COMMENT

Do something

With mounting pressure on Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala from his own MPs and also his arch rivals within the party, the issues that the government had promised it would tackle with priority, now seem to be given a back seat. Naturally, political survival comes foremost for any politician, more so for one who is holding power. But it will be an unfortunate development, if the present government, which had made a commitment to tackle problems like the Maoist insurgency and corruption, now has to abandon both these objectives for political reasons. Right now, Prime Minister Koirala seems more busy in consolidating his new won power and also keeping the party MPs in line, rather than doing what he had promised the people. Within a few weeks, this government will also have completed its "Honeymoon" period. But what has it done in the over two months period that it has stayed in office? Before he became the Prime Minister, Koirala had made utterances, going by which the people in general had thought things would start moving right the next day after he took office. But that hasn’t been the case, neither have any of his ministers, specially Home Minister Govinda Raj Joshi, done any remarkable work. The promises have been limited to hollow words only. So what is the difference between the Bhattarai government and the present one?

There are many areas where the Koirala government can show instant results. That is, at least give indications to the people that some concrete works are in the pipeline. For example, headway can be made in the water resources sector, but the authorities concerned must be able to fully acquaint themselves with the task in hand and the projects that can be undertaken at once. It is the same in the communications sector, agriculture, education, home affairs and also health. But while these long term goals are being initiated, the government could assure the public that it has stuck to the promises it had delivered, by tackling head on, the burning issue of corruption. Obviously, no one will be convinced the government is serious, if it catches in its nets only the small fries and does not take action against the bigger fishes. The political leaders who promised a clean governance, must lead from the front. This will not be possible if they are not clean themselves. It can be hoped the present government will at least start taking steps to improve the law and order situation and control corruption, the two promises it made, before it can be believed that it will do anything else.

The burning issue of Safa tempos

The government’s recent decision to ban the registration of the three wheeled Safa tempos have been met with much concern. There are allegations that certain vested interests that wish to bring in the micro buses languishing in the Tibet border, are influencing this decision. The Danish embassy here in Kathmandu has also reacted to the decision and it has warned that this move could come at the cost of larger Danish-funded environmental programmes.

The reason behind removing what till now had been considered a truly environmentally friendly public transport, is attributed to the short life span of the batteries of the vehicle and the resulting problem of its disposal. Enough study should have been done before this decision affecting the lives of many was taken. Were alternatives considered? Did statistics show that the disposal of the batteries of the ever increasing four wheeled automobiles posses less risk than that of the three wheelers? If these new three wheelers were environmental risks themselves, then why were they introduced in the first place, specially after the infamous "Vikram" tempos had already created much problems.

Now, to slap on the ban without adequate research is a folly. And any decision that has been coerced or is heavily influenced by external factors would not be a fair one. The government needs to rethink on this issue and save itself many ensuing hassles if it were to go ahead with this decision that seems to be rather lop sided. After all, such decisions are to be made for the benefit of the general public and not for people who would benefit from such a decision.

Non Exciting Budget 2000-2001

By Shanker M. Singh

The Eighteenth Session of Parliament called the " Budget Session", has been called one month ahead of the usual schedule. This has been done so that the annual budget of the nation can be announced at least a month before the new fiscal year begins.

In Nepal, year after year and sometimes twice in a year when the government is not stable; finance ministers have lectured the nation about the need for fiscal correction, consolidation, poverty alleviation and so on and so forth. This year was no different. The poverty ridden people, woodcutters, street children, the rag pickers, the dalits, the street vendors and the rural people will all be wondering what this Budget is all about. Does it concern them at all in any way?

The finance minister Mr. Mahesh Acharya might have claimed many firsts for his Budget- the first Budget of the Millennium, the first Budget of the New Government led by Koirala, the first Budget to address the issue of Second round of Liberalization and so on and might have hoped that it would add many more firsts to its credit as time went by. He also has made it clear that the Budget will continue the tempo of reform of the second phase of the liberalization process; the first phase was initiated and implemented after 1992.

The bouquet of tax proposals ceiling from the finance minister does not guarantee a " Decade of Development" with a 7 percent growth per annum. As the designer of the first Budget of the new millennium, Acharya has left out the suggestions and recommendations made so far by the business community. Some opine that it is not an exciting budget.

Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) has estimated the Nepalese economy to grow at 6 percent in the current fiscal year ending July 2000. Agriculture sector is estimated to grow at 4.99 percent and non-agriculture sector is expected to grow at about 7 percent. With the estimated growth, there have been minor changes in the composition of agriculture and non-agriculture sector contribution to the GDP. The contribution of agriculture sector has slightly declined to 40.1 percent from the earlier 40.4 percent.

Mahesh Acharya had for long been crying wolf. He had warned that the budget would be pro-poor but it is only in part as good as his word. He has introduced rather tough measures in both direct and indirect taxes, though some of these are part of tax reforms, such as taxing the agriculture sector.

Acharya’s decision to tax the agriculture sector is unfortunate. The trade balance in Nepal is still fragile, and export needs to be supported every way. We don’t see any specific reference to the questions raised by business and trade regarding the implications to the accession negotiations to WTO.

Acharya’s Budget has been quite impressive for the initiatives taken in regard to the quantum increase in the salary structure of the government employees with a view to boost morale and the formation of the Act to check corruption and the foreign aid policy

The tremendous growth of the Asian economies creates a need for a new international centre of finance for the region. Nepal, with its traditions of law and nonalignment, and its central location, already has many of the attributes needed to become that centre. As an international financial offshore centre Nepal will not only secure a more independent role in the international community, but will also become attractive for all forms of investment, including those needed for its current domestic growth.

In the particular milieu of Nepal, there remain major obstacles in implementing this second phase of economic liberalization policy. In sum they are: In the competition to attract foreign direct investment within Nepal, many developing countries offer a wider range of incentives which would be expensive to duplicate, and have geographical or other strategic advantages; modern developed nations offer direct financial subsidies or grants, low cost loans, or other direct financial assistance to attract foreign investment, Nepal does not have the capital to offer similar incentives.

Moreover, the process of industrialization is capital -intensive for the host government, requiring large infrastructure improvements in transportation, power, water etc. While some foreign aid is available, there will be a large capital demand and additional debt burden placed on His Majesty’s Government of Nepal. Heavy capital demands in Nepal divert funds from other societal needs, such as education, health facilities, environmental projects, etc.

The economic situation in the country warranted a hard budget. The corporate sector and the media were reluctantly preparing themselves for the same.

The Finance Minister has an onerous job on hand: To protect the interests of domestic producers, and simultaneously to ensure liberal access to import goods at global prices. The Budget’s response to the emerging situation has to be delicately balanced. As an annual exercise in the levy of indirect tax for revenue generation, it has all along concerned itself with varying the rates of custom duties.

Poverty and Rural development

Acharya has made the customary allocations for poverty alleviation which is like dialogue of the deaf. Everyone talks but nobody can do anything about it.

The Budget seems to give incentive to sectors where Nepal has a sustainable competitive advantage. Sectors such as Telecommunications, media, IT have been given encouragement.

On recycling

By K.C. Bhatt

In the contemporary age, values of consumerism have become ubiquitous, thanks largely to the industrial revolution that commenced centuries ago in certain parts of the world, and the media that has sustained it in a protracted manner.

Strangely, in this world, the media speculates about the lifestyle in a post industrial age in one part and the human beings continue to live the traditional nomadic life in another part of the world, despite the hype of an information age, that is said to have a potential to bridge all the gaps existing among the different human cultures, notwithstanding the distance.

Talking of consumerism, one can take recycling, that is considered by most as environmentally conscious and thereby environmental friendly. In fact a few of the people even appear to believe that consuming recycled products is sophisticated.

However, like most of the human enterprises, recycling too involves a lot of energy consumption, as it is not easy to produce useful products out of the varying nature of ample wastes the contemporary human civilization produces.

And once you have a recycled product in your hand, you are again supposed to consume it to produce waste once again.

So, thereby; once again; consumerism is promoted in the guise of recycling by the ‘environmentally conscious’ trans-national companies, putting back a tiny amount of the huge amount of money they make by selling their, at times, useless products, in the hope of multiplying their profits.

Indeed, one may be even deluded to believe that one has contributed in saving the environment while consuming a recycled product, abetted by a ‘feel-good’ feeling; that the consumption of a recycled product may leave behind.

In fact, consumption as such is harmful to the environment, whether of the recycled products or otherwise. So, to be genuinely environmental conscious: one should refrain from consumption itself, unless it is absolutely necessary.

Because, by consuming less, lesser amount of the waste will be produced in the first place and recycling won’t be necessary. So, consuming sparingly is the real environmental consciousness and anything less is hypocrisy and a usual, banal and specious manifestation of the holier-than-thou attitude of the mortal human beings.

Talk back

Give Gajendra justice

India’s Zee TV, in order to shift away the heat from bungling of (mis) handling of the December last hijacking drama, conveniently accused a Nepali national Gajendra Tamrakar as being one of the hijackers. Along with him the entire nation was humiliated.

The channel overstepped all journalistic ethics and decorum with its biased and unsubstantiated reporting. Perhaps, it got away because of our government’s spineless attitude. Any able government should have had the guts to sack the channel’s irresponsible Kathmandu based reporter.

Today, hapless Gajendra Tamrakar is knocking on every door so that he can approach the court to file a defamation case against Zee TV which must be registered before June 24, 2000.

One hopes our courageous national elements (which are in short supply these days) will somehow rise to the occasion to assist a defamed Nepali. Otherwise, together we will be all singing the song, "Hang down your head Tom Dooly, Hang down your head and cry..." r

Maya Karki,
Sinamangal, Kathmandu