In shock, I
let my half empty cup of coffee slip from my hands. I caught it in time, though
not before a few drops of very warm liquid spilled onto my trousers. “Free
housing, free food, free health care, seven-hour working weeks, government by
the people. This can’t be real. How the hell can you afford free housing?”
“The same
way we afford free staple food,” said Dianne, showing no offence at my
outburst. “The costs are absorbed into the prices of other goods and services,
using CAPE.”
I suddenly
remembered Wilbur mentioning this in passing, yet still I could not believe it.
“Surely not! Houses are too expensive. If they were made free, other goods
would have outrageous prices. No one could afford them.”
“No, er,
that’s not so,” said David, now mimicking his wife by fidgeting in his seat. He
continued, in sentences full of ums and ers, his arms waving, his hands
gesticulating wildly. The movements, as far as I could see, mostly had no
relationship to the words, but they were of such a magnitude, I found myself
thinking of a puppet show. “In the early days, that is when we were all children,
the building of houses comprised only about eight or nine percent—I think,
wasn’t it, Di?—certainly less than ten percent of most nations’ costs, I’m
pretty sure. So, that being the case, the prices of other goods—non-housing
goods that is—were naturally only about ten percent higher than they would have
been if there had been no free housing.”
Again, my
coffee cup almost fell to the ground. Even with my bank’s staff discount, Yvette
and I spend a lot more than ten percent of our income on our mortgage. So do
most people.
“The percentage
is somewhat higher now,” continued David, “with so many other costs removed
because of the shorter working week. But then the population is also stable
enough for there not to be nearly as much need for new houses. Even if we had
to spend, say, half of all our costs
on housing, making it free would still be affordable—I think that would be a
fair thing to say, wouldn’t it, Di? That’s the way CAPE operates, after all: if
the total costs of an economy are balanced by its total prices, then the prices
are by definition affordable.”
His final
gesture of a pointed finger being abruptly lowered almost made me feel like I
was back at school. “What else is free in this place?” I demanded irritably.
“Do you pay for anything? Apart from restaurant meals and toilet paper?” That
was about all I’d seen that involved a payment. “And tropical fruit?”
“Of
course,” said Dianne. “You saw me pay for Gino’s work this morning. It’s only essential
needs that are free—for the most part. Housing, food, basic clothing, education,
health care.”
I grappled
momentarily with this news before returning my thoughts to the concept of free
housing. An objection immediately reared its ugly head. “What happens if you
decide you want to move?” I said. “Surely there’ll be more than one person or
family interested in the same house. If you don’t offer a higher price for a
house, how do you manage to get to own it ahead of someone else?”
“We don’t
own our house,” said Dianne.
“But you
said you had no mortgage or rent.” Suddenly I realised. “Ohhhh. The state owns
it. Your locality or town. Or city.”
“No one owns it,” said Dianne.
“But we steward it,” said David. “Ownership has
been transcended—by stewardship.”
I
remembered Wilbur using the same word in relation to Alice and her restaurant,
but the memory did not aid my understanding. “What?! No one owns anything?! Not
even clothes?”
“Sorry,”
said David. “I expressed myself poorly. Too general and brief. Most things are
owned, but not houses. Nor land and fixed capital. They’re stewarded.”
“And who is
Stuart?”
My mind
already broiling, I listened with a mixture of horror and fascination as they
explained how the costs of developing land for use, and building factories and
industrial plants and other fixed capital, were all absorbed via CAPE into the
prices of other consumable goods and services, so that, like houses, land and
fixed capital were free. They pointed out that even under capitalism, the costs
of creating and maintaining capital goods are covered by the prices of the
goods they help produce—effectively absorbed into prices just as with CAPE. Nevertheless,
making fixed capital free had (allegedly) caused stocks, bonds and other
speculative money-raising methods to become obsolete. Was my subconscious
trying to tell me it was a good thing I never became a stockbroker, a career
I’d once briefly entertained?
Stewardship
of land and fixed capital was not as alien as I expected. Essentially it was a
plurocratic form of collective ownership. The people living in the smallest
plurocracy with borders that fully enclosed any unused land were its stewards,
which is to say they had responsibility for looking after the land until they
could agree on how, if at all, it would be used or developed. Whereas fixed
capital was stewarded mostly by the people operating it—all of the workers of a
factory or restaurant, for example—but also, and ultimately, by those most
directly affected by the capital’s operations: again, those living in the
smallest plurocracy with borders that fully enclosed it. All of which, it was
said, tended to encourage environmental and social care.
Home
stewards, on the other hand, had the usual rights bestowed by ownership, except
they could not sell or buy their houses. What they did instead struck me at
first as a little complicated. Even though houses were free, they still had ‘prices’
associated with them. Whenever a house had new or vacating occupants, valuers
would inspect the condition of the house and estimate what it would cost to
rebuild it from scratch. Adding standardised amounts for location, proximity to
services, the state of soil and land, and other advantages or disadvantages,
produced a quasi-price. If people left a house in worse condition than when
they moved in—if its ‘price’, adjusted to take CAPE-fluctuations into account,
fell during their stewardship—they could only move to places with an equal or
lower ‘price’. But if house stewards maintained or improved the value of their
homes, they were eligible to move to higher-‘priced’ houses—in Chord, higher by
the percentage increase in the price of their existing home plus ten percent of
the average house price. This allowance for ‘upward mobility’ differed between
plurocracies, as did the maximum ‘price’ for anyone’s first home.
I was
pleased to hear that burdos were treated somewhat differently. Anyone below
retirement age who had refused to work for more than a year, regardless of the
state of their house, could move only to houses with lesser ‘prices’. If this
obstacle prompted any burdos to return to work, they still could not move to a
higher-‘priced’ house until they worked for as long as they had previously
avoided working—in other words, it had to be a committed change of mind, not
just a brief effort to exploit a possible loophole. Likewise, anyone with an
account in the red beyond a specified value could move only to houses with lesser
‘prices’. Of course, burdos could still spend to their heart’s content, and
rack up more colossal negative balances, but at least there was some pressure
on them to contribute—a motivation more concrete, I thought, than the distant
prospect of an accusative epitaph.
“But you
still haven’t answered my question,” I said at the end of the explanation.
“There is bound to be more than one family interested in buying a house when
it’s vacated. How do you decide who gets it?”
“Waiting
lists,” said Dianne. “Accessible online and alterable at will. We nominated
eleven specific houses we were interested in as soon as we were engaged. When
the occupants of any of those houses decided they wanted to move, whoever was
at the top of their waiting list was notified automatically and given first
choice to move in. As it turned out, when this house’s previous stewards moved
elsewhere, we were second on the list, but the couple ahead of us decided
against it, so we moved in.”
“We were a
bit lucky,” said David, “I have to admit. It could have taken much longer, and
for others it often does. But then the other ten houses on our list would have
suited us just as much as this one, or maybe even more”—he turned to Dianne—“wouldn’t
you say so dear?”
“But there
must have been many other people waiting on those houses,” I said, not at all
convinced by their explanation. Visions of poor crowded public housing in
Soviet Russia came to mind. “And how often would they come on the market? You
might have been waiting for years. And what do you do in the meantime?”
“Well,”
began David, “for a start, there are more houses than occupants in Hillbeach,
quite a few more in fact, so there are always—or very nearly always—some vacant
houses to use while anyone is waiting. We were living in one such house in the
adjacent city for about two years before we moved here. But of course we
weren’t so silly as to put all our eggs in the same basket of just eleven
houses. We also put ourselves on waiting lists for this locality, and for two
other nearby localities as well. And for several others in other towns and
cities. That way, whenever any house
in those localities was vacated and we were on top of the list, or others ahead
of us rejected the houses, we were offered them.”
“We knocked
back at least ten,” added Dianne.
“It sounds
a bit like pot luck,” I said.
“No more
than it ever was,” replied David. He blinked rapidly (either a habit picked up
from his wife or passed to her), before meekly regretting the certainty of his
reply. “At least that’s what it seems to me. Indeed, I would think there was
probably more luck involved in the old days, what with everyone bidding against
everyone else and trying to guess what they could afford and what the
manic-compulsive market double-thought a home was worth. Wasn’t that how it was
under capitalism? A breeding ground for homelessness?”
With his
last sentence, the faltering gentle quality of his voice vanished, replaced by
a certainty and gravity that bordered on anger. His face also settled into an
expression that could not be misconstrued: he did not approve.
Dianne’s
response was similar in mood, though her face maintained its standard
composure. “What sort of excuse can be made for condemning even one person to
living under railway bridges or inside tunnels, begging on streets, kept merely
alive by handouts from charities, isolated, unwanted, half-frozen at night, and
semi-catatonic during the day? Is that supposed to be a mark of civilisation?”
“Civilisation?!”
said David, with more passion than I thought him capable, free of hesitation
and nervous movement. “It often seems to me that pre-enufist civilisation is an
oxymoron.” He turned to me. “I never cease to be amazed how you can study history
so dispassionately. Some of its travesties are more than I can bear to think
about.”
I did not
reply, since there seemed no point in reminding him I was not who he thought I
was. Dianne diplomatically changed the subject, asking about David’s progress
with his work. His response, again replete with puzzling gesticulations,
informed me—in about twice the time really required—that his nitinol phase
transformation engine was prototyped about a century before, but largely
abandoned for most of that time. He and other researchers across the world,
mostly hobbyists, had resurrected it recently and solved several of its more
pressing hurdles. But it was clearly a work in progress, though he was
optimistic about the prospects. Soon after, he returned to his workshop, and
soon after that, Dianne took the dishes inside.
The next moment,
she was gently jostling me awake—I had dozed off in her absence and she’d let
me sleep for over an hour. My sleeping hours in this dream, always irregular,
still hadn’t settled down.
Dianne
informed me that she, David, and Victoria were about to head off to the
locality meeting and asked if I wanted to join them. Why not, I thought—and said. It wasn’t like I had anywhere else to
go.
David,
apparently as usual, curtailed his day’s research only at the last possible
moment, so we were on the verge of running late. But the hall was only a few
hundred metres away.
Victoria
walked there with us, surprisingly enthusiastic. She claimed she liked the
meetings and all their activity, even though she could not vote. Her brother,
however, preferred playing football with friends, but was going to join us
afterwards.
Soon after
starting our walk, my eye was caught by a flash of movement on the opposite
side of the road. I looked up just in time to catch a glimpse of a small dark
shape as it scrambled into the bushland that fronted the entirety of that side
of the street.
“Did you
see that?” said Dianne to no one in particular, pointing.
“Only
briefly,” said David. “Too briefly to be sure what it was, I’m afraid. Was it a
possum?”
“No, Dad,”
said Victoria with relish. “It was a lyrebird.”
“That’s
what I thought,” said Dianne.
“Could have
been,” I muttered. “Didn’t really see it properly.”
“I suspect
it was,” said Dianne. “That would be the third sighting this year.”
“What’s it
doing in an urban area like this?” I asked. “I thought they’re very timid
creatures.”
“They are.
But that’s part of a nature corridor,” explained Dianne, pointing at the
bushland, “one that winds through Chord and connects up ultimately with open
habitat. The original town planners hoped it would have this sort of effect,
but I doubt they expected lyrebirds. They haven’t been seen in this area for
nearly a century. Not until this year.”
Two
cyclists rode past, waving. The Knights waved back.
We walked
the rest of the way without incident. The hall was a spacious mud-brick
construction on the near side of the tennis courts, set on a large block
devoted to sporting and community facilities, located according to Dianne near
the centre of the several localities which shared it. Inside, there must have been
hundreds of people, mostly adults but also many children. I looked for Wilbur,
but could not see him. I did see Mattie and Gino, and returned their waves,
along with many other salutations I received from complete strangers. Mattie’s
spirits seemed to have risen, but his expression indicated cautious restraint—an
admirable change, I thought.
It was a
kaleidoscopic crowd. Women wore everything from jeans and t-shirts to formal
gowns, billowing frilly dresses, skin-tight mini-skirts, glaring rainbow colours,
drab greys, muted monotones, floral ornamentation, modernist and abstract
patterns, modest high neck- and hem-lines, plunging décolletage and brazen
midriffs and thighs—a plethora of coordination and dishevelment. Men were less
varied: none in dresses at least, but everything else from shorts and singlets
to formal jackets and pants. One red-headed old fellow even had a kilt. Makeup ranged
from subtle to savage to none, but there was little jewellery, facial or body.
More surprisingly, there were no tattoos, and hair colours were all decidedly
natural. (Something I could admire: I never have understood why people who
object to the slightest artificial additives in their food or who worry about
pollution can choose to have their heads covered with abrasive chemicals just
to change the colour of their hair. Even Yvette used to do it.) But if hair
colours were plain, their styles were not—for men and women. Long hair, short hair, curly, straight, wavy, frizzed,
loose, tight, buns, plaids, pony-tails, shaved scalps, men with sideboards,
moustaches, beards from full-face to thin lines, even a pair of cheeks covered
in facial hair without moustache,
sideboards, or van dyke.
When I
could tear my attention away from the people, I noticed, along one wall of the
hall, a series of tables almost spilling over with large lidded containers of
food, copious bottles and jugs of drinks, stacks of plates and glasses, and several
microwaves and kettles. My appetite awoke. Another free dinner by the looks.
On the same
side, near the hall’s entrance, was a large electronic noticeboard with several
lists each of about two hundred names. Each list had large headings, but the
only one I recognised was ‘Jibilee’. As soon as we walked into the hall, David
moved to the Jibilee list and waited in line behind several people. Eventually,
he put a tick against the names of himself, Dianne, and Ernest. I was on the
verge of objecting to his last tick, and making my usual denial, but decided it
was futile. I noticed that all but five of Jibilee’s names had ticks against
them.
While David
waited in line, Dianne reminded me that consensus was needed for one of the
issues to be discussed. “All of Jibilee’s voters really should be present
tonight,” she added.
“What
happens if some don’t turn up?” I asked, looking at the faces in the hall.
“We mark
them as absent and carry on without them. It would only be a problem if they
were inclined to vote against the issue, but very few objectors tend to miss
these meetings.”
“What if
they have a good reason for missing them? Illness, for instance.”
“They can
always appoint someone to vote on their behalf, or send it through online. But
if, for whatever reason, they were prevented from conveying their views to the
meeting in time, they could still discuss it with me afterwards. I’m not
altogether an unreasonable person.”
“I imagine
not,” I replied. Having finished scanning the hall’s occupants, I asked,
“Where’s Wilbur?”
“His house
is in Aurora, an adjacent locality. They met last week.”
Dianne
moved to the front of the hall, onto a low stage, while the rest of us found
seats. She inserted a finger-sized device into a slot at the side of a large
whiteboard, and pressed some buttons near the slot. The board lit up with a
typed agenda. The steady stream of conversation ebbed. Dianne took what looked
like a remote control device from the side of the board, checked her watch and
stood to one side, waiting silently until the missing five stragglers arrived
not long after.
“Thank you
all for attending,” she said as soon as they found seats. Her clear voice
quieted the last dregs of chat. “As you can see, we have only four items to
discuss this evening, so we should have a fair chance of finishing on time. The
first is Jeff Myer. I doubt any of you wouldn’t have seen his work in Galadriel
Street, but just in case, here’s a less than exhaustive sample of it.”
She pointed
the remote control at the board and the agenda was replaced with a photo of
Dianne’s street, and its idiosyncratic decorations. Further photos followed before
Dianne began to speak again. To my surprise, she was no longer blinking and her
fingers were still. Had her fidgeting merely been symptoms of performance
anxiety? She certainly seemed to be in her element now, comfortable and
relaxed.
“At the
last meeting,” said Dianne, “the proposal was made to record Jeff’s efforts
officially by treating it as his needay work. In the month since, I’m pleased
to report that the necessary two-thirds majority has been recorded in favour of
the proposal, so the cost of paying him will now be included in Enote’s CAPE
budget, starting from the beginning of next month.”
“How can
that suddenly be afforded?” I whispered to David, as Dianne paused to let a
mother quieten the sudden cries of a baby. “I thought CAPE was planned out for
the whole year.”
“It is,” he
whispered back, nodding slightly. He continued, accompanied by more
facial and
hand gestures, but like his voice, they were muted, less sweeping and
more
circumspect than usual. “However, each town and higher level plurocracy
sets aside nominal amounts in their annual CAPE plans for unanticipated
expenditures.
These are used as needs and desires arise, although I should add there
is
certainly no compunction to spend everything.”
“Needless
to say,” continued Dianne, the baby now silent, “Jeff works far longer than
seven hours a week, so the town is definitely getting a bargain employing him.”
“How long
will he last?” demanded a surly voice from the back of the hall. I turned to
see its source: a young man, slouching in his seat. “Your street’s about as
decorated as it’s ever going to get. Then what will he do to earn his keep?”
I turned to
David with a quizzical expression.
“Len
Dartmouth,” whispered David. “He’s always been inclined to play the devil’s
advocate, but even more so since he broke up with his last girlfriend.”
Meanwhile,
Dianne answered Len’s question. “Jeff will be available to decorate any street
whose occupants desire it, Len. The occupants of one block in Briony Street
have already asked him to sketch some plans for their approval. I daresay
others will follow.” She turned her gaze directly at Len when she continued.
“And I must remind participants that, for the sake of orderly discussion, it’s
the custom to raise one’s hand and wait for me to acknowledge you before
speaking.” (A snort from Len’s direction.) Dianne paused before asking if
anyone else had questions on the matter. After a suitable silence, she
continued with the second agenda item.
This was
not a report about decisions already plurocratically made, but the issue that
required consensus: the location of a new fire lookout tower. According to
Dianne, this had been proposed by a city planning group, to overcome blind
spots of existing lookouts in Chord and surrounding cities. They had selected
five sites as most suitable, one of which, a small area of one block’s central
garden near the corner of Jibilee, almost opposite where we were meeting, was
near the border of three other localities. The tower had an obvious drawback:
it intruded visually—even given the plan’s attempts to hide it behind new
plants and to maximise the existing screening provided by houses’ backyard
hedges and other plants. As a result, the proposal required approval by the
bordering localities as well as by Jibilee. Dianne used her remote to display
on the board a computer graphic of what the tower would look like on the site
in question, depending on the viewing location.
Two of the
other localities had already voted in favour of the site, and one narrowly
against, but Enote’s rules had been plurocratically agreed that, in such a
situation, the proposal would be carried by the ‘home’ locality’s approval. At
the previous meeting, Jibilee had voted to require consensus approval; but as
this was not immediately forthcoming, people had been given the month since to
consider the issue.
Even though
the initial show of hands indicated only fourteen people were prepared to vote
against the proposal, the debate that followed took over half an hour. All
objectors agreed that the locality, town, city, and region would be better
served by having the tower than not—the risk of bushfire had apparently not
lessened since my day—but all were concerned about its visual intrusion. None
of the objectors lived close to the proposed site, where the planned screening
along with bordering hedges were expected to more or less fully hide the tower;
instead, as the computer graphic demonstrated, their homes were further away in
locations that gave them a line of sight to the tower. Nevertheless, the
objectors’ resistance was gradually whittled away as additional strategically
placed screening was suggested and considered—usually in their own yards, and not
very tall due to the distance and angles involved. The final result was indeed
a consensus in favour of the new tower.
When I
failed to raise my hand in the initial vote, David whispered that I “really
should” have my say, not only because the proposed site was not far from the
rear of ‘my’ house, but also because ‘my’ vote was necessary for consensus to
be reached. I objected, saying I was not a member of the locality, but he
insisted that if I did not vote, the proposal could not be decided. As it
turned out, my vote was not needed, because after the initial raising of hands,
Dianne was sensible enough not to attempt to repeatedly count the nearly two
hundred in favour, but instead opted merely to count those against. When this
number finally shrank to zero, the issue was decided.
“Congratulations,”
said Dianne. “I can remember few issues where we have reached consensus as
quickly as we have today. I will record our decision formally on Chord’s
website, but of course this is only the first step. As soon as the stewards of
all other nominated sites finish voting, the city planners will make the final
choice. As usual, this will be based not only on the differing suitability of
each site, but also on the level of consensus and extent of additional
requirements made by each site’s voters. From what I have been informed about
progress with the other sites, I would expect the planners’ decision and their
reasons for it to be on the Net within the month.” Something from the back of
the hall took her attention, and she nodded towards it, saying, “You wish to
address the hall, Len?”
I turned to
see Len lower his raised hand, stand, and begin speaking. “This is so damned
slow,” he said.
“Here we
go,” whispered someone behind me. David shifted his eyes skyward. At my
quizzical look, he said, “Len makes more or less the same complaint, I would
say, at every single meeting.”
Len expanded
at length on his initial statement, while whispers mounted. Several people
headed toward the public conveniences.
When Len
finally finished, without offering any way of speeding the discussion along, an
old fellow near the front of the hall raised his hand.
“Seiji,”
said Dianne, “you wish to speak?”
He stood
and spoke in a quiet dignified voice, far clearer and louder than I would have
expected from someone his age. “I trust Len has now let off enough steam for
the meeting to resume. I wish only to point out that if he had been around in
the old days, before these meetings, when decisions were made usually too quickly by someone who lived and worked
miles away and had no familiarity or understanding of who and what we have here
in Jibilee, Len wouldn’t now be complaining of sloth.”
A short
round of applause erupted from most of the hall, including David.
“It’s still
too slow,” grumbled Len, unrepentant.
Dianne
waited briefly for further comments, then began the third agenda item. It may
have been my imagination, but I thought the meeting proceeded then at a
slightly quicker pace.
The third
item took me somewhat by surprise, though everyone else seemed to treat it as
old news. Dianne explained how in the previous week, a number of refugees had
landed by boat on Australia’s north coast, seeking asylum from a repressive
regime whose name was unknown to me but apparently well recognised by everyone
else. She made a brief reference to national and meta-national policy dictating
that the refugees were to be accepted into Australia as long as sufficient
housing was available. And she added that diplomatic negotiations and something
I thought she called ‘pair giving’ were continuing in the hope of persuading
the regime to abandon its authoritarian system in favour of plurocracy and a
free lunch.
The issue
for Jibilee was whether or not to offer some of its vacant houses to some of
the refugees, although there was no guarantee an offer would either be needed
or accepted by national and regional authorities who, according to Dianne,
might well be facing a glut of similar offers. To assist Jibilee in the making
up of its mind, Dianne had electronically circulated a summary of the cases for
and against the proposal. She put a shorter point-form summary on the board for
all to see. It seemed thorough and even-handed. When I whispered the question
to David, he replied that this was typical of how Dianne handled issues.
It was all
in stark contrast to the policies, procedures, and opinions dominant in recent
years—my recent years, that is. For a
long time, even as foreign millionaires, leaders of industry and anyone
considered a skilled worker migrated without fuss to the land down under, when
it came to refugees we had all but suffocated under a deluge of well-worn phrases
like ‘opening the floodgates’, ‘invading hordes’, and ‘queue jumpers’.
Xenophobia ruled to the extent that it was questioned not only whether those
seeking asylum were genuine refugees but even whether some were terrorist
plants. Consequently, both major political parties tried endlessly to duck-shove
the refugees onto more willing nations.
I was one
of the alleged minority at the time who found the national reaction appalling.
Allowing every refugee into the country ran a risk of encouraging more to do the
same and stretching our resources beyond their limits, but I did not accept
that this demanded a blanket rejection of all so-called ‘boat people’. In my
opinion, what it did require was a more humane response to those in need and
better diplomatic relations and understanding between Australia and the
countries of origin. Financial assistance and technological aid to improve
living standards and so deter refugees from leaving their homes would also not
have been misplaced. But, as Yvette pointed out, it was truly an international
problem, with the same scenario enacted in many other countries. “It will never
be fully avoided,” she warned me one night, “as long as nations are pitted
against each other in economic war. It will require a cooperative solution to
bring everyone’s living standards and political institutions up to something
resembling a civilised level.” Her words sounded right at the time, but I gave
them barely any further thought. Obviously, my subconscious had contemplated
them considerably more than my conscious mind: the dream it had thrown me into
was indeed looking at the problem from Yvette’s angle.
“To begin
the discussion,” said Dianne, “I’d like to offer my own view. Let me remind you
of plurocracy’s single guiding rule: any practice of one’s own choice is a right, as long as one fulfils the duty not to harm others in the process.
Some might claim we have a right to keep Jibilee to ourselves, a right to
privacy or self-rule, a right to do as we have been doing without being
burdened by people who at least at first will require considerable care and
attention, who will probably not even speak our language. My own view is that
Jibilee cannot exercise such rights or any right that might allow us to reject
taking in some of the refugees without neglecting its duty not to harm those
people. Who would like to respond?”
Several
people raised their hands, and Dianne selected the closest, an elderly man
sitting on his own. As with all of the others who had spoken during the
meeting, she addressed him by name—quite a memory. “Poppycock!” he said in a
loud but croaky voice. “There are enough spare houses all over the country to
accommodate a thousand times the number of refugees we’re talking about here.
Why should Jibilee take them on when others could do so just as easily? More
easily in fact since our spare housing stock is not as high as many other
places. I say we leave it to others.”
He was
rebutted by a nearby elderly woman who spoke about Jibilee setting a good
example, and the discussion passed back and forth between those willing and
those less willing. I was struck by how there was no talk about rejecting the
refugees overall, the only question was where in the country to relocate them.
And through it all, Dianne kept making gentle references to rights and duties.
She did not denigrate any person’s opinion, and allowed all to speak, but
nevertheless made her own views clear. Her actions during the meeting, and her
preliminary dissemination of both sides of the case, persuaded me she was a very
committed representative keen to raise the standard of thought of her
electorate. Quite the contrast to what I was used to!
“Are all
locality representatives like your wife?” I whispered to David in the midst of
the discussion.
He smiled
and shook his head. “If only. Most plurocrats are fairly conscientious, I would
think, however a few leave much to be desired. Di’s predecessor, for instance,
it would be fair to say, took it very easy. I doubt he ever distributed any
background information, or even tried to set out both sides of an argument. He
did not stay our plurocrat for long.”
My
attention returned to the discussion. The floor was held by a middle-aged
mother flanked by two pre-adolescent boys, all of obvious Asian ancestry. “In
this country,” she said, “we are all refugees, and have been ever since Britain
first sent convicts to Botany Bay. How can we refuse them?”
The
discussion continued for another ten minutes or more, before it quietened to
the point where Dianne brought it to a vote. I would have liked to have voted
in favour of this one myself, but I still felt an overriding sense of being an
impostor, so I kept my hand down. It made no difference. The vote was a clear
two-thirds majority in favour of offering some houses to refugees, without an
exact number of houses being stipulated. When that question had its turn to be
voted on, Dianne began by asking for a show of hands in favour of offering all
eleven spare houses in Jibilee. No one agreed, and so the number was reduced
incrementally by one until the necessary majority was reached. Dianne’s only
comment during this process followed the narrow rejection of three houses. She
pointed out that offering only one house would probably cause more problems
than offering two, since it would help any refugees to have someone else nearby
with whom they were familiar and could speak the same language. Jibilee then
voted—almost unanimously—to make two houses available to the refugees.
The fourth
and final agenda item took barely a minute. It concerned a number of new
products that were on the verge of being released across the region, including a
battery-free smoke alarm developed by a Jibilee resident present in the hall. In
what she called a “reminder”, Dianne explained that if enough voters nominated
their preferred price for the new products, as a percentage of cost, the
average value voted would then be used by CAPE. But if too few voters made the
effort, the price would be set at cost. She pointed out that with less than a
week still left to nominate prices, no one in Jibilee, apart from the inventor,
herself and David, had bothered, and that it might be courteous, as well as
ultimately in their own best interests, to cast their votes. Some uncomfortable
shifting in seats, particularly those closest to where the inventor was
sitting, suggested Dianne had struck guilt.
“Now is
there any other business?” she asked, after a brief pause.
A tall
youth, I thought just barely old enough to vote, raised his hand. Dianne said
his name, and he stood and spoke. “Last year, you might remember, before
consensus was reached about building the new tennis courts, a few of us pointed
out we preferred an upgrade to the basketball court. We ended up giving in when
it was pointed out that more people here play tennis than basketball, but it
was conditional on the basketball situation being reconsidered a year later.
That time has come.”
“According
to my records, Nguyhen,” said Dianne, “the meeting you refer to was a year ago next month. I have included it in next
month’s agenda.”
“I thought
it was…,” said Nguyhen, blushing. “Sorry.” He sat down abruptly.
“It won’t
hurt,” said Dianne, “to have reminded people now. It will require a town vote,
of course, since the facility is used by people from many localities besides
Jibilee, and any upgrade will naturally need to comply with city regulations.
But I suggest those in favour of the upgrade prepare their case as fully as
possible, including its affordability, and promote it in person and online
before next month’s meeting. I doubt Jibilee or any other of Enote’s localities
will require consensus for it.”
Another
call for further business was answered by Len, who complained (apparently not
for the first time) of Jibilee having different representatives for different
town and higher-level issues. Although Dianne was the official plurocrat for
Jibilee, for some specialist issues the locality was often represented by other
locals who (usually) had more knowledge of those subjects. The ensuing
discussion also mentioned that some localities did not even vote for their
representatives but rostered the positions among volunteers.
It was
clear to me that Len wanted to be Jibilee’s sole representative on everything.
Yet he had no option but to let the matter drop when Dianne reminded him that his
had been the only dissenting vote against the standing arrangement for over
five years.
When a
thorough silence greeted her final call for further business, Dianne declared
the meeting over. “Okay,” she said, quietly beaming, “let’s eat.”
The entire
gathering stood, moved to the tables, and helped themselves to the waiting
smorgasbord.
Eat we did.
And drink. I made a pig of myself. And drank more wine than probably was wise.
That’s my excuse anyway.
![]() |
Chapter 16![]() |