Action, action

Successive governments have formed too many commissions and committees to look into the long-ailing public corporations (PEs) and suggest measures for turning them into cost-effective or profitable ventures. But not much concrete action has been taken to that end. If all those reports were put together, they would fill many shelves. The latest report, an interim one, has come from the five-month-old Corporation Reform Suggestions Committee headed by former industry secretary Dr Bhola Chalise. Unsurprisingly, it has concluded that most of the PEs are in an unenviable state. It has categorised them as bad and very bad, and added that both the privatisation and reform process for the PEs have stalled. Therefore, it has recommended the formation of a corporation reform commission to adopt policy for reform. Though the existing privatisation committee has representation from the political parties and the private sector, little has come of it.

The justification for this commission and for reform, according to the report, comes from the belief that in the present fluid political atmosphere, full-scale privatisation cannot move forward. As the interim government represents eight parties with different views on how to pull the PEs out of red, a consensus on the PEs’ outright privatisation may indeed be difficult to achieve at this juncture. However, even the Maoists may not be averse to the idea of starting the process of selling the shares to the general public. The symptoms of the disease are more or less common to all PEs, and the disease was diagnosed long ago. What is really needed now is not more committees or commissions, but concrete remedial action to bring the ailing PEs back to health. In this context, the great majority of the corporations have no option but to privatise. The government and bureaucrats, who cannot run the ministries and departments properly, cannot be expected to run commercial, industrial or financial enterprises professionally.

In the past, many reform measures were announced to revitalise the PEs but none worked. It is therefore hard to believe that any new reform measure without changing their ownership structure will now be effective at turning the PEs around. One or two governments also sought to put vigour into the PEs by hiring their chief executives on performance contracts, but that came to almost nothing. Poor performance of the PEs has a lot to do with the failure to exact accountability. For instance, government bureaucrats who occupy important positions as chairmen or members of the boards of the PEs or members of recruitment committees are not held accountable for their performance there. There has not been a consensus among the political parties either on exactly what to do with the PEs. Any government that came to power lacked clear vision and willpower to introduce far-reaching reforms. It treated the PEs as employment mills. The interim government can no longer afford to waste time on commissions or reports. The need of the hour is action.

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 5, 2007

Federal structure: Administrative units on ethnic basis

Shailendra Kumar Upadhyay

Jawaharlal Nehru University professor S D Muni needs no introduction for Nepali intellectuals and politicians because of his long association with political developments in Nepal. Muni is a well-wisher of Nepal and an ardent believer in people’s power and democracy. He believes in the special nature of ties between Nepal and India. For these reasons his observations on current Nepali politics merit serious attention.

During his recent Nepal visit, Muni suggested that the Tarai problem be given due priority to prevent the disintegration of Nepal. The people of Tarai have been raising their voice against their marginalisation since the advent of democracy in 1950. In spite of Tarai’s contribution to Nepali economy, the state has not treated them in a fair manner. Just as a token of gesture some people from Tarai have been picked for high-level posts but not as a matter of their rights. This has been resented by the people of Tarai and particularly after the success of Jana Andolan II, and consciousness of Tarai people has increased manifold.The commitment made by the eight party alliance to restructure the state on a federal basis has been widely welcomed but the question of the basis of the formation of the new administrative units under a federal structure is yet to be answered. At the same time, the question of representation in the Constituent Assembly and future parliament remains a sensitive issue.

While there is a consensus among civil society members that the country’s future administrative units have to be decided, as far as possible, on ethnic and linguistic basis, the political leaders are still creating confusion about the issue. Even the chief government negotiator has publicly denounced formation of future administrative units on the basis of ethnicity and language. This not only diminishes the credibility of the negotiator but also raises severe doubts about government’s intention.The Tarai belt has four prominent language groups — Maithili, Bhojpuri, Awadhi and Tharu, with Hindi as their lingua franca. Now, it has to be agreed that only the people of Tarai have the right to opt for either a single Tarai unit as a new administrative entity or four units based on language.

Similarly the question of administrative units in the hills and mountains has to be left to the wishes of the people inhabiting those regions. Although most of the mountainous districts have mixed populations, a particular ethnic community makes for the dominant part of a particular district. Naturally these ethnic communities would prefer creation of administrative units on the basis of the prominence of a particular ethnic community although the rights and privileges of other minority groups would have to be protected too. But to say that since there is no majority of any ethnic community in any district there is no need for units on ethnic basis is like trying to sweep the problem under the carpet.The fact that culture grows out of a particular language. For the protection of a culture the language has to be protected is a universal truth. It has to be accepted that new administrative units will use their own language and common link language to facilitate the participation of commonfolk in socio-political activities and promotion of their culture. The right to protect one’s identity must be recognised as a fundamental right of the people. Either those opposed to formation of new administrative units have to submit a viable alternative or they should accede to the demands of the Tarai people.

If the government adopts a policy of suppression of the Tarai agitation through force, such measures will boomerang by helping the extremists who want to see the country disintegrate. The same armed forces that assured the King they would be able to quell the Maoist rebellion in six months might try to persuade the present regime that the Tarai agitation could be thwarted by martial means as well. The politicians need to keep this in mind and must open up the vista for mutual understanding.As long as the government does not show its readiness to create new administrative units on the basis of ethnicity and language and discuss the merits of proportional representation, no meaningful discussions can take place with the dissenters and the question of free and fair CA polls will remain in limbo.

For their part, the ministers must learn to hold their tongue on controversial matters which can only be solved through dialogue. They also need to show their readiness to respond to the demands of the people of Tarai, indigenous groups and ethnic communities, dalits and women. The age of imposition of one’s idea on others has passed. The new awareness among people of their legitimate rights and privileges must be respected. There is no alternative to dialogue and discussion. Use of force is undemocratic and will create bigger problems. Recognition of the sovereign right of people is the only way out of the present crisis.Upadhyay is ex-foreign minister

Source: The Himalayan Times, July 5, 2007

Tapping Nepal’s hydropower potential

Rajendra Bhandari

The parliamentary Natural Resources and Means Committee has been meeting to decide on what could be the turning point in terms of Nepal’s development. In this regard, the country’s huge hydropower potential has emerged as the strongest contender, as far as economic emancipation is concerned. Nepal, despite being a country rich in hydropower resources, has unfortunately been unable to utilise this asset to its advantage. It is estimated that less than 2% of its hydropotential is being tapped.However, realising this enormous possibility, positive steps are now being taken in the right direction. The government, after gaining and learning from past experiences, set up a bidding committee for hydropower projects with a comprehensive evaluation process to identify and select the most capable and feasible party. Some of these include 402 MW Arun 3, 300 MW Upper Karnali, and others totalling an approximate 2000 MW projects being processed by the government and private sectors collectively.

The Parliamentary Committee is now assessing the bidding process. Embroiled in a dynamic political environment, the process seems to be taking too long. The coalition has priorities changing from day to day. Meanwhile, the world is looking up to those in power to quickly take measures that will inculcate confidence in the investing community — be it national or international.This is what puts the Committee as well as the government in a position that will help them define the future of the economic progress of Nepal. An expeditious decision on the power projects will help send a signal to the world about the government’s seriousness of purpose in inviting investment that is important for Nepal’s development. But unending deliberations and a prolonged process may take Nepal right back to where it began.Nepal may even consider taking a leaf out of its neighbour’s book. Bhutan’s achievement in terms of hydropower development has helped establish it as the nation with the highest per capita income among SAARC countries. A remarkable feat considering that there is a two-fold increase in its GDP.

Nepal too can mobilise its huge water resources. Bearing in mind the similarities between the two countries in terms of geographical size, terrain and population, adopting a parallel strategy that can leverage hydropower resources to enhance national economy could well be Nepal’s ticket to prosperity, especially with the Indian economy promising to be a big market.The government has already got overwhelming response from the international community. The approach, process and criteria of selection looked much more apprehensive and credible. No wonder many good international parties have submitted their proposals this time. The selection committee must take a holistic approach towards the entire process and get out of small issues. Now, it is up to the government and the Parliamentary Committee to settle the bidding process and take a quick step towards economic independence.

Source: The Himalayan Times, June 28, 2007

Get it on

Home Minister Krishna Prasad Sitaula urged the people and the institutions concerned to initiate a social campaign against drug abuse and illicit trafficking on the occasion of the International Day Against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, June 26. The minister opined that since law alone would not ensure effective control over drug abuse and illegal trade in humans, the society at large should be involved in this cause. He also said a national policy should be formulated after appropriate debate and discussion with all the stakeholders. Sitaula is right in one thing: that a positive impact can only be generated if a nationwide campaign is undertaken with active participation of the citizens’ groups. Such a campaign must also involve people from the grassroots.

However, success of any social awareness campaign is contingent upon the depth of government’s commitment. Because legal protection is the most important instrument to check social ills, the state’s role becomes all the more crucial. If the government enforced stringent measures to check drug abuse and illicit trafficking, things would improve drastically. According to official figures, there are still around 70 thousand drug addicts in the country and around 55 per cent of them are HIV/AIDS victims. Some introspection is certainly warranted to find out as to why past government policies in this regard failed to become effective and why NGO-led programmes have proved by and large redundant in spite of the huge foreign assistance for over 15 years now.

Source: The Himalayan Times, June 28, 2007

The Growing Foreign Concern for Nepal

With the development of peace building process foreign concern in Nepal has increased in massive Level. Each and every country directly or indirectly related to Nepal is concerning about Nepal and its peace building process according to their global and regional influence. But the critics say that it is foreign intervention upon internal politics of Nepal. China, which often remains silent in Nepalese politics, has also been showing its concern since April movement of 2006. Especially it has seen in massive scale when Chinese ambassador to Nepal, Zheng Xianglin said any foreign intervention in Nepal "will not be tolerable for China," in an interview published in Nepal magazine, last month. Though China has not faced any charge from critic about intervention. But it is said that America and India have been playing vital role in Nepalese politics. Among the many Countries America, India and china are mainly have seen on the scene in Nepalese diplomacy. It is not new of American and Indian concern but in the latest day's Chinese concern has created a new wave.

Nepal is surrounded by India in east, west and south and by China in north. So she has geopolitical relationship with India and China. And, located between two large Asian countries China and India, America wants to gain the benefit of geopolitical and strategic significant from Nepal-U.S. relationship.Directly or indirectly these three country want to keep continue their relationship with Nepal in high level to maintain their political and economical impulse. America always wants to look through Indian eyes to Nepal; and India also does not make any different idea to look Nepal rather than American interests. Now, going on federalism and abolishing the monarchy are main political issues of Nepalese political ground. On the issue of abolishing the monarchy has disputes in the country. And it is charged that America and India want to keep continue the monarchy in Nepal, so, before a month some cadres of Young communist league, a sister organization of Nepal communist Party (Maoist) had hurled stone to James F. Moriarty, the American ambassador to Nepal.

India and Nepal have a geographical nearness and open boarder. There is monopoly of India in Nepalese commercial market too. So India wants to secure her dominant role in Nepalese market. And a few decades ago India was battled and defeated with china and it has remained a bit fear to India of China. This is why Nepal is important "northern frontiers" of India. Though, China and India have improved their relationship into fair competitive commercial partner from traditional enemy.China doesn't tolerate the activities about free Tibet in Nepal which happened sometimes. And, some analyst especially leftist says that the America is trying to encircle China through Nepali territory. So, it is said that china's relationship with Nepal is also a bit more strategic on the prospective of security. Even though Chinese ambassador to Nepal has said that it is not the time of cold war and china-America relations witness a smooth and healthy development. Nowadays China also wants to buildup the formal relationship with CPN (Maoist) which is said by Chinese ambassador in a press interaction, last week, organized by Reporters club. But America and India still doubtfully look to Maoist. And it is said that the Maoist's president Prachanda will visit to China after few months.

Besides located between India and China, America has another issue in Nepal of their interest. That is doctrine issue. America always hates communist. So, the entering of Maoist into government and their open politics has been challenging to America. America has still tagged to Maoist as terrorist. The out going ambassador Moriarty often talk about Nepalese politics in different programme and scold Maoist and her sister organization YCL. India has begun to invite to Nepalese party to visit India. Nepali congress and CPN UML has already visited India. Likewise many political mission and team of different western country come to Nepal to observe and talk about politics in Nepal. And they directly talk to Nepalese prime minister too. Last time American Former President had come to Nepal and met with prime minister and leaders of political parties including Maoist president Prachanda. These influential countries envoy frequently meet to the Nepalese prime minister directly and talk about Nepalese politics.

But critics say that it is not the right system to meet prime minister directly. Professor and political analyst Dr. Lokraj Baral said, "They must go through joint secretary of foreign ministry." Critics accuse that the foreign diplomats are being over smart in Nepalese politics out of their ethics. Some critics believe that our leader themselves give the environment of such type. Bhim Bhurtel, A political analyst says that if the political leadership believes on people rather than power center the foreign concern automatically reduce. He said, "in this situation Nepal should adopt the dynamic foreign policy in spite of accusing to foreign diplomats."

Source: Ohmy News International, June 30, 2007