Improve bus service

It is indeed an irony that public transportation in Kathmandu valley should  turn from bad to worse since the day the government introduced the Euro-I emission standard. The reason for this deterioration is no doubt the sluggish traffic flow in the traffic congested streets of the city. Even when the traffic jams are not there, for instance, in the early morning hours, it takes a bus an average of one hour to cover a distance of 15 kilometres within the valley.

It is not that there are no traffic rules to discipline these city buses, but by all appearances, these rules do not seem to apply to them. Neither has the valley traffic police placed its personnel at major bus stops, nor has Kathmandu Metropolis set rules and regulations for bus drivers to follow. The manner in which buses make a beeline at every stop and the fact that stray passengers are allowed to get into crammed buses at any point shows that Kathmandu Metropolis has done nothing to regulate the daily bus service.

It is true that most city buses plying within the valley spend more than 15 minutes at each bus stop waiting for passengers. Besides polluting the environment with diesel fumes and noise, they also increase the traffic load during peak hours. Thousands of suffering commuters who spend hours in crammed buses become victims of the service. Had Kathmandu metropolis and Valley Traffic Office manned the major bus stops, such a pathetic bus service would not have existed. No doubt, much of has comminuting woes can be traced to the neglect shown by VTO and Kathmandu Metropolis towards this problem. 

The introduction of micro buses, especially in Kathmandu valley has not eased the problems of public transportation. Neither are there any prospects that they will help commuters travel short distances quickly unless the traffic system is itself properly managed. In this, the traffic police as well as the metropolis must play a crucial role for without their coordinated efforts, the bus service of Kathmandu will never improve. First things first, the bus stops as well as the streets have to have traffic police presence so that they can see to it that drivers comply with traffic rules. Both VTO and Kathmandu Metropolis have to take new measures to control the movement of city buses if they want to provide better and faster bus service to commuters. The earlier they do so the better it will be for commuters.

Change through ballot, not violence

By Nagendra Chhetri

The so-called Maoist problem that the country has been having for the last five years is not the first of its kind. We have had similar problems in Malaya, Kenya, Cyprus, Jordan,   Vietnam, Algeria and in so many other countries. Many countries in Latin  America and Africa still suffer from it. In Nepal any form of violence ie killing and looting, burning and plundering used to be a rare occurrence, but now it is a daily happening If the violence is called insurgencies, whether political or social, these insurgencies have taken on recognizable patterns, as societies everywhere are attempting to change the world, a world ravaged by war and shaken not only by the end of colonialism but also a world unsteady particularly after the destruction of communist empires in USSR and its satellites in Europe. The frequency and make up of this form of disorder is perhaps the most unusual aspect of the world scene. Nepal, perhaps, can not be an exception, in this fast growing global electronic and print media. The only unfortunate thing is this media is dominated by rich industrialized countries and the poor and underdeveloped countries like Nepal are being subjected to well-crafted information campaigns. If Nepal had the means to control this most effective and influential power to project its national image in the global scenario, may be things could have been different today for this nation. Alas! Will this ever happen for Nepal?

The basic truth however is this nation is living in a period of great political, economic and social change. In the present generation, thinking people everywhere in all continents have fully discovered that change in any society is possible; therefore even in a poor and illiterate country like Nepal, no citizen needs to settle for a dirt floor merely because his parents did it. All Nepalese have lately learned that change, both mental and physical, can be brought about by even an active minority and that leaders need not be prominent or wealthy. The realization has also quickly spread here that a thin majority of one vote of one individual can bring about  basic changes in the whole national outlook through the ballot affecting even the national policy of the country. For those without full faith in the ballot box, change, the total one, is also possible and achieved through violence and they may be aided by friendly and pseudo friendly supporters even from outside the country.

Now it has become the primary responsibility of all political leaders, bureaucrats, media and academicians whether the 5 year old Maoist revolt is really based on widespread grievances? How well organized this revolutionary party (CPN Maoist) is and whether the uprising against constitutional monarchy and multi-party system can mobilize the Nepalese mass as a whole? It is nothing new nor a surprise these days to hear about or actually face a revolution, rebellion, insurrection, coups, counter coups or uprising somewhere in the world almost every week if not every day. Leaving aside about half a dozen major military operations around the globe, there have been numerous uprisings against the legitimate government of one sort or the other after 1990. The Maoist uprising is a direct result of mismanagement causing frustration, unemployment, unequal distribution, corruption and political and administrative inability to institutionalize democratic delivery system and failing to win public confidence in the newly gained liberal freedom.

The so-called proletariat and insurgents did not start their uprisings against an existing system with a formal declaration of traditional and conventional war. But more than fifteen hundred people have been already killed due to Maoist activities, thousands have been wounded and maimed, property damages, both private and public run into millions and overall loss in the developmental activity runs into hundreds of millions. Although encounters between the security forces and Maoist are not war in its orthodox form it is neither the traditional peace that is prevailing in this country. It is clearly a nationwide assault on the democratic and historical institutions, an assault which has assumed a violent form. We are probably in the midst of an unprecedented readjustment of our democratic system and for the control and distribution of the meagre goods and services that this nation produces.

What we are seeing today is a practice of old phenomenon in a  new pattern/form. "The old phenomenon is the fact that for every one thousand persons there have always been one or two willing to risk imprisonment, exile or death to bring about political change." Almost without exception, their goal has not been to totally alter the pattern of a state but rather to take it over. Political history is witness to these changes around the world. "Julius Caesar did not want to change  Roman society; he merely wanted to run Rome--no doubt because he thought he could do it better than most." Therefore, what we see when we study  revolutionary history is that the goal has not always been to improve the quality of public life, but to enforce a dictatorial one party system and capture power for personal reason for a new leader. In many cases, they may strengthen the role of proletariat, shift the means of production from private to public ownership, realign external relations with the aim of changing the political, economic and social system.

Maoist leadership has been talking about changes in the present political, economic and social structure of this country. Well! change in what ways and to what limits? And why? Are they talking about equal and equitable distribution, social justice, rights and duties to go hand in hand, leadership being accountable to the people, fair and clean justice, fair dealings based on ability, attitude, action and performance, honesty and sincerity national interest being on top of every thing? All these are qualities and basic characteristics inherent in the political system that we are practising in the country today. No one is going to believe that the political system itself is bad just because some of us are bad and not properly doing our job. This is a system which has sustained, endured and proved better than any other system including the so called proletariat dictatorial one which crumbled after about 70 years. If the Maoist are really serious about improving the quality of Nepalese life, they must come out of the bush, sit for the political competition, convince the people, find a national common ground with all political leadership and lead this country towards peace, prosperity and progress. Let people decide which system and who is better to govern not through the gun but through the ballot, although what everybody should understand in the context of Nepal is monarchy and democracy are inseparable.

The Maoists are also talking about a new model of democracy because they say the western form of democracy has failed to deliver. They must explain and specify what new model of democracy they are talking about. They are talking about a new constitution but what kind of constitution and why? They must explain the weakness of the present constitution and suggest amendments, if needed, analyzing the overall interest of the nation. They know it very well for any insurgency operation and uprising to be successful, three basic and decisive factors are needed. They are a good solid cause, spontaneous people's support and readily available external assistance to the cause. In the present Maoists case all three are lacking whatever the propaganda. If the authorities understood the importance and necessity for complete integration of the civil administration, security force and the civil police into one coordinated team, working from a common plan in close cooperation and along with the people rather than in isolation, things could be different. Completely successful counter insurgency operations were conducted in Malaya, Kenya and Cyprus by the British government which understood the principle and importance of totally integrated approach in such cases. It is a question of providing basic security, work/employment structures for development and  good administration to the people. The authorities must understand that not all insurgencies are communist inspired but that the local communists profit from them. They generally become fine vehicles for communist propaganda themes, and the communists do not fail to use this in a massive way.

The government therefore may have to gear up to shift its domestic and foreign policy towards greater coordination and interpretability amongst various branches of  administration and intelligence agencies which could solve half the problems. Although always under hard budget pressures, the government has a basic duty to provide basic needs to the people. The best answer to any uprising and low level insurgency is to guarantee the local populace security and when government interest clashes with the interest of the insurgents, the locals should be won over by government interest. This conflict could be harder to handle than we initially foresee. What must be understood is there is never zero-casualty war on one side and fire eaters calling   for mounds of corpses on the other. A democratic system particularly a newly established one in an underdeveloped country should be ready to handle the most complex and expensive operations in the future conflict spectrum. Given the present deficit in security forces more than visible in the past few years, in the skirmishes with Maoists, government can not remain idle when confronted by  hostile aggression by unlawful elements. Both sides should seek peaceful settlement at the negotiating table with practicality flexibility and commonsense for political stability, economic vibrancy and social and cultural integration of Nepal. If all the leadership including the Maoists agree to amend the present constitution to make it more practical, easier to implement and acceptable to the people why should there be a problem! Where the rolls, responsibilities, rights and duties of all institutions including the monarchy will be clearly identified and defined and red lines drawn? If this is done even during crisis and emergencies there should be no ambiguity in the exercise of power and execution of ones authority in protecting the overall interest of the Nepalese nation.

Garbage culture

By Padma Devkota

Garbage culture describes an invalid way of thinking that has an immediate negative impact upon the lives of people. It is reflected in the local environment of those who are infected in such areas as unplanned urbanization, ill-maintained roads, unhygienic restaurants, party-politicized educational institutions, uncontrolled profit booms in business and industry and the like. The presence of human excreta in 91 percent of waterlines tested in the laboratory is an endorsement of the existence of garbage culture in Kathmandu "metropolis."

The other endorsement of garbage culture is the problem of garbage control itself. This problem merely reflects the garbage mentality of those in decision-making positions. First, the government made the fatal error of not controlling the encroachment of public land, which has resulted in its not having sufficient land to use as garbage disposal site. Given this fact, it should simply buy land for garbage disposal. It should even be ready to come down hard on individuals for the sake of the good of the majority, which means that it should even seize land and allocate residential areas and money for the concerned landowners elsewhere. Because it is a weak government, it will not do so.

The government, I'm sure, does not expect congratulations from citizens for finding a temporary solution to the problem of garbage disposal. In fact, citizens are further aggravated by garbage workers who create great traffic problems by choosing to pick garbage exactly at the peak of the office rush hour. I have seen the first as well as the third worlds, but nowhere in these worlds that I have seen were garbage trucks or tractors allowed to ply the streets during the rush hours. Everything that does not happen in places we appreciate happens in the place we live.

To a layman's mind all that the government needs to do is to allow garbage collection only before eight in the morning or after six in the evening. If it has to be collected during office hours, how about between one to three? What we do not understand is why, of all the time in the day to pick garbage, this job needs to be done exactly when people are rushing to their office in the morning.

However, garbage culture does not like to take advice, not from the common layman anyway. It does not read newspapers where the common man discusses national problems. Even if it does, it pretends that the common man cannot and does not know enough about the government's problems to discuss it in any useful way. They're right! We will never understand why they function the way they do.

Should private investors be allowed to develop Arun-III ?

The Kathmandu Post and Mercantile Communications conducted a survey on the question  "Is the government's decision to allow private investors to develop Arun III hydel project good for the country?" on the Net last week. Of the total 216 respondents, 179 persons said "Yes", 32 persons said "No" and five persons said "they did not know."

We regret the inconvenience, any that may be caused on account of the non-mention of original names by some respondents.

Arun III is a very expensive project but the benefits that we are going to get in future are far more than the cost that is going to be. I hope the electric power that it generates after completion will not only help people but also reduce the instability of power supply in industries which desperately need it. If there is continuous supply of power, more investors will be attracted. Moreover, there is greater chance of selling electric power to our neighbouring country. So, I am in favour of the decision to allow private investors develop it as it has become extremely necessary. We

will, otherwise, be in the same position forever as we were in the past and are at the moment.

- Indira Giri

Is it a real need to get outsiders involved in development projects so that they can collect most of the benefits? Why can't we try to mobilize the resources available within the country? For example, there are a lot of Nepalese bringing hard currency in. If the government comes up with an attractive proposal, people will

be willing to invest their income in the country.

- Shrestha

It is very difficult to say without observing the terms and conditions of the contract. It is not a bad decision for a country like Nepal, where capital is lacking in order to carry out such a huge project. At least, there should be national consensus among political parties regarding this matter. I still doubt whether there is any leader who can do something for the country. In this case, the government and other political parties should think twice before they award the contract to a private party.

- Susan

It's a good decision to look for private parties to invest in hydropower. The government is so poor that it cannot afford to do so. Besides, our political leaders have no time to think of such a huge project. At least a private party can create some jobs and many will save themselves from starvation.

- Kajiman

The government has taken a right decision to invite a private party to develop Arun-III although it is late. This is a good signal and decision makers have really done a good job for the development of the nation.

- Mukti Sharma

At last, the government is doing something good. I strongly believe that the government should attract foreign private investors for the development of tourism, too. It will be very good for the country. Because of our rich natural beauty, I am sure investors will be attracted.

- Asmita

For many years, it has already been proved that the government is no more capable of conducting a big project like Arun. Therefore, it is a good decision taken by the government to allow private investors to develop Arun III. But one has to see the terms and conditions. I hope it will not be like Tanakpur

- Bed Uprety

It is good to allow private investors in such a kind of project. But how? Will Girija Prasad Koirala do the same thing as he did with India. I mean Tanakpur. Because he is not a reliable person. In fact, three of the Koirala brothers have sold out some parts of terai including rivers to India. Yet, Nepalese are silent and even allowed Girija Prasad to remain at the top. What kind of people are we? Please, do not allow Girija Prasad to hand the Arun-III over to multinationals.

- Bhuwan Pant

The country needs electricity but with Arun-III project, it is not feasible. First and foremost, the electricity generated will be very costly because of high cost of project. No road to airlift equipment to the project, therefore, the price of the electricity will be too high. India won't buy and we will have to pay double the price of what we are paying. Instead of going for bigger projects, the government should concentrate on small projects inviting Nepalese companies. Advantages are : low cost of electricity; it develops the country all around; and Nepalese companies can learn more and more.

- Shalav Rana

To allow this type of project to private sector is a good idea. But are we ready for it? Will our government allow such projects? If the commission is not finalized, will this project exist? We have previous experience of this too. In our country, politics of water goes on always and every parliamentarian wants to be the Water Resource Minister. There are various things that we have to learn from the past. Each political party wants its share of such projects.

- N Dugar

In this country with rampant corruption among political leaders, the best way to get service to the people is through privatizing most of the services. Otherwise this country does not have any future left.

- Ramakant

It will be good if it materializes. We know that Arun III was aborted due to many national and international forces. The same factors may revitalize in one way or other. Power of different currencies may appear in different ways in both public and private sectors. Hence, transparency in governance makes all the dirty things exposed which is the key for the development of Nepal. The government should develop and encourage the confidence of private and international sectors. They are the agents of development. It is not the job of the government to produce cigarettes, whisky, cement and lime, telephone distribution etc but to make policies conducive to attract like a spot of global competition.

- Surendra R Devkota

The Arun -III project is a scam. Ministers and Prime Minister will get richer. It has never been surprising when there is corruption at the highest level. The rich involved with the project will make millions of dollars. Another case of "the rich getting richer and the poor poorer", environmentally it will be a disaster! Will the hundreds of people involved be rehabilitated? "Never". The money will not be reinvested into the country. Because of foreign investors, so how will our economy grow?

- Ranbir