A strike too many

The three day general strike called by the alliance of six left parties and spearheaded by the main opposition UML, proved to be a disaster claiming at least six lives. Four persons died as they could not be rushed to hospital in time. The three day closure affected normal life for the general public across the country. Educational institutions, public and private transport, government offices and even private hospitals remained closed for 72 hours as a result of threats from the left alliance including the CPN-UML. The six left parties have been exerting pressure on Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to resign for his alleged involvement in the controversial deal to lease an aircraft for Royal Nepal Airlines from Austria-based Lauda Air. Thae CIAA has charge sheeted Tarini Dutt Chataut who had quit his post as Minister for Tourism and Civil Aviation over the Lauda deal. There were allegations that the Prime Minister too was involved and he, therefore, has no moral authority to remain in the country’s top executive post. The questionnaire, sent to the Prime Minister by the CIAA last month, also indicates that he could have had a hand in the Lauda deal. The deal has caused the country a direct loss of 389 million rupees.

During the month of May, the country has suffered a series of disruptions. A three day general strike preceded by total closure of private schools for seven days including for three days at the call of the Private and Boarding Schools Organization of Nepal was painful for students as well as for the national economy. The pain and suffering that this nation has had to undergo because of wrong moves by political parties is there for all to see and experience. This is something which has never become a matter of concern to any political party. The three day "bandh", for instance, pained everyone, but the ruling party continues to boast of a parliamentary majority and gives little or no weightage to public opinion. Thanks to our political parties, the ailing economy has been subjected to further strain by the strikes. The rate of poverty has increased because the poor have been denied work as a result of frequent strikes. This apart, many secondary schools could not hold regular examinations for three days in Baglung and surrounding districts. Strikes have made the daily life of the poor harder and also made a mockery of democracy as it is practised in this country. The UML must admit that there were some ugly incidents of vandalism and clashes between police personnel and party cadres. They paralyzed daily economic activity by pushing the country towards political chaos. It is more than likely that frequency of strikes can trigger social unrest unless both ruling and opposition parties learn to act and behave in a people-oriented manner.

The political situation of the country has taken a chaotic turn ever since Prime Minister Koirala refused to resign. The Prime Minister should also admit that he has failed to maintain law and order or provide security to the general public. At a time when the country faces crisis after crisis, he has no right to remain in office even if he has a House majority. It is time he learnt to act for the good of the people and country rather than continuing to listen to a bunch of sycophants. Educational reform : Put effort where needed most

Educational reform : Put effort where needed most

By Dr Alok K Bohara

Recent news reports and debates have again underlined the dismal state of the education system in the country. Such awareness is indeed good news. But the bad news is that these debates still lack focus, especially in terms of providing a viable solution to an ever accelerating slide in our public school performance. Unfortunately, singling out the private schools for punishment, for example, for being too expensive, will hardly provide any solution for the ills of our public education system. The regulatory prescription (eg, price control) in the private education sector is nothing more than a short-term populist prescription. It is the public sector which should be the center of debate.

There is no denying that the ever increasing number of private colleges without proper facilities and their affiliation to the universities without a minimum amount of infrastructure in place should indeed be a matter of great concern for all of us. But this hardly constitutes the single source of all the ills of the education sector. In fact, any unjustifiable move to undermine the accomplishments of the private education sector in the country is harmful, especially in light of the fact that it is the public education sector that is dangerously close to complete collapse. But, attacking a long-awaited and emerging (sure, a less than perfect) private education sector will hardly do any good for fixing the a public sector’s woes. Of course, there should be serious discussion to revitalize the public education sector, and the concerned citizens, professionals, and educators should engage in a constructive dialogue. But, can anyone please propose any specific ideas?

Let me pose some questions? Finance: It is obvious that the public education sector should be funded adequately. But, how do we finance it to a level that will ensure a quality product? Can the government undertake such a financial responsibility completely? Should we seek some alternate sources such as educational bonds, educational sales taxes or tuition revenues, or even a regional-level sin-tax (on tobacco and alcohol) to fund education? Can we streamline our bloated bureaucracy to put more money into the classrooms for books, teachers and computers? Without a healthy financial resource, any effort to improve our public educational sector will be futile. A lottery system may also be instituted to raise money for our public education. Any other ideas?

Empowering locals: Decentralize our national education system, and give more power and decision making authority to local entities. Locally elected (or nominated) governing bodies of parents and common citizens should play an important role in making decisions related to matters such as, tuition, infrastructure, fund raising, or even curriculum. It is these individuals who are on the front line who are likely to know the problems and their solutions, not the bureaucrats.

Incentive and Accountability: Should we expect any accountability from the various educational units? That is, how about rewarding productive schools (eg, based on some standardized test scores, passing rates, dropout rates) and helping the less productive ones? Should we reward those (headmasters) who innovate? Should we start implementing a differential pay scheme, paying more for experienced and good teachers? Should we also expect results from (school) administrators and have the guts to fire them in case of less than expected productivity? There are many hard working teachers in the system, but should we expect more classroom time from teachers and less political activism? Our teachers are underpaid and they should be compensated for their hard work, but at the same time should we not implement some sort of evaluation scheme to reward (eg, promote) only the deserving ones? As I have argued elsewhere, an independent watchdog body should be formed to monitor the performance of public schools. They should annually publish their records on passing rates, dropout rates, college attendance rates, student/teacher ratio, tuition information and rank the school accordingly. Such an objective and open process will inject a sense of accountability for the public to see.

Academic climate: Can we expect a joint condemnation from all major political parties discouraging students (and teachers) from engaging in any political activities within school (and campus) boundaries? Can the politicians (from all parties) give word that they will not encourage agitation among students to boycott classes? How about a sense of law and order? That is, get the politics out of the classroom, and the public should demand such a commitment from our party leaders.

Competition: To ease the pressure on the public education sector, we need to develop a vibrant private sector, and the current trend is praiseworthy. Granted that many of these schools are outside the reach of many less-privileged students, any attempt to stymie the progress of the private school sector, for example through price controls, is very counterproductive. Use incentives like tax-exemptions and non-profit status, on a voluntary basis, to reward those private schools which, for example, offer a certain percentage of scholarships to poor students (10-20%). Give larger tax incentives to those which cater to underdeveloped districts. Give (free) management training to teach them to become more efficient. To ease the demand on the private sector, which will then exert a downward pressure on price, the government can make use of new technology to provide alternate schooling opportunities.

One such scheme could be the concept of virtual schools. The government can hire private consulting firms to design a virtual schooling system, which is focused on providing quality education at less cost. Innovative curriculum, new instructional approaches, and a more efficient management system can perhaps achieve the same result with less time and money. If so, this well-researched and highly cost-effective package, complete with a step-by-step lesson plan and resource requirement, can be "sold" to member schools, thus making it affordable for many lower middle-class families. Parents can form a group and run such virtual schools themselves for their children. Such fragmented virtual programs should be monitored for their compatibility with the education standards set forth by the district level education authority. Routine standardized tests at the district (or national) level will obviously provide a barometer to judge their performance.

Frustrated with the quality of the US public education system and the (in)accessability of the private schools, Dr William Bennett, an educator and long-time reform advocate, has assembled a group of experts to design just such a (chartered-type) system (www.k12.com). Established recently, it is still too early to judge its effectiveness. Further, such schemes may have to be refined for our needs and environment, but my point is that we need to be creative and innovative while thinking about our own reforms, and should be especially careful not to reverse the achievement made by the private school sector. This is, by no means, an exhaustive list of important questions or solutions. But, as I have argued elsewhere (Regulated education sector is bad; TKP, May 27), the price control prescription for the private sector is not the right approach. There may be some handful of schools which may be engaged in price gouging, but a regulatory price control prescription applied universally, although it may provide short-term relief, will hurt the entire education sector. The bottom line is that the government and the educational authorities should put in effort where needed most—the public education sector.

(The author is economics professor at the University of New Mexico, USA)

Blissfully unaware

By Bhupendra Rawat

As a proud citizen of this tire-burning country, I was really happy to learn that our Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) recently made the Prime Minister aware that the cabinet he heads had supported acts of corruption involving millions of dollars from the national treasury. The news that the PM was finally made aware about the shocking Lauda scandal came like a breeze of Sprite-sprayed air to all in Nepal: cool and refreshing.

That’s because, for a long time, we all thought that our chain-smoking, hardly-working PM was so bent on making things go worse from bad that he was not really aware of what was going on behind his back, under his PA’s table, over the toilet commode and into the web of ‘Grand Design’.

But, happily, all that turned out to be not his fault at all. After all, think about this: When you insist on burying your head in Baluwatar, all you are likely to see are footprints which, as we all know, are rarely etched permanently in the sand.

Anyway, just when the PM had finally been made aware of what was what about the Lauda scam, I caught up with his enlightened self at his daughter’s humble abode at Shivapuri Hills 90210 to ask why he kept his veil of ignorance on while the rest of Nepal burned.

"High expectations," he sighed, picking at the ‘salat’ flown in from Berlin especially for the First Daughter.

"You know, I recruited these Ministers and bureaucrats straight from the bhajan-mandali at Bankali. They were all men of character. Who’d have guessed that they would end up as characters themselves? They all sang Ram, Ram in front of me. The science and technology minister even shouted RAM, RAM all the time. But ultimately, their pockets held knives, and, with those, they sliced and diced the national treasury, carving out their shares."

"But, sir," I asked, "Isn’t it hard to believe that you wouldn’t know what your own ministers were up to?

I mean, after all, aren’t you the one who calls the shots at cabinet meetings?"

"My dear friend," the PM shot back in his best only-on-CNN voice. "All I do is call for the shot glasses at the time of celebrations. For example, I remember the day we approved of that Lauda deal. Sipping wine at the balcony of Singha Durbar, my ministers and I thought: Wouldn’t it be awesome to have this magnificent bird of iron from Europe fly free and soar high up above in our Himalayan skies - defying not only the laws of gravity, but also those of the Kingdom? You know, it was then we all sort of looked at one another, and the idea that we could break the laws and fly away for free made us all giddy with anticipation."

I nodded in silence.

"Sure," the PM went on. "That meant, we had to dig into the treasury a bit. But digging into the treasury was important. Why? Because, if you look at our hardscrabble past, none of us come from wealthy families, and, at some point, we had to earn our living, right? Still, I must say that a million here, a million there and another million over there, it all amounted to nothing more than pocket change for us all. I mean, who knew that the money involved was so large? I certainly did not know."

I again nodded in silence.

"And I sit here, my dear friend," the PM thundered, shaking with anger, "as angry as every Nepali man worth his suruwal and every Nepali woman worth her fariya to finally learn from the CIAA how that guy Chataut, the two Shresthas and others of their ilk milked this cash-cow country of ours dry, while keeping me, the Prime Suspect, blissfully unaware."

China and South Asia

By Nishchal Nath Pandey

Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji’s eleven-day, five Asian nations tour mirrors the profound friendship based on warmth and cordiality that China possesses with these countries. While he said in an audience with the King and Queen of Thailand that ‘China and Thailand are as close as one family’, President Gayuum of Maldives said that Zhu’s visit is of historical significance because ‘this is the first time for a Chinese head of government to visit the Indian Ocean island country’. The President of Pakistan remarked that his country’s relations with China are ‘higher than the Himalayas, deeper than the ocean and sweeter than honey’. In the 1950s, Sri Lanka had provided China with economic assistance in defiance of the economic blockade imposed at that time on China and Premier Zhu spoke highly of that during his meeting with the President of Sri Lanka.

It is a well-known truism that Sino-Nepal relations have thrived under the visionary leaders of both the countries and exchange of visits has elevated bilateral relations and helped deepen mutual understanding. During the visit to Nepal in 1996 by President Jiang Zemin, the two countries had decided to build a good-neighborly partnership which ‘would be handed down from generation to generation and pointed out the direction of the development of Sino-Nepal relations’. According to the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s official website which has just posted reports on the five-nation tour, Premier Zhu remarked to His Majesty King Birendra that ‘he (the King) has contributed to the consolidation and development of Sino-Nepal relations’. As stated by the same website, Prime Minister Koirala told his counterpart that ‘China’s development will certainly benefit Asian countries as a whole.’ It must be recalled here that Zhu is recognized as one of the emerging leaders of contemporary China and also as an economic planner because of his achievements in successful macro-economic control. He was once praised by Deng Xiaoping as ‘having his own views and own measures and being resolute and bold in tackling problems’

The visit was definitely a ‘feel-good’ exercise but political aspects of the relations apart, both the countries have lately found new avenues on the economic front with which they feel that together they can benefit in the days ahead. The deals approved during the visit, abolition of double taxation, cooperation in the field of agriculture, a grant assistance under economic and technical cooperation, and construction of the Syaphrubesi-Rasuwagadhi road, a civil service hospital and a polytechnic institute will prove valuable for Nepal’s developmental efforts. Some time back China enlisted Nepal as the ninth destination country for its tourists and we are yet to figure out how best to attract at least a fraction of the nine million Chinese vacationers that go abroad annually.

One renowned tourism entrepreneur points out, ‘Chinese tourists don’t understand English, they don’t eat anything but Chinese, they are not known to be so much interested in trekking and worse we don’t have air-link facility to bring them here.’ If his trepidation is true, Nepalese tourism industry as a whole has a long way to go if it is to see an alteration on its clientele’. How many Chinese speaking guides does the industry currently have for instance?

On the other hand, while a rail-link is supposed to stretch from the mainland to Lhasa in a couple of years, China is also set to reinforce communications and exchanges with its South Asian neighbors with a huge investment in roads from Tibetan inland cities to the border areas including the Khasa road. Isn’t it our business to see that proper homework is done quickly by all concerned departments if we as a nation are to take full advantage of China’s generosity and Tibet’s economic progress? Have we planned in depth the various means to reduce the impediments on our side?

Several erudite policy analysts seem overly cheerful regarding the supply of daily essential commodities, especially foodstuff, to poverty-stricken areas in the mountainous districts through Chinese territory. Although this serves our purpose in the short-run, it is apparently going to present us with manifold complications and long-term hazards if our people who are attached to kith and kin across the border in Tibet get alienated from their own state. Besides, with the massive economic development of Tibet, modern commodities like VCDs and TV sets are swiftly getting into Tibetan middle-class homes. If this induces an inferiority complex in the hearts of our people, will it not open another source of possible trouble? Shouldn’t we start giving preference to the development of the bordering districts from right now on?

The build-up of a broad based relationship with China will not have any impact on the core concerns of Indo-Nepal relations in the analysis of this writer contrary to the general mind-set bred on Sino-Indian rivalry that lives on the hangover of yesteryear which is dead and gone. While Jagatguru Shankaracharya of the Kanchi peeth has been invited to visit China (interestingly not even the Pope has been given this honour), a joint naval exercise involving warships of both India and China is taking place in Mumbai ‘as part of efforts to build transparency, credibility and confidence between the two nuclear powers.’ Indians are at the same time not anxious regarding the opening up of a second road link (Syaphrubesi-Rasuwagadhi), the same Indians who had turned furious with the decision on the construction of the Arniko highway in the early sixties. This had remained an issue bugging India and Nepal throughout the 30 years of Panchayat rule. Significant also is the response of Indian Ambassador Dev Mukharji to a query at the Reporters Club on May 26, that ‘there can be no question of India objecting to what Nepal decides to do in her national interest and for what is necessary.’

On the whole, it is vital to understand China’s present day goals in South Asia ie, its desire to have peaceful relations with all its neighbors. In fact, the commonality of interests and discovering sources that bring in mutual benefit are strong cementing factors. Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan speaking about Zhu Rongji’s five-Asian nation tour discloses that ‘economic relations and cooperation are the strong driving force behind the development of bilateral relations and remained an important content of Zhu’s visit.’ It is evidently clear that China is focusing on economics and its developmental policies and appears to be convinced that the key to great power status is a strong economy. We in turn must also strive to develop the relationship by expanding it at various levels, especially through economic, tourism and trade cooperation.