Without water

Come summer time, and it’s the same old painful story of water crisis. This plague dogs urbanites throughout the year, only it becomes unbearable in summer. Despite the billions pumped in to keep the water pipes running, water is still luxurious here. Even as the authorities and experts debate endlessly when and what ambitious water project could be ushered in to ensure clean and round-the-clock water in taps, Valley residents continue to struggle for a bucketful of water. Such is the plight of citizens of the world’s second water-richest country after Brazil. As things stand now, the much-hyped and much longed for Melamchi drinking water project remains as illusive as ever for consumers and a subject of tall talk by bigwigs. The completion of the project is now not expected till 2007, and even that could be uncertain because of Maoist activity.

Getting one’s water is indeed a messy affair, and inefficient management makes it even messier. Our water management system is riddled with chronic problems like leakage, wastage, poor inventory, high tariff and irregular distribution. In their bid to acquire water, consumers resort to all sorts of unscrupulous techniques that further intensify the war for water. Except for die-hard followers of Darwinism, almost every household has been stung by this water crunch. The ordeal of a Nepali household starts from dawn and lasts indefinitely. Housewives, teachers, students, labourers stand in endless queues to have their buckets and jerry-cans filled. In this hectic age of competition, the water famine eats away their time and energy.

Water is scarce all right. But what is more exasperating still is that the Nepal Water Supply Corporation (NWSC), the state monopoly, releases the water at odd and inconvenient hours, and without any notice. NWSC’s whims dictate our daily ritual and routine. Such irresponsibility makes life more difficult, especially for those at subsistence level. When it comes to fulfilling basic necessities, the ball is naturally in the government’s court. We do have modest expectations of a democratically elected regime which is supposed to care for public well being. But so far, nothing worth mentioning has been done to tackle the crisis. Ask any government authority and he or she will pass the buck. The buck does not seem to stop anywhere. If the government cannot provide adequate piped water, how can people expect it to cope on more challenging fronts?

It has been almost a decade since the high and mighty fed us promises of clean, adequate water supply, but the situation has only worsened. Instead of harping on the still distant Melamchi, it’s high time the government, and indeed the public too, turned their energies and ingenuity to cost effective and reliable alternatives. We have had enough of time-consuming, expensive studies that failed to deliver. We should not be putting all our eggs in one basket. This time too, the water crisis looms menacingly and the Koirala government appears to treat it with disdain. All we want is water, and more water. Is that asking for too much?

Global economic slowdown

By Bharat Jhunjhunwala

The global economy is slowing down. The boom in dotcoms is waning and the world is turning back to its normal ‘slow’ pace. Time is ripe for the mainstream economists to change gears too. In periods of technological advance such as that of the dotcoms new opportunities of private investment open up. In such a situation, a cut in government expenditures and reduction of interest and tax rates can place more money in the hands of investors and fuel growth. But in normal periods, such as that which is now unfolding, it is expansion of government expenditures that alone will work.

The world has been through such slowdowns many times before. The most well known was the Great Depression in the US in the l930’s. The US government had persisted with the policy of balancing the budget and tax cuts at that time. The idea was that reduction in taxes will place more funds in the hands of the investors, who will invest in new factories and create demand in the economy. A balanced budget will provide stability and confidence for such investment to take place. Year after year the government had cut tax rates and its expenditures; and the economy sank deeper and deeper into a recession. It was only when Keynes suggested a policy of fiscal expansion that the depression was broken. It seems that we are set to make the same mistake again.

The difficulty is that economists do not distinguish between the two phases in which the economy grows, those of ‘technological advance’ and ‘technological stability’. Development of new technologies, whether the steam engine, the automobile or dotcoms opens up opportunities for new investments in the expectation of future profits. In such periods private investment leads marked demand and the correct method to break a recession is indeed to give tax breaks and cut interest rates. A reduction in government expenditures does not hit in such circumstances because private investment is strong.

This same strategy fails when technology is stable. Investment is led by market demand. In such periods the correct strategy is to stimulate the market by a decrease in government expenditures. This is the lesson from the Great Depression. A businessman will certainly borrow more and put up a new factory if the interest rates are low. But he will do so only if there is demand.

The two phases of technological advance and stability follow each other. The crash of the dotcoms implies that those opportunities for investment have evaporated into thin air. In such a situation a reduction in interest rates becomes ineffective. The US Federal Reserve Board will have to learn this lesson, soon.

The current slowdown in the US economy was precipitated by a huge pile up of inventories with corporations. The boom in dotcoms had created a huge paper wealth in the hands of US consumers. They had borrowed heavily and consumed the goods of the world on the assumption that the stock prices will go up and up and only up. But the dotcom technology failed to live up to expectations. Companies collapsed one after the other and their stock prices came tumbling down. The demand from investment as well as consumption has faltered and that led to a pile of inventories. At the root of this change lay the flattening of the technological advance of dotcoms.

A reduction in interest rates will prove ineffective because companies already have surplus capacities on their hands, and consumers are not sure whether their next paycheck will materialize or not. Tax cuts will certainly place more income in the hands of the investors but, again, that may not translate into investment.

Keeping fiscal deficit in control will lead to a worsening of the situation. A reduction in government expenditures would prevent the potential demand from the construction of roads and canals from materializing. The correct policy in this situation is to expand the level of government expenditures. This is what Keynes had suggested to break the Great Depression. If the government were to print notes and build roads or Taj Mahals then demand will be generated and recession would be broken.

There is one rider though. If a new technological advance such as that in biotechnology or space exploration was to take place then the situation would turn back 180 degrees. Let us say, human beings are cloned and there emerges a market for the clones. New companies will invest in clone laboratories and that will create demand for buildings, equipment and labour. Stock prices may be buoyed by the expectation of profits and consumers may splurge once again as they have done in the US till recently.

The World Bank and IMF-led contraction of fiscal deficit has some logic to it in periods of technological advance when private investment opportunities are there to be exploited. But the same policy has the opposite result when technological advance has waned. There is a need to jettison the World Bank-IMF prescription at this juncture and revert to traditional Keynesian policy.

Asking for privacy

By Laxmi Sharma

Ding-Dong! A distant relative makes a surprise visit just before around our dinner time. We usher him in, offer him tea, ask whereabouts of his children (of whom we hardly know the names or even how many they were) and listen to his totally unrelated blabbering "with interest", while the dinner gets cold and our maid is annoyed that she is surely going to miss her favourite TV serial tonight! The purpose of the visit? I wonder what was that, perhaps chan chu (a Nepali way to show his "nearness" by offering his humble presence and back- biting) Or, perhaps, to kill his monotonous evening but posing as if we deserved his gracious presence as a token of his gift.

Many people have yet to learn the value of time. They think they are the supreme ones and everything else is being taken for granted. Their inherent attitude is that, they are the most important people in anyone’s life. A "small surprise" visit, as they call it, would do no harm. What pains do they have to take? Spare a few moments of their monotonous time and they arrive at your doorstep, not even waiting a minute to think whether the other person is free or not; since they are working couples and barely get a day off to spend for themselves. Maybe they feel that by paying an "unannounced" visit they are doing the other person a grand favour and they should be honoured because they are recalling them and have sacrificed "their precious" time to visit them.

I am not implying that we should keep ourselves isolated from our friends and relatives. We live in a society where everybody needs company to laugh with, to cry or share their feelings. Opportunities to be with your favourite ones are certainly gifted moments and are priceless gems, often to be treasured for years. But the indifferent attitudes about others time, unannounced visits, and intrusive behaviours do not bring two people really together but they sow seeds of shallowness or even hatred relationships. A moment to pre-plan and keeping in mind that other’s time is as precious as ours, respecting their privacy, can make visits warm and entertaining.

Other day, one of our neighbours, was saying how unannounced repeated visits sparked off conflicts with her husband. Tired, exhausted husband, last thing he wanted at the closure of his day was another round of superficial talking.

So be careful next time you walk into someone’s home (or life) uninvited!

What went wrong with the administration ?

By Rajan Shrestha

The mismatch between expectations of the general public for ‘good governance’ and the desire of party cadre for ‘their governance’ may be the crux of what went wrong. If anybody asks what went wrong, my answer will be simply,’ you could harvest as you have sown’. Since the restoration of multiparty democracy in the country, the ruling party workers and their relatives have enjoyed everything that they can have from the state. Every member is looking for ‘their man’ rather than a ‘competent Nepali’. The appointment, posting, transfer, nomination, training and everything we have been doing since the last few years are for ‘our man’. Decisions are made keeping in mind whether they will benefit the party or not. The benefit derived from any decision should be in favour of ‘our man’. The ‘our man’ has to be a supporter of the party or at least a relative of any party worker. Many workers are too busy to find out who in administration are the supporters of the party .

Every Nepali might have some grievances about getting things done by the government. With the advent of the multiparty system the expectation of general public was fair treatment from state services without any partisan feeling and nepotism. The things to be done by government departments and offices are far below the standards which any democratic, civilized society expects. The chaotic condition and growing anarchism gives the people a feeling of insecurity and apathy towards the political system. The fundamentals of any nation are not only the people, demarcated land and the political system, but peace, security and tranquillity are also equally important. Nowadays, you have to manage your security yourself, and the government administration is there not to serve you but to create problems. You can expect to get things done in any office if you have relationship or contacts and connections with the leaders of the ruling party.

Once the first general elections were completed many appointments were made from among people who had spent their time for the party. Many appointments were made for ‘our man’ and ‘our relatives’, assessing the contributions made to ‘our party’, not on the basis of competence. The assessment was based on the person’s political loyalty. It was never considered whether or not the incumbent was competent enough or deserved a particular post. Competence was judged on the basis of his or her political clout. If you check the chronological details, one secretary was appointed on the ground that the Panchas had almost beaten his father to death during the referendum. The competence, capability and integrity of a particular person were never considered and evaluated, something basic for a good administration.

The people are still craving effective and efficient governance, transparency at every decision-making level and peace and tranquillity in society. Unfortunately, the leaders thought that they were in government not to serve but to rule and to exploit the national resources and do whatever they liked, without any accountability. They have a wrong notion of their rights: to exploit the people and rule the people. People sacrificed their lives, money and time to bring about change for good governance. The change was meant for rule by the people themselves, not by any corrupt and incompetent ruler. After the restoration of multi-party democracy, the seeds of a bad administration system were sown by appointing incompetent intelligence officers, teachers and so on. Also, the sagging morale of the police can be attributed to unnecessary tension created by the then Inspector General. The motivation of the entire police force began to wane after the untimely changes among the bigwigs. In the same way, the employees in the revenue service were humiliated when the leader of their department became involved with smugglers. Every minister and leader is eyeing the Ministry of Finance to get some of their people transferred to lucrative postings.

The promotions and postings began to occur at the mercy of party workers and had many costs. Every small transfer has been in accordance with the recommendations of party workers. The entire civil, police and technical services became the monopoly of party cadres. A senior bureaucrat, who had spent two or three decades in service was made to go through an assessment conducted by a young chap from the ruling party. How can a civil servant be judged by incompetent political leaders. The political leaders are not in any case dispensing any justice for the nation, what they are doing is just manipulating things to safeguard their own interests. The issues to be dealt with at the initial stages are never taken care of at the right time. No government agency is serious and sensitive at the initial phase of an issue. Take, for instance, the issue of hotel service tax.

The vision and policy about the future administration desired is still unclear. The lawmakers want to be involved in the execution and implementation of all the policies- be they big or small, worthy or unworthy. They prefer to work as an office chief rather than as policymakers and guides to the concerned ministry. More often than not, they want to fill all the posts with their party workers. Every ministry has projects to be implemented by the ministry itself. The reason behind this state of affair is that such projects are generally equipped with luxurious amenities and incentives preferred by the head of the ministry. Once the ministry becomes an implementing agency than nobody will be left to supervise and monitor such projects.

The unwarranted amendments and ambiguous explanations of the Civil Service Act have also complicated our administrative system. The civil servants get confused and in such a situation, nobody can set out his career goals. The creation of ‘assistant secretaries’ and then their abolition, converting all of them automatically into ‘under secretaries’, the abolition of the ‘additional secretary’ and again the creation of the ‘special secretary’ for a certain time are also beyond the authority given by law. These are only a few examples of how people at the helm play with the system. The present crisis is an outcome of certain vested interests that were hyperactive while amending the Civil Service Act.

Specialists want to quit their specialized fields, maybe due to their incompetence and want to become generalists like the secretaries. The leaders also want to bring in ‘their men’ even if it means going out of their way, whether they are generalists or specialists. Naturally, the people in specialized fields can contribute more to their field than to the general field. The nation had spent a lot, to make them specialists. But due to some adamant leaders, the whole nation is stagnant. Is it that any particular party or any particular group is to be made responsible for this sordid situation. The people in administration are equally responsible for this pathetic condition and apathy towards the administration. The secretaries could not show the courage to tell their masters the right thing to do instead of becoming hand-tools for fulfilling the greed of autocratic and authoritarian’ leaders touted as followers of democracy. The adherence to set norms by the secretaries may create more scapegoats like the then Chief Secretary, but it will provide lessons to the leaders whose desire is to rule the nation by themselves, and not through the people. This is indeed unfortunate.