This is news to me. As an executive member of IT Association of Bhutan and a member of the fledgling IT industry in Bhutan, if this is true, things are not going right for the industry and for the country. According to statistics, government needs to create some 93,000 jobs by 10FYP. If all these activities are going to be done by Indian firms, how will our private sector create jobs and how will we have growth? I hope this is not true and that the government corrects this if it is true. This is a news article by Sonam Pelden in Bhutan Observer. Read on:
Local IT firms question ICT agreement
29 January 2010
The Total Solutions Project (TSP) agreement signed between the Department of Information Technology (DIT) and NIIT of India last March has ruffled the feathers of local IT firms.
The agreement says that NIIT will spearhead the supply of hardware components for Bhutan. The Bhutanese IT firms say that, while the project will benefit a large section of the population, they will see little growth if the whole procurement of materials goes to the Indian firm. The proprietor of Gyelyong Enterprise, a Thimphu-based IT firm, said the IT business in Bhutan was already going down with big-budget projects going directly to the suppliers. “It will make our survival difficult.
This project should be given to the Bhutanese vendors,” he said. The fledgling Bhutanese IT firms will suffer losses if some Indian company supplies the materials, according to the General Manager of Bhutan International, Shyam Basnet. The Chairman of IT Association of Bhutan, Rinzy Dorji, said the association does not know anything about TSP and its procurement procedures. But if the procurement business goes to the Indian firms, he said the issue would be taken up to the Ministry of Information and Communication (MoIC) where the survival of Bhutanese IT firms and vendors would be discussed.
“If the Indian firms are going to do everything, how will the IT capacity grow in the country?” he asked. “In order to grow, we need work and experience. Otherwise, the license holders would be just sitting uselessly paying taxes and giving employment.” “When there are so many IT graduates and firms in the country, why depend on others? Rinzy Dorji asked. However, an MoIC official said that the steering committee of the project wants the Bhutanese vendors to be involved in the procurement of materials. “The agreement would be reviewed,” he said, adding that once the agreement has been reviewed, each sector will take up the procurement job separately.
The project involves five sectors, namely Education Ministry, Labour Ministry, Royal University of Bhutan, Royal Civil Service Commission and DIT. The sectors will work on five components –training of 12, 000 government employees including 5,000 teachers, computer labs in the tertiary institutions, 260 Hole-in-the-Wall projects and taking ICT to 168 schools.
MoIC Secretary, Dasho Kinley Dorji, said that the sectors involved will sit with NIIT officials and discuss what happens in each sector and finalize equipment procurement. “Each sector will look at the proposal made, and we have to go through the rules on purchasing equipment,” he said. By the end of February, the decision on training, equipment and timetable will be made. Asked if any amendments would be made to the agreement, he said the agreement itself is flexible.
During His Majesty’s recent visit to India, the Indian government pledged a grant of Nu 2.05 billion for the development of ICT in Bhutan. The grant MoU says that the Indian government will continue to provide financial support for implementing the ICT projects under Bhutan’s 10th five-year plan and expedite the implementation of TSP.
The project will provide access to information technology and IT solutions to a significant proportion of Bhutan’s population over the next five years and promote Bhutan as a knowledge-based society.
By Sonam Pelden
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
GOVERNMENT GOING TRANSPARENT NOW?
Our government came under attack for banning live TV from the national assembly hall last year and for initiating performance audit of BBS when it refused or rather could not cover a session of the parliament when asked to do so. The speaker was quoted saying "BBS dhi zhung gi inna gyer gi inna" insinuating that if it is financed by the government, it should do as told and questioning the independence of media in the country.
This is an editorial from Bhutan Today about transparency in government.Transparency in government is, perhaps, one of the most important requirements in a democracy. Let us hear Bhutan Today's perspectives on this:
January 14, 2010 · Filed Under editorial
So, now the government wants to be more open to the media. Or it seems so. It depends on how committed they are.
In fact, before the democratic government came into place, the cabinet secretariat had come out with the weekly briefings on major decisions taken by the gov?ernment. We did have one or two sittings in the Cabinet Secretariat. Then, the whole arrangement fizzled out.
When we asked the cabinet office for any information, they didn’t have the appropriate information, because they are not fed with the appropriate answers. Nor were there any one responsible for coordinating the flow of information. Perhaps, lack of cooperation from the rel?evant ministry/department had most likely constrained them in their work.
We don’t blame the people in the cabinet office. They have to do their own routine work and at the same time field the reporters. And reporters can and do come out with the weirdest questions.
The move to hold press briefings every Wednesday was supposed to be an example when the new demo?cratic government sat on the saddle. That was part of the government’s effort to be transparent.
Of course when the new government came into power, for some reason it fizzled out. The caretaker government bowed out and it was all up to the new one to do something about it. The continuity stopped there.
Now the government wants to continue with the system. The cabinet meets every Tuesday and the media would be informed of the outcome by late Tuesday or Wednesday morning at the latest. That is a laudable effort.
Now that PMO has appointed someone to handle this PR side of the government, we do expect something more than what we were handed out in the past.
If transparency is to be as transparent as promised, it is time that the government set up a conduit that will ensure it. As is often said, the government officials are not approachable. We always have to approach the spokesperson. The point is that even when we contact the spokespersons, s/he is never able to provide the full information as the person doesn’t know what is hap?pening about a particular project. When we contact the project manager or the person in-charge, we are told to contact the spokesperson. So we end up in a wild goose chase.
The Prime Minister and the ministers, combined together, have to run a government. They are a busy bunch of VIPs. Many reporters felt that many of the ministers are accessible. Such accessibility is mostly based on personal contact. That is understandable. One has to build confidence in your sources.
There might be as many annoying reporters as there are brusque and unapproachable ministers, or for that matter ministry secretaries and departmental directors. If we continue with the blame game, we will only tire ourselves pointing the finger at each other.
The best solution would be to understand each other’ problems and render assistance wherever possible. No one is asking for some one to bend over backwards. We are each doing our work.
Accompanying the Prime Minister or a minister on some important visit abroad has also come as an issue. Now the question is who should go and who shouldn’t? What should be the selection criteria?
This is at present not the important issue. The issue is transparency. If every one follows that principle, if not everything, at least, most problems would be solved.
This is an editorial from Bhutan Today about transparency in government.Transparency in government is, perhaps, one of the most important requirements in a democracy. Let us hear Bhutan Today's perspectives on this:
January 14, 2010 · Filed Under editorial
So, now the government wants to be more open to the media. Or it seems so. It depends on how committed they are.
In fact, before the democratic government came into place, the cabinet secretariat had come out with the weekly briefings on major decisions taken by the gov?ernment. We did have one or two sittings in the Cabinet Secretariat. Then, the whole arrangement fizzled out.
When we asked the cabinet office for any information, they didn’t have the appropriate information, because they are not fed with the appropriate answers. Nor were there any one responsible for coordinating the flow of information. Perhaps, lack of cooperation from the rel?evant ministry/department had most likely constrained them in their work.
We don’t blame the people in the cabinet office. They have to do their own routine work and at the same time field the reporters. And reporters can and do come out with the weirdest questions.
The move to hold press briefings every Wednesday was supposed to be an example when the new demo?cratic government sat on the saddle. That was part of the government’s effort to be transparent.
Of course when the new government came into power, for some reason it fizzled out. The caretaker government bowed out and it was all up to the new one to do something about it. The continuity stopped there.
Now the government wants to continue with the system. The cabinet meets every Tuesday and the media would be informed of the outcome by late Tuesday or Wednesday morning at the latest. That is a laudable effort.
Now that PMO has appointed someone to handle this PR side of the government, we do expect something more than what we were handed out in the past.
If transparency is to be as transparent as promised, it is time that the government set up a conduit that will ensure it. As is often said, the government officials are not approachable. We always have to approach the spokesperson. The point is that even when we contact the spokespersons, s/he is never able to provide the full information as the person doesn’t know what is hap?pening about a particular project. When we contact the project manager or the person in-charge, we are told to contact the spokesperson. So we end up in a wild goose chase.
The Prime Minister and the ministers, combined together, have to run a government. They are a busy bunch of VIPs. Many reporters felt that many of the ministers are accessible. Such accessibility is mostly based on personal contact. That is understandable. One has to build confidence in your sources.
There might be as many annoying reporters as there are brusque and unapproachable ministers, or for that matter ministry secretaries and departmental directors. If we continue with the blame game, we will only tire ourselves pointing the finger at each other.
The best solution would be to understand each other’ problems and render assistance wherever possible. No one is asking for some one to bend over backwards. We are each doing our work.
Accompanying the Prime Minister or a minister on some important visit abroad has also come as an issue. Now the question is who should go and who shouldn’t? What should be the selection criteria?
This is at present not the important issue. The issue is transparency. If every one follows that principle, if not everything, at least, most problems would be solved.
CDG – the never ending controversy
CDG is one of the most talked about controversy for the first elected government. This is another view from Bhutan Times:
Written by Sangey of Haa Wangcha
January 17, 2010: Once again it is in the news. The National Council seems to have faded because now it seems to be a contest between Government and the Election Commission. Is it constitutional or is it unconstitutional? Is it a breach of Election Law? The last time, in fact quite sometime back, I thought this issue was put up to the King by the National Council. Maybe I am wrong.
What is happening is that the CDG has been put into operation through a mechanism called Annual Budget which the National Assembly says does not need to be approved or consented to by the National Council. I think the 2 opposition members in the National Assembly opposed the CDG inclusion in the Budget but in Democracy the majority have the say, most of the time.
The Election Commission is worried because CDG could, in its opinion, give an edge to sitting MPs if Constituency Development Grant is used to meet the promises that these MPs made whilst asking for votes in the 1st General Election. The voters could reward the MPs in the next General Election (2013) if these MPs are able to keep their campaign promises already made.
The CDG of Nu: 2 million a year i.e. 10 million or 1 crore in 5 years is quite a sum especially in a small constituency and could provide the necessary edge against any opponent in the next Election.
I like one arguement put forth by the Minister of Works and Human Settlements. The Government formed by DPT Party is executing and implementing all projects/developments works in the 10th five year plan. Does this automatically mean that the incumbent Government will be elected to power in the next General Election? If the answer is “yes”, then CDG does not make a difference and if it is “no”, then again by the same logic, CDG should not have an impact. I may have an answer but for the time being the opportunity must be given to the National Council and the Election Commission.
What I am intrigued is about the present scenario where Government proposes to go to the Local Governments to find out whether the CDG is needed, justifiable or unnecessary, not justifiable. So if the Local Governments responds favourably to the Government’s continuance of the implementation of CDG, then I suppose the Government intends to go ahead and if not then revert. How does one revert what has been spent under CDG?
The Local Governments are supposed to be apolitical institutions. At least the present Dzongkhag Administrations and the DYTs and the GYTs are supposed to be apolitical. Therefore, would it be even politically correct to draw them into this political disagreement? And more important will the Local Governments agree to be drawn into such a political bone-fire. It would be interesting to find out the reactions and responses of the Dzongdas and the Chair Persons of the Local Governments.
Why are MPs so insistent on this CDG? Is it because of the objectives of the next General Election or is it because their Constituencies keep reminding them of campaign promises? There is no easy answer but fulfilling campaign promises to the extent possible can be a very powerful motive. Maybe the MPs are caught in a moral dilemma. If CDG goes through, they will be able to keep part of the campaign promises. But then they stand to be accused of being unfaithful to the Constitution that created them and breaching Election Laws. And if CDG does not go through, their Constituencies would mark them as being unreliable and dubious. It is also possible that few MPs do genuinely feel that there are things to be done and not necessarily because they form part of campaign promises or laying future vote banks.
I can also imagine the kind of pressures that the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers are subjected to from their DPT member MPs and Party Faithfuls. Why even have a Party and fight an Election if you cannot do anything for the Party and Party Constituencies? Further MPs could even challenge the Ministers for not supporting the CDG after all Ministers have Ministries and all the development works to talk about but MPs would not have anything to show their personal care for the constituencies.
There also pressure on the Election Commission. It is the constitutational resposibility of this Commission to ensure that Election is Free and Fair. Therefore any wide spread perception that the present government is finding ways to tilt the scale of the next general election, is harmful and detrimental to the perceived process of democracy. Therefore the Commission will do all it can to correct any possible imbalance.
CDG is just one battle and there will be continuous other battles. All I hope is that in-spite of differences of the opinions, all Parties keep maintaining their dignity even in disagreement and find ways to resolve the differences in a way that the Nation can find confidence in itself.
What seem to appear on the surface may not be the real picture. It is important that all involved parties especially the public should be honest and forth right in the long term interest of the nation.
Democracy is a complex monster. It is not a Faith of Fairness and at times it is not even the choice of the Majority. The intricacies of the patterns of Democracies practised all over the World could baffle the most skilful weaver and the challenges of Democracies can be daunting even to a Knight of the Round Table.
Written by Sangey of Haa Wangcha
January 17, 2010: Once again it is in the news. The National Council seems to have faded because now it seems to be a contest between Government and the Election Commission. Is it constitutional or is it unconstitutional? Is it a breach of Election Law? The last time, in fact quite sometime back, I thought this issue was put up to the King by the National Council. Maybe I am wrong.
What is happening is that the CDG has been put into operation through a mechanism called Annual Budget which the National Assembly says does not need to be approved or consented to by the National Council. I think the 2 opposition members in the National Assembly opposed the CDG inclusion in the Budget but in Democracy the majority have the say, most of the time.
The Election Commission is worried because CDG could, in its opinion, give an edge to sitting MPs if Constituency Development Grant is used to meet the promises that these MPs made whilst asking for votes in the 1st General Election. The voters could reward the MPs in the next General Election (2013) if these MPs are able to keep their campaign promises already made.
The CDG of Nu: 2 million a year i.e. 10 million or 1 crore in 5 years is quite a sum especially in a small constituency and could provide the necessary edge against any opponent in the next Election.
I like one arguement put forth by the Minister of Works and Human Settlements. The Government formed by DPT Party is executing and implementing all projects/developments works in the 10th five year plan. Does this automatically mean that the incumbent Government will be elected to power in the next General Election? If the answer is “yes”, then CDG does not make a difference and if it is “no”, then again by the same logic, CDG should not have an impact. I may have an answer but for the time being the opportunity must be given to the National Council and the Election Commission.
What I am intrigued is about the present scenario where Government proposes to go to the Local Governments to find out whether the CDG is needed, justifiable or unnecessary, not justifiable. So if the Local Governments responds favourably to the Government’s continuance of the implementation of CDG, then I suppose the Government intends to go ahead and if not then revert. How does one revert what has been spent under CDG?
The Local Governments are supposed to be apolitical institutions. At least the present Dzongkhag Administrations and the DYTs and the GYTs are supposed to be apolitical. Therefore, would it be even politically correct to draw them into this political disagreement? And more important will the Local Governments agree to be drawn into such a political bone-fire. It would be interesting to find out the reactions and responses of the Dzongdas and the Chair Persons of the Local Governments.
Why are MPs so insistent on this CDG? Is it because of the objectives of the next General Election or is it because their Constituencies keep reminding them of campaign promises? There is no easy answer but fulfilling campaign promises to the extent possible can be a very powerful motive. Maybe the MPs are caught in a moral dilemma. If CDG goes through, they will be able to keep part of the campaign promises. But then they stand to be accused of being unfaithful to the Constitution that created them and breaching Election Laws. And if CDG does not go through, their Constituencies would mark them as being unreliable and dubious. It is also possible that few MPs do genuinely feel that there are things to be done and not necessarily because they form part of campaign promises or laying future vote banks.
I can also imagine the kind of pressures that the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers are subjected to from their DPT member MPs and Party Faithfuls. Why even have a Party and fight an Election if you cannot do anything for the Party and Party Constituencies? Further MPs could even challenge the Ministers for not supporting the CDG after all Ministers have Ministries and all the development works to talk about but MPs would not have anything to show their personal care for the constituencies.
There also pressure on the Election Commission. It is the constitutational resposibility of this Commission to ensure that Election is Free and Fair. Therefore any wide spread perception that the present government is finding ways to tilt the scale of the next general election, is harmful and detrimental to the perceived process of democracy. Therefore the Commission will do all it can to correct any possible imbalance.
CDG is just one battle and there will be continuous other battles. All I hope is that in-spite of differences of the opinions, all Parties keep maintaining their dignity even in disagreement and find ways to resolve the differences in a way that the Nation can find confidence in itself.
What seem to appear on the surface may not be the real picture. It is important that all involved parties especially the public should be honest and forth right in the long term interest of the nation.
Democracy is a complex monster. It is not a Faith of Fairness and at times it is not even the choice of the Majority. The intricacies of the patterns of Democracies practised all over the World could baffle the most skilful weaver and the challenges of Democracies can be daunting even to a Knight of the Round Table.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Our hon'ble PM wants teachers to beat up our children?
This is a news feed from Kuensel. I am a little taken aback that our prime minister should suggest such barbaric measures. Read on...
25 January, 2009 - The prime minister, Lyonchhoen Jigmi Y Thinley, has suggested corporal punishment, which is officially banned in schools, be used as the last resort to counter growing indiscipline cases in educational institutes.
Speaking to educators at the annual education conference in Phuentsholing earlier this month, he said that children were growing waywardly and it might not have been right for the schools to do away with corporal punishment without finding an alternative.
“While we have done away with corporal punishment, it seems the replacement or alternative measures have not been found,” he said. “I certainly do not want our teachers afraid of going to the classroom because of abusive children that they may face in the next ten years.”
He exhorted the educators at the conference to discuss the issue and see what were the truly viable and effective measures against indiscipline in schools. “Maybe we should keep corporal punishment as the last resort when all the alternative means get exhausted. And this right should be exercised by only one designated person, perhaps the principal himself or herself,” said the prime minister.
Most teachers in the urban schools complain that students are going out of hand when it comes to discipline and there are no alternatives to inculcate discipline. A Thimphu school principal told Kuensel that having one designated person to exercise corporal punishment, as suggested by the prime minister, could be a temporary solution until a variety of alternatives are introduced.
Bhutan, as a signatory to the Convention of the Rights of the Child, banned corporal punishment in schools several years ago, based on the argument that relying on corporal punishment is a failure on the part of the teacher to be more engaging. Many teachers and parents reason that the outcome of this ban has been serious disciplinary problems. In most schools beyond the urban centres, however, students are still spanked or caned as a disciplinary action.
Education secretary Sangay Zam said that one of the resolutions of the recent annual education conference is to find alternative ways. “We are working on the alternative methods of making children mindful of their actions,” she said. “There is no debate on corporal punishment because we are a signatory to the child rights convention and also provisions in the penal code does not allow corporal punishment on children.”
The national commission for women and children’s childcare protection bill is also awaiting the parliament’s endorsement. Once passed corporal punishment in any kind of setting whether at home or at school becomes a punishable offence by law.
Lyonchhoen said that no one among educators could dare to speak against corporal punishment because this is totally against the new ideas and notions of education. “But there are hundreds of ways through which a child can be motivated to behave, to learn and to perform,” he said. “We need to spend lot of time to think and discuss this issue.”
By Phuntsho Choden
25 January, 2009 - The prime minister, Lyonchhoen Jigmi Y Thinley, has suggested corporal punishment, which is officially banned in schools, be used as the last resort to counter growing indiscipline cases in educational institutes.
Speaking to educators at the annual education conference in Phuentsholing earlier this month, he said that children were growing waywardly and it might not have been right for the schools to do away with corporal punishment without finding an alternative.
“While we have done away with corporal punishment, it seems the replacement or alternative measures have not been found,” he said. “I certainly do not want our teachers afraid of going to the classroom because of abusive children that they may face in the next ten years.”
He exhorted the educators at the conference to discuss the issue and see what were the truly viable and effective measures against indiscipline in schools. “Maybe we should keep corporal punishment as the last resort when all the alternative means get exhausted. And this right should be exercised by only one designated person, perhaps the principal himself or herself,” said the prime minister.
Most teachers in the urban schools complain that students are going out of hand when it comes to discipline and there are no alternatives to inculcate discipline. A Thimphu school principal told Kuensel that having one designated person to exercise corporal punishment, as suggested by the prime minister, could be a temporary solution until a variety of alternatives are introduced.
Bhutan, as a signatory to the Convention of the Rights of the Child, banned corporal punishment in schools several years ago, based on the argument that relying on corporal punishment is a failure on the part of the teacher to be more engaging. Many teachers and parents reason that the outcome of this ban has been serious disciplinary problems. In most schools beyond the urban centres, however, students are still spanked or caned as a disciplinary action.
Education secretary Sangay Zam said that one of the resolutions of the recent annual education conference is to find alternative ways. “We are working on the alternative methods of making children mindful of their actions,” she said. “There is no debate on corporal punishment because we are a signatory to the child rights convention and also provisions in the penal code does not allow corporal punishment on children.”
The national commission for women and children’s childcare protection bill is also awaiting the parliament’s endorsement. Once passed corporal punishment in any kind of setting whether at home or at school becomes a punishable offence by law.
Lyonchhoen said that no one among educators could dare to speak against corporal punishment because this is totally against the new ideas and notions of education. “But there are hundreds of ways through which a child can be motivated to behave, to learn and to perform,” he said. “We need to spend lot of time to think and discuss this issue.”
By Phuntsho Choden
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Drayangs - their business model and sustainability
I have recently visited a drayang out of curiosity to entertain a Bangladeshi friend. I am told that there are several drayangs in the capital city of Bhutan and the women at these entertainment houses are mostly illiterate who are trying to escape the drudgery of living hard lives in their farming villages in rural Bhutan. The business model in such a establishent is thus: the girls here are supposed to make a minimum earnings from the song or dance request from their clients of Nu. 15,000 a month and if they fail to meet the minimum ceiling, it is deducted from their measly monthly salary of Nu. 4,000. When you sit down and order a drink or something, the bolder ones come near you and ask to request a dance or song that she will sing for you. The request would cost the "requester" Nu. 100 for a song or dance request. If the bolder girl is successful, others follow suit and ask you for a request too.
If you are generous in doling out the requests, the girls come and request for a "spy wine". Bhutan is a small country and I am wondering how such business models would sustain in the long run. I wish our economy created a lot of good jobs, decent high-paying jobs for these women so that they (mostly poorly-educated or no education at all) do not have to go begging for a song request. I hope our government's promise of equity and justice for all becomes a dream realized for these women languishing in the drayangs of Thimphu!
If you are generous in doling out the requests, the girls come and request for a "spy wine". Bhutan is a small country and I am wondering how such business models would sustain in the long run. I wish our economy created a lot of good jobs, decent high-paying jobs for these women so that they (mostly poorly-educated or no education at all) do not have to go begging for a song request. I hope our government's promise of equity and justice for all becomes a dream realized for these women languishing in the drayangs of Thimphu!
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Of queues and clean vegetable market
I have just returned from Phuentsholing and while there, I had gone to BNB to get some cash from my account. My token number was 81, and the customer served at that moment was 66, so I ventured to see a friend at the other bank at the opposite side of the road. When I returned from BOB after 20 minutes, the customer number they were calling in was 67. From then on, it took another two hours for me to get my cheque encashed. While waiting, I got talking to a another customer who said that if I knew someobody in the bank, I could get the services faster. I said that the token system was introduced to ensure that there were no shortcuts to availing the services. He said that those known to the customer service personnel got the services ahead of others. I don't know if his accusation was true, but BNB management should certainly get to the root of this delay problems at their counters and ensure that its customer service is improved. I mean if they do not want these customers to move to Druk PNB foraging into the market next month.
This afternoon, I took two of my friends from Bangladesh to our centennial farmer's market in Thimphu. Surprisingly, the place was very clean and there were women in uniforms moping up the place every now and then along the vegetable spot lanes. My Bangladeshi friends were visibly pleased to see the orderliness and cleanliness of the place and commended me for it. I felt proud to be a Bhutanese. We are doing something right, and we should keep this spirit going!
This afternoon, I took two of my friends from Bangladesh to our centennial farmer's market in Thimphu. Surprisingly, the place was very clean and there were women in uniforms moping up the place every now and then along the vegetable spot lanes. My Bangladeshi friends were visibly pleased to see the orderliness and cleanliness of the place and commended me for it. I felt proud to be a Bhutanese. We are doing something right, and we should keep this spirit going!
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Buli-Barkhey road in Upper Kheng?
Zhemgang has, in the past, missed the train to economic prosperity. It still hasn't boarded the train yet. When would she get to board the train?
Upper Kheng consisting of Shingkhar and Bardo geogs has remained an island. In the fading distance, the lights from vehicles plying on the Bumthang-Mongar highway is visible from middle part of Wamling in Upper Kheng. Footpaths from Thrisa, another village, leads to Mongar taking adventurous villagers to Lingmathang in Mongar. I have myself taken on several occassions Buli-Upper Kheng footpath across Malaya, perhaps the most used footpaths in all of Bhutan. Horses, men, women, school children, government officials, you name it.
In the backdrop of this scenario, a 15-km farm road was built sometime in 2007-2008 from Buli in Nangkor geog to Barkhey on the other side of the mighty Malayas, a huge mountain ridge where travellers spend most of their day's journey to Nimshong, the next village. The road was built but no vehicle has ever reached Barkhey so far, not counting the bulldozer that cut the road. This 15-km road, if usable, would cut the journey for the weary travellers by half a day. If only it is usable and if anybody is listening?
Upper Kheng consisting of Shingkhar and Bardo geogs has remained an island. In the fading distance, the lights from vehicles plying on the Bumthang-Mongar highway is visible from middle part of Wamling in Upper Kheng. Footpaths from Thrisa, another village, leads to Mongar taking adventurous villagers to Lingmathang in Mongar. I have myself taken on several occassions Buli-Upper Kheng footpath across Malaya, perhaps the most used footpaths in all of Bhutan. Horses, men, women, school children, government officials, you name it.
In the backdrop of this scenario, a 15-km farm road was built sometime in 2007-2008 from Buli in Nangkor geog to Barkhey on the other side of the mighty Malayas, a huge mountain ridge where travellers spend most of their day's journey to Nimshong, the next village. The road was built but no vehicle has ever reached Barkhey so far, not counting the bulldozer that cut the road. This 15-km road, if usable, would cut the journey for the weary travellers by half a day. If only it is usable and if anybody is listening?
Government using CDG for political gains?
First the government conceived and bulldozed CDG through DPT-dominated parliament. Now they are using local governments to decide the fate of CDG. Our government is very clever, let us not discount that and give them credit. However, we need to critique and analyse these issues and facts:
1. Is CDG constitutional?
Elections Commission of Bhutan (ECB) had filed a written complaint against its adoption to the prime minister. ECB reasoned that CDG would distort the level playing fields for political parties and would interfere with free and fair elections. NC has submitted this matter to His Majesty the King. Now that Supreme Court is in place, shouldn't the matter be put upto it to interpret the constitutionality of the CDG.
2. Does the local government understand what is at stake?
Without understanding the bigger picture of democracy and how it affects free and fair elections, I would not be surprised if all or most of the local governments in 205 geogs vote for CDG. An independent study and survey may be required to find out if the issues in contention are understood by the stakeholders who, it seems would, decide the fate of CDG. Are our local governments aware of how CDG has been received in other countries and how it has aided corrupt activities that would take away chunks of resources from development activities.
3. Why can't all activities be planned or why can't LGs be empowered to spend the resources?
If local governments require additional resources for unplanned activities in their geogs, government could ensure local government's access to the resource kit instead of constituting CDG that has not worked in several countries to take roots in our country.
1. Is CDG constitutional?
Elections Commission of Bhutan (ECB) had filed a written complaint against its adoption to the prime minister. ECB reasoned that CDG would distort the level playing fields for political parties and would interfere with free and fair elections. NC has submitted this matter to His Majesty the King. Now that Supreme Court is in place, shouldn't the matter be put upto it to interpret the constitutionality of the CDG.
2. Does the local government understand what is at stake?
Without understanding the bigger picture of democracy and how it affects free and fair elections, I would not be surprised if all or most of the local governments in 205 geogs vote for CDG. An independent study and survey may be required to find out if the issues in contention are understood by the stakeholders who, it seems would, decide the fate of CDG. Are our local governments aware of how CDG has been received in other countries and how it has aided corrupt activities that would take away chunks of resources from development activities.
3. Why can't all activities be planned or why can't LGs be empowered to spend the resources?
If local governments require additional resources for unplanned activities in their geogs, government could ensure local government's access to the resource kit instead of constituting CDG that has not worked in several countries to take roots in our country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
