Participación ciudadana en el gobierno de Bachelet: consejos asesores presidenciales

Abstract

RESUMEN: En el artículo se exponen los resultados preliminares de un estudio que analiza tres consejos asesores del gobierno de Michelle Bachelet (2006-2010) en Chile. Estos consejos tenían el mandato de formular políticas públicas en temas centrales del programa de gobierno: previsión, políticas de infancia y educación. Además, tenían el mandato de ser consejos que contaran con una amplia participación ciudadana. Desde el discurso político del gobierno estos consejos se presentaron como parte de una nueva práctica del ejercicio del poder político estatal para abrir espacios de participación ciudadana directa en el proceso de políticas públicas. El artículo argumenta (a) que en la práctica dichos mecanismos no operaron como foros participativos, sino como consejos de expertos con acotada amplitud ideológica (2 casos); y (b) que estas instancias presentan una relación Estado-sociedad vertical en el proceso de políticas públicas.ABSTRACT: This article presents the preliminary results of a study about three advisory boards appointed by Michelle Bachelet’s government (2006-2010) in Chile. Those boards were commanded to elaborate public policy proposals in key areas of her government plan: pension system, infant policies and education. The commissions were intended to include a broad participation of citizens. The political discourse of the government presented them as part of a new form to exercise political power by the State by opening spaces for direct citizen participation in policy making processes. The article argues that (a) those mechanisms did not function as participatory forums but as expert advisory boards with a narrow ideological scope (2 cases); and (b)that in terms of the relationship between State and society, these mechanisms produce a vertical relationship in the political process.

Hegemony and Frustration

“…Their presence countered the position of the commission's other, more "technocratic" members, including university professors, economists, and civil servants from the Ministry and the municipalities. This meant that the commission was more participatory than the other two commissions set up by Bachelet during her first year, on social security and health, in which civil servants and professionals in these sectors predominated (Aguilera, 2007). While the commission was welcomed by many of the participants within and outside the government, not all sections of the Concertación approved: some felt that the commission would undermine representative political institutions such as Congress by introducing a new space in which policies would be debated and negotiated (Elacqua, interview, 2007).…”

Removed from the Bargaining Table

“…Although union actors took part in 21 of 78 hearings, this did not mean the unfolding of a dialogue between "experts" and unionists, since the latter only made presentations based on topics already identified by the commission. Moreover, there was no mechanism for ensuring that these presentations be taken into account, and they were considered individually and voluntarily by each of the commission members (Aguilera, 2007). Thus, instead of opening up spaces for political discussion or social agreement about how to proceed on the pension issue, President Bachelet chose to give a group of specialists the responsibility for filtering social demands (an eminently political rather than technical matter).…”

“…What is significant is that whereas the CUT had consistently tried and failed to place this issue on the public agenda, a single declaration by the Church was sufficient to make the government decide to take action. Given that the commission arose in a context of social protest, the president decided to bring social actors into the discussion (Aguilera, 2007). On this occasion, along with about 50 other people, the president of the CUT was invited to join the working group.…”

“…The concept of citizens' government promoted by the president seemed to seek a counterpoint to the control that political parties had exercised over the discussion of public issues in the three preceding administrations. However, this autonomy from the parties led the president to rely on think-tank technocrats (Aguilera, 2007;Silva, 2007) rather than seeking to establish relationships with organized civil society. Thus, although the government expressed its desire to increase citizen participation, the CUT was limited in its ability to take part in policy discussion on issues of concern to workers.…”

“…In conjunction with this promise of a citizens' government, expressed in the "Agenda for Citizen Participation" (Aguilera, 2007), the then-presidential candidate made other statements giving the impression that she would create a favorable climate for social actors such as the Central Unitaria de Trabajadores (Unitary Workers' Federation-CUT), the principal labor federation, to participate in the policy-making process. In the specific case of the union federation, this optimistic view was based on the fact that during her campaign she expressed her desire to improve working conditions and reform the pension system.…”