[P2P-F] [Networkedlabour] open budget

Mon Jul 14 11:24:24 CEST 2014

Michel, many thanks for this detailed response.

Actually my intention was posting on the networked labour list only
the personal or official reports coming from or about the FLOK project
which you led it's research part and concluded last month in Ecuador.

As for the request you replied below, actually I meant to address the
impotence of adopting open or participatory budgeting practise in
general. Otherwise did not mean to question anybodies' integrity or
so. I believe, as you do, for building p2p or distributed ethical
economies figuratively, and for especially these kind of projects this
is an essential point.

Besides, in my opinion, it may be useful for those who are on the
networked labour list so not very much aware of the exchanges going on
about the project process so on; so who were  not able to read the
whole email in which I made the request from you and others. If you
agree and find it useful or necessary to give a brief background
please feel free. So it is up to you.

Thanks again,
Orsan

On 7 July 2014 06:43, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:
> Orsan, you write:
>
> <To avoid any negative impact for all the sides, I would humbly suggest,
> especially in terms of financial aspects, providing full transparency (Flok,
> P2P-F, Cook Consultancy, Ecuadorean ministries so on). And without
> practicing a sort of participatory budgeting, IMHO, there will always be
> shadows of doubts and questions hanging on these kinds of
> state-capital-funded projects.>
>
> Orsan, the budget was highly secretive and tightly  controlled by the flok
> mgt team; in fact, AD was removed (though they are claiming he removed
> himself, so I'm not sure), largely because he tried to get a regular and
> open budget done controlled by the institution. It was the key area of
> contention and why he has been called a spy.
>
> Here is my guesswork:
>
> * the project was tri-funded by the Min of Knowledge, the Senescyt
> innovation secretariat and the IAEN  institution
>
> * the entire process with wages may have reached $400k , with an additional
> $300k plus for the summit
>
> The wage issue was highly contentious, from before I reached the project.
> The rector wanted to pay intl' level wages to foreign researchers, and this
> was not taken well by the locals. On the other hand, the institution payed
> some people very well who never showed up, and trying to get rid of them  is
> one of the causes that caused him the loss of his job. The ratio of staff to
> students is incredibly skewed at the IAEN but I can't remember the ratio,
> but much more staff than students.
>
> My understanding is that most of the research team got $4k and I got $5.x as
> 'director'. There is no doubt that this is well paid, but it is still less
> for a month than a private consulting gets for a day. So, if the FLOK is a
> genuine transition project, that was not outside of decency. There is a lot
> of discussion about the other salaries, which are shrouded in secrecy. One
> of the most often expressed critiques directed at me and the research team:
> how can you guys make so much noise when you are paid so well, 'aren't you
> ashamed'; on the other hand, 'flok mgt works tirelessly for nearly nothing'.
> This is the mythology, used again and again, but I'm not sure it is the
> truth; from very good accounting sources, I was informed that they earned
> four times their claims, but I can't prove this. But as I've learned not to
> trust anything said coming from the flok mgt, I tend to give credence to my
> source.
>
> As for me,  yes, I was well paid, after living under the minimum wage for
> seven years. We had to pay our own tickets, rent and rent guarantees, all
> internal job-related travels, and because of the length of the engagement, I
> had to bring my family for two months (this was a stated condition of my
> employment, even if I had to finance it myself). Because of the structurally
> late payments, I had to pay 40% more for these tickets, and on average,
> since we all had to take loans, 20% interest fees. So, just to say, despite
> appearances, none of us got rich from this, and we worked tirelessly, in
> very tough circumstances, 12 to 14 hours a day, including many weekend days.
> So, we are  certainly not victims, privileged for sure, but not getting rich
> on this assignment either. Neither of us asked for anything, we accepted an
> invitation with its conditions, so I think the whole wage controversy is
> really a side issue.
>
> I'm not suggesting any budget malfeasance, the opacity of the budget was
> exclusively an issue of political control. You should also take into account
> that due to the structural non-payment, the flok mgt had to make superhuman
> efforts for the project to merely survive. Two full-time staff were engaged
> just to speed up our payments (they achieved a 6 week average delay due to
> superhuman efforfts): I was told, but can't verify this, that 26 signatures
> were needed each month for each wage, a sign of terrible bureaucracy. (while
> I critique the hierarchical aspects of the mgt process we should not forget
> the extreme structural stress they were facing day in day out).
>
> Also, apart from the real work, we were forced to produce partly fictitious
> 'products', taking 2-3 working days to produce, as proof of our work. These
> had to be delivered 10 days before the end of each month, hence having a 10
> day 'future narrative' included. You have no idea of the level of
> dysfunctional bureaucracy that was prevalent. This is not exclusively a flok
> and IAEN problem, as the young and mosty precarious Prometheo researchers
> also are routinely not paid for the first four months of their work. Unless
> you have strong reserves to withstand such delays, I would not recommend any
> foreigner to work as a scholar in Ecuador for the moment. But if you have
> reserves and go for the experience and engagement with local people, it's
> worthwhile, it's a spectacular place. The structural situation in Ecuador is
> that most of the education funding goes to Yachai, a rather terrible
> neoliberal experiment in a green desert, signing secret deals with
> Microsoft, etc ..  There is really nothing there, and won't be, for a very
> long time. While the existing universities are being underfunded, this
> artificial place, which will be structurally incapable of atracting the
> creative class (even richard florida thinks it's a terrible idea), is
> getting all the attention and funding. It's a little bit like the anti-FLOK
> project, though funded by the same Ministry, one of the many contradictions
> of the project and the political situation in Ecuador. Just as it was
> impossible to find a single civic mvt with a positive view of the government
> (at least amongst the 70 we spoke with); it was equally impossible to find a
> single university administrator or scholar that supported the current
> education policy. It's part of the divorce between the intellectual class
> and the government that I discussed earlier,
>
> Michel
>
>
> --
> Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record
> of previous communication, proposals, etc ..
>
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetworkedLabour mailing list
> NetworkedLabour at lists.contrast.org
> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour
>