Grey Corruption

Grey literature is published but seldom indexed, seldom catalogued, and poorly distributed. Grey literature is not noticed. It is at once central and peripheral to the state: central, in that the machinery of government runs on intelligence, which in written form is grey literature; and peripheral in that it is on the fringes of state communication with citizens and the media. Most people have never heard of grey literature, which is very much the point.

Grey corruption is public but seldom investigated, seldom reported, and never prosecuted. Grey corruption is not noticed. I'm going to define grey corruption as the influence of the state on civil society. The example I will take is that of associations. In Catalonia alone there are some 25,000 registered associations, or one for every 280 residents.

Shortly before the Diagonal plebiscite, two groups of civil society organisations stated or demonstrated their support not only for the process but for but two of the three options put forward by the municipal authorities. There was some overlap between these groups. I'll deal with the second group, and the overlap, in my next post. In the meantime, here's a list of the signatories of the "Manifest per a la transformació de la Diagonal" (Manifesto in Support of the Transformation of Diagonal Avenue):

1. UGT (a trade union federation)
2. CCOO (a trade union federation)
3. Consell d'Associacions de Barcelona (the Barcelona Associations' Council, not to be confused with the Consell Muncipal d'Associacions de Barcelona or Barcelona Municipal Associations' Council.
4. Federació d'Associacions de Veïns i Veines de Barcelona (Federation of Barcelona Neighbourhood Residents' Associations)
5. Consell de la Joventut de Barcelona (Barcelona Young People's Council)
6. Consell de la Gent Gran de Barcelona (Barcelona Elderly People's Council, which seems not to exist unless it is the same as Consell Assessor de la Gent Gran de Barcelona)
7. Diagonal per a Tothom (Diagional Avenue for Everyone, about which more below)
8. Fundació Francesc Ferrer i Guàrdia
9. Institut Muncipal de Persones amb Discapacitat (Muncipal Institute for People with Disabilities)
10. Federación de Entidades Latinoamericanes de Cataluña (Federation of Latin-American Organisations of Catalonia)
11. Federación de Casas Regionales y Entidades Culturales de Cataluña (Federation of Regional Clubs and Cultural Organisations of Catalonia)

Some of the signatories are para-governmental:  No. 9, as its names suggests, is part of the apparatus of municipal administration, headed by an elected politician and governed by a board of whose twenty members ten are named by Barcelona city council. No. 6 is likewise sponsored by city hall, which names four members to a fourteen-member board directly, and another two indirectly. The mayor called the plebiscite, city hall advertised two of the three options; it's no surprise that city hall would support its own initiative.

Of the rest, three related questions suggest themselves. How are they funded? Were they acting independently of political manipulation? And were they exceeding their mandate, concerning themselves with an issue that does not readily mesh with their raisons d'être? A few examples:

• Nos. 1 and 2, the unions, receive state funding, and have enjoyed a great increase in funding under the two successive PSOE minority governments in Madrid. The PSOE's Catalan sister party, the PSC, leads the coalition at city hall. 
• No. 4 is an umbrella organisation representing residents' associations large and small all over the city. In the 2010 master list of municipal grants, 128 project grants were made to associations whose titles include the word 'veïns' and which, presumably, belong to the federation. If the average grant were 3000 euros--a low estimate--the total disbursed to member associations would come to 384000 euros. 
• No. 5, the Consell de la Joventut, received an 18000-euro generic grant in 2006. It has been an official interlocutor of city hall's on youth policy since 1980 and has signed a series of accords with city authorities since its inception. It runs a youth services centre jointly with the municipal youth services department.  For 2010, it was accorded, together with its neighbourhood level constituent bodies, over 5500 euros of municipal funding.  
• No. 8, a left-of-centre think-tank, received 18000 in municipal project grants in 2010 and 
• No. 10, Fedelatina, was accorded a 27500-euro grant towards the "social integration of immigrated (sic) persons" in March of this year. (The grantor, the Catalan autonomous government, is of the same three political stripes as city hall.) From city hall it's received 32000 euros in project grants, including 10000 for a Latin American Eco-Fest. 

I could go on and on, and probably will when I have a chance to trawl for more data. The point is that a civil society will not bite the hand that feeds it: if funding has come from the same funders for over thirty years--if you're tight--you're not likely to act in good faith, independently, with an eye to your own constituency and membership. By way of comparison: if a self-employed professional is only billing one client, isn't that professional an employee of the client's in all but name? If an association is dependent for funding on the largesse of one party through the various levels of government that it controls, how can it be independently and honestly critical?

Then there's the matter of expertise. Civil society is wide and deep. La Leche League and Amnesty International do excellent work, but would we ask for their brief on an urban planning issue? They know about breast-feeding and human rights; they are respected because they stick to what they know. What qualifies Fedelatina or CCOO to issue pronouncements on new designs for a six-lane avenue? Nothing, except the tune being called from the counting house. No wonder half a dozen of the signatories, or constituent organisations, set up polling stations in their offices, though they had publicly campaigned against one of the options.