Over the past week or so, there have been protests across Fujian about lead pollution from local factories. It’s the usual stuff: demonstrators gather, block the roads, lobby on masse outside the local government.
OK, check out how Xinhua reported the incident. But firstly, note that Xinhua did report the incident, a strictly local and apparently non violent MGI that would have been easy to ignore even if there were no pressure to do so. Anyway, here’s a substantial extract from the report:
Protest against a battery factory suspected of causing lead pollution in east China continued Friday, as nearly 100 villagers gathered in front of the local government of Jiaoyang Township, Fujian Province.
The villagers demanded the Huaqiang Battery Factory move out of the township. The crowd dispersed during the afternoon. Ding Yanzhi, head of the township government, said the factory has been ordered to suspend operation and efforts to clean up the environment around it were under way.
In a move to put more pressure on the local government, all the dealers at a local open fair with 192 stalls suspended their businesses Friday. "We want the government to make the factory move out as soon as possible," said one dealer, who requested anonymity.
Ding said the local government would organize tests on blood lead levels for all children in the township.
Amid fears of lead poisoning, hundreds of children were absent from the local primary school and kindergarten Friday.
At least four children in Jiaoyang have been found to have excessive lead levels their blood, which their parents said was a result of pollution from the factory.
Officials from the governments of Longyan City and Shanghang County went to the township Thursday to talk with the villagers. But no agreement was reached.
Firstly, it’s absolutely dead straight reporting. This is what the protestors did. This is why they did it. And this is what the local government is doing. There’s no mention of rumour mongering, disruptive forces or agitators. The phrase “some people” does not occur, “some people” being the code to distinguish “rioters” from the mass of the population. The report is also quite relaxed about acknowledging solidarity action by local tradesmen. Moreover, the report emphasises that the demonstrators case has substance, that the local government acknowledges it and that it is moving by means of peaceful dialogue towards some kind of solution.
So what’s happening here? We noted earlier that there’s been a change in media policy backed by some parts of central government with calls for greater freedom in reporting and more meaningful democracy at local level. This is being pioneered in Yunnan Province, as explained here. Global Times – which appears to be pushing this agenda quite hard – has an interview with Wu Hao, who appears to be Yunnan’s point man on the issue, in which he explicitly links media policy with the practice of local authorities in investigating MGIs.
We also used to focus our work on investigating why people assembled to "cause trouble" or look for "behind-the-scenes manipulators," but in this case, the local government of Luliang prioritized finding out what the people wanted. We should note, though, that giving priority to public needs doesn't mean making wholesale concessions without thinking them through.
James in Beijing and I have been having a bit of a to and fro about whether this reflects a genuine liberalization effort by elements in Party Central or simply an attempt to reassert central control over the activities of local government. Maybe you can’t have one without the other at this stage. This is, after all, liberalization by central diktat. But it’s also an acknowledgment of some sort at senior level in the Communist Party that liberty is the mother of order, as the saying goes. I don’t think we’ve had one of those before. Also, it’s far too premature to assume that this is being rolled out as a general policy.
There’s an obvious contrast here between the treatment of MGIs and the treatment of individual campaigners, which appears to be getting more harsh if anything. Perhaps prominent and isolated individuals are easier to deal with the the traditional Stalinist manner (no man, no problem). At any rate, it’s an instructive comparison: urge reform as a liberal voice and get picked off. Take to the streets with an anonymous group intent on raising a little hell, and get listened to.
Thanks again to James in Beijing for a lot of the material refereed to above.
Comments