal — to democratize the municipality and turn it over to the citizens. This conforms with the articles and principles of participatory and protagonistic democracy in the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Although other municipalities have implemented some of the institutions of participatory democracy, Julio Chavez is miles ahead of his colleagues.

When Chavez took office, he inherited a typical representative system that had been run by a small local oligarchy for centuries. These same families ran the municipality and the local agro-businesses and their ancillary industries (and still do to a large extent). The former mayor made all the decisions for municipal expenditures, and awarded lucrative municipal contracts to his friends and family.

As most other governments of the 4th Republic did, they had virtually ignored the social problems facing the majority of citizens in the municipality. Most of these businesses and individuals had never paid taxes — that is, until Chavez arrived on the scene. In just two short years, the municipal government has quadrupled its operational tax base by collecting taxes from errant companies, including some big name national and multinational firms, some of which had been fudging their books for years. Faced with heavy fines if they continued to refuse to pay, these companies and individuals have now started paying taxes.

In addition, the city receives funding from the federal government's decentralization funds (FIDES) and through the LAEE — a piece of legislation that provides equalization funding to non-petroleum producing states — similar to provincial equalization payments in Canada. What is remarkable is that Chavez has turned these funds over to the communities to decide how they are spent. But the buck doesn't stop there; the citizens are also active in the administration of public funds, including comptrollership and evaluation.

Julio Chavez began his term by quickly implementing all of the participatory programs outlined in the country's constitution, including the participatory budget, the local public planning councils, and most recently, the communal councils.

Implementing participatory systems on top of the local statutes of the former 4th Republic didn't make sense to Chavez, the city councillors or local citizens, so they organized a massive municipal citizens' assembly to discuss, evaluate and reform the municipal by-laws to bring them in line with the country's progressive constitution. For three months, discussions and debates took place in all 17 parishes with the mayor and all councillors in attendance.

The product is a new, revolutionary municipal constitution that is based on the fundamental principles of “life, liberty justice, equality, solidarity, democracy, social responsibility and the pre-eminence of human rights, ethics and political pluralism.” Chavez views his government as a transitional government with these goals: 1) to dissolve the municipal oligarchic structure; and 2) to introduce a transitional government that will dismantle the corrupt and inefficient bureaucracy and transfer democratic decision-making to the people.

When asked why other supposed revolutionary mayors have not done the same, Chavez politely shrugs and says, “I have asked them the same question.” This has not gone unnoticed by President Hugo Chavez who has placed Julio Chavez on two presidential commissions — one for popular participation and the communal councils, and one to assist other municipalities with the realignment of their by-laws.

The first participatory budget in Torres took place in 2005 through the parish-based Local Public Planning Councils (CLPPs). The following year, the discussions moved closer to the residents and all citizens were provided the opportunity to prioritize spending.

But the participation doesn't stop here. It goes much further by placing the administration of public works (both the actual work and the financial management) in the hands of communities. In his first year, the mayor says that unfortunately the communities overlooked a couple of global problems like repairing roads. Chavez says that he had to go to each of the communities and convince them to give money back to the city in order for them to pave some roads.

The real engine of popular revolutionary power, however, is the communal councils. There are currently 317 communal councils operating in Torres' 17 parishes. Most of them are just over a year old, and new ones are forming on a weekly basis. The councils consist of up to 200 families in rural settings, and 400-500 in larger towns and cities. The councils form the basis of popular power of the new socialist system that is slowly emerging in Venezuela.

Community assemblies of all citizens make collective decisions on community priorities and spending. Spokespeople are elected, but they do not take decisions on behalf of the community. All decisions, ideas and spending are approved by the community assembly as a whole. Remarkably, the percentage of participation by women is between 80-90 per cent, and the majority of the councils are in poorer communities. Also remarkable is the level of transparency with the administration of public money — all accounts are kept in a set of books that are available to anyone who wants to see them (including me), and these accounts are rendered publicly to the community assembly as well as the government.

Lilian Ballesteros, a spokesperson for El Onzo Communal Council says her community was completely ignored by former governments, but now with the communal council system, they have been able to access funds to improve their water supply, build new houses for the families that live in the most dire conditions in what are referred to as “ranchos,” and now they are moving into social production projects that will provide sustainable employment and generate income for further community improvements.

She says it is no problem for her to walk into Julio's office at any time, without an appointment, and discuss community issues. The El Onzo Communal Council is also part of a multi-community structure called a mancomunidad where five communities are collaborating with each other to run a communal bank. Funds for community projects go directly to the community from central government funds and are managed out of the communal bank.

This means that community members don't have to find transportation to the municipal or state capital any more in order to wade through the paperwork and processes previously required to undertake community projects. For Lilian, the communal councils prove that people can administer public funds and projects without specialized training. Julio Chavez put his faith in these communities and it is paying off.

Most importantly, the communal councils are building a communal bond of mutual social responsibility that is slowly replacing the individualism that is such a key part of the outgoing capitalist system. Rosa Rodriguez of Las Palmitas Communal Council says that she barely knew some of the people in her community prior to becoming involved with her communal council, let alone the kinds of problems they faced.

However, during the socio-economic census that each communal council undertakes at the beginning of their formation process to understand what kind of resources exist in the community, and what they are lacking, she began to have a deeper appreciation for the problems of others — something which has united the community in a common front. The census allows the community to understand which families are in the direst need and those are the ones that are first in line for housing and other programs.

So what lies ahead for the communal councils, participatory and protagonistic democracy and socialism of the 21st century in Venezuela? According to Julio Chavez, the next step is to re-design the local governance system built on the communal councils. This will have a dramatic impact on the previous geographic boundaries of municipalities, on the power of elected officials and public employees, and on the state and national governance structures.

The councils themselves still have to overcome the behaviours and practices associated with representative democracy. For now, the councils are very new, and have a lot of wrinkles to work out before the fifth engine of the revolution, that of popular power, can run smoothly. If they can do it, Venezuela will become one of the few places on the planet where true “democracy” (rule by the people) will flourish.

Jay Hartling of Vancouver and Halifax, is a graduate student at the University of Victoria, studying the communal councils in Venezuela

Source: http://www.rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?sh_itm=eac07efa07c757eb1911096c9ebba7f3&rXn=1&