Quick questions with Barsha Lekhi
Q. What is your biggest pet peeve?
A. Poor customer service at restaurants and supermarkets.
Q. If you had just one day left to live, how would you spend that day?
A. Party, time with family, cook great food and enjoy it.
Q. When you are down, what keeps you going?
A. The fear of failure.
Q. What does your perfect day consist of?
A. Drinking warm water, yoga, good lunch and praise at work.
Q. How do you deal with negativity on social media?
A. I have never received negativity on social media. And even if I did, I don’t think I would care.
Q. What is the best thing a fan has ever done for you?
A. Make a fan art. It still hangs on my room wall.
Q. What would be your superpower?
A. Power mimicry.
Q. What is an issue you feel deeply about and wish to highlight?
A. Human-wildlife conflict in conservation areas.
Q. One Nepali celebrity you absolutely admire and why?
A. Anuradha Koirala for the tremendous work she has done for our society and for being idolized worldwide
Quick questions with Salon Basnet
Q. What is an opinion you hold that most people would disagree with?
A. The only thing you should care about is yourself.
Q. What do you like the most about your fans?
A. Love and support that they give in every step of my journey.
Q. If you had only one day left to live, what would you do?
A. I would organize a big party and invite EVERYONE.
Q. Your alternate career choice?
A. A singer.
Q. Did you always want to be an actor?
A. During my teenage years, I thought I would become a rockstar. Never had I ever imagined working in the film industry. But now I love it!
Q. Which actress would you like to work opposite?
A. Swastima Khadka, again.
Q. Your best and worst purchase?
A. Best purchase: Every building material I purchased to make my house. Worst purchase: The Bluetooth mic I bought online.
Q. What would you like to say to aspiring actors?
A. Work hard and have patience. Entering movie industry is not as easy as it seems but it will be worth it!
Q. Are you someone who likes to live in a happening city or its quiet outskirts?
A. I mostly like living in a city. It also depends on my mood though.
The narrative of the loanable fund crisis or credit crunch is not validated by data
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has urged coherence in fiscal, monetary and financial sector policies for broad-based growth, stable macroeconomic situation and external sector stability. It has also emphasized leveraging knowledge and innovation, efficient fiscal and monetary institutions to mitigate downside risks in every economy. How does Nepal fare on these metrics? Pushpa Raj Acharya of the Annapurna Media Network caught up with Geert Almekinders, IMF mission chief for Nepal.
Nepal is going to achieve sound growth for three consecutive fiscals and is projected togrow at 6-6.5 percent in next two fiscals. Yet the IMF has pointed the risks of macro-economic instability.
The near-term outlook for growth is favorable. We, at the IMF, expect growth to reach 6.5 percent this fiscal and 6.3 percent in the next fiscal. This is supported by ongoing reconstruction, investment in hydro-power projects, and strong tourism-related activity. In the context of the IMF’s annual discussion with Nepali authorities in December and the subsequent staff report published in February, we noted how the strong growth is fueled by expansionary fiscal and credit policies. These expansionary policies lead to rising non-food inflation, a widening current account deficit, falling foreign exchange reserves, and a buildup of financial sector vulnerabilities.
You mean Nepal cannot sustain higher growth?
In the 10 years before the 2015 earthquake, Nepal’s growth averaged 4.4 percent a year. Governments changed frequently. The capital spending was low. The pace of macroeconomic and structural reforms was slower compared to neighboring countries, and domestic and foreign private investment were subdued. Because of the suppressed economic prospects in Nepal, large numbers of people went abroad to find work. As a result, Nepal’s actual and potential growth averaged about 4.4 percent a year. Put differently, Nepal’s economy got used to this level of growth.
Several recent developments have likely raised Nepal’s growth. Improved and reliable supply of electricity and increased political stability will both raise investment and boost growth. However, looking at the experience of other countries and the external pressures experienced by Nepal in the past two years, it is probably not realistic to target 8 percent growth.
What does the IMF recommend then?
In the staff report we recommend that the authorities focus on containing rising domestic demand pressures and external imbalance, and safeguard financial sector health. Combined with actions to make Nepal’s economy more competitive and attractive to investment, this will also deliver stronger and more sustainable medium-term growth. The government is making commendable efforts to upgrade the legal framework for domestic and foreign investors. It also held a successful Investment Summit last month. Nepal needs to build on this reform momentum and continue to strengthen the business environment.
But our finance minister has been saying that the BoP deficit is not a serious issue; it like a child suffering from diarrhea due to teething troubles.
It is only natural for post-earthquake reconstruction and investments in infrastructure to push up imports. But there are limits to the absorptive capacity of Nepal’s economy, and rapid decline in reserves is one of the signs that it may be advisable to slow the demand growth. In this regard it is encouraging to note that central bank reserves have staged a recovery in recent months and are now back up to $8.5 billion.
Nepal has had the perennial challenge of loanable fund crisis in its bank and financial institutions. And banks are now lobbying to increase the credit to core capital cum deposit (CCD) ratio from the current 80 percent. However, the central bank itself has been relaxing CCD time and again.
The narrative of the loanable fund crisis or credit crunch is not validated by data. Going by the numbers published by the central bank, banks expanded their credit to the private sector by about Rs 520 billion over the past 12 months. This is a phenomenal increase, equivalent to 17 percent of GDP. According to our assessment tools, credit is growing too fast. To contain the buildup of risk in the financial sector, we support efforts of the central bank to slow credit growth to a sustainable pace. Given the banks’ desire to expand their loan portfolio and increase their profits further, it is perhaps understandable that they are lobbying the central bank to increase the CCD ratio. However, to support financial stability, we think the central bank should resist such pressures.
Nepal has been raising revenue target every year, yet the capital expenditure is low. Banks blame the government for low deposit growth due to lack of spending of development budget. How can these problems be solved?
It is true that there is considerable seasonality in government spending. Unfortunately, a large share of central government capital spending typically takes place in the last few weeks of the fiscal. This is an old issue and there will be important gains if this spending can be spread out evenly across the fiscal. The quality and efficiency of capital spending would rise and overall cashflow in the economy would be more balanced. It will take time to address this issue and for now banks should take the seasonality into account when they plan and manage their lending business.
Imports are fueled by bank loans and the government depend on imports for revenue. Do you think this is a sustainable approach?
To sustain growth over medium term, the economy’s productive capacity must be increased through higher investment and greater competition. The capital budget management and the investment climate both need to improve. To improve budget planning and promote efficient spending, immediate action should focus on proper planning, selection and implementation of major capital projects and spreading them evenly throughout the year.
Many say remittances are contributing to the ‘Dutch disease’ in Nepal. What should be done before remittances slow down?
The steps we just discussed are also essential to create jobs in Nepal, which is needed to create a viable alternative to going abroad for the work. Recent improvement in availability of electricity has reduced the cost of doing business in Nepal. Other reforms, including steps to address physical and social infrastructure gaps, can also be expected to help boost investment, productivity and growth.
Talk of debt-trap is mass-scale propaganda
On April 24, President Bidya Devi Bhandari is going to Beijing to take part in the second Belt and Road Ini-tiative (BRI) conference. There are reports that China is preparing to roll out the red carpet for Bhandari. While in Beijing, Bhandari will address the BRI conference, and reportedly sign a slew of agreements with her Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, including on a protocol to the 2016 Trade and Transit Agreement. Some say President Bhandari’s visit will give clear signs of Nepal’s abiding commitment to the BRI, at a time when the Chinese project seems to have stagnated in Nepal. Kamal Dev Bhattarai talked to Nepal’s former Ambassador to China Tanka Karki for his views on the visit and on Nepal-China relations.
Why is China giving President Bhandari such importance?
Nepal and China share a 1,400-km-long border. There has been continuous interaction between the two countries for a long time. We help each other, and we support each other’s genuine interests. The Chinese side understands the value of geographical proximity. Not only now, China was extending a helping hand to Nepal even when China was not economically strong.
Neighborhood policy figures prominently in China’s overall foreign policy. The Chinese realize the importance of peace and stability in the neighborhood. There are no political differences between the two countries. That is why China is giving Nepal utmost priority. I think Bhandari’s visit is taking place in this larger context.
How is President Bhandari’s visit going to differ from previous high-level visits to China?
I think it is a regular visit. In China’s diplomatic dealings, there is no influence of ideology. If someone thinks the Chinese are giving more priority to this government due to its communist ideology, they are totally wrong and they do not understand Chinese foreign policy. Their foreign policy is rather directed by their national interest and mutual interest. I don’t see a difference in President Bhandari’s visit compared to such visits in the past.
What accounts for the delays in the implementation of the BRI projects in Nepal?
Before us are big powers such as India, China, Russia, the US, and others. These powers all exert their influence. Also, instead of focusing on our own national interest and issues, we are more sensitive to others’ interests and issues, which could have affected progress on BRI projects. We should be guided by our needs and interests; such an approach will help us gain credibility. But in the name of making others happy we are accepting unjust demands and pressures.
Nepal’s participation in the BRI means Nepal can no longer be projected as a ‘Himalayan barrier’. To eradicate poverty, we have to try to reap benefits from three major powers: China, India and the US. At the same time, we should not entertain unjustifiable interests of those countries. Joining the BRI means our access to the outer world would be easier. It also means coming out of the old mindset of confining ourselves to only one side of the Himalayas.
Even when China was not economically strong, it was extending a helping hand to Nepal
Are you hinting at pressures from India and western countries for the delay in selecting projects under the Belt and Road Initiative?
India is boycotting the BRI and western countries are divided over it. This means there are ideological differences over this project.
More specifically, is Indian and American pressure the reason for the delay?
In my observation, there is obviously external pressure. But we have not developed the ability to resist such pressure.
There is also talk of a debt trap. How do you see this?
There have been attempts to blame China in the name of debt-trap diplomacy. First, it is mass-scale propaganda warfare. Second, you if take a loan from others you are responsible for its proper utilization. It is our responsibility to execute projects cleanly and create an environment of paying back loans. You cannot maintain a corrupt structure at home and then blame China. There is talk of a debt trap in Sri Lanka. In a recent seminar I attended, a Sri Lankan professor said that the debt trap story is not theirs. He shared a different story. It is about propaganda and we should not run after what others say. We cannot emerge out of poverty only by mobilizing internal resources. We should take loans and correct our defective mechanisms rather than blaming those who loan us money.
Is the new US Indo-Pacific Strategy a counter to China’s BRI?
Mainly, we should give priority to our relations with our two giant neighbors, India and China. The changing global context and our development needs encourage us to maintain cordial relations with western powers and take their help in emerging out of extreme poverty. But Nepal’s best interest still lies in maintaining balanced relations with India and China.
Have there been sincere efforts to maintain such a balance?
We have to do a lot of homework to maintain a fine balance between the two countries. To some extent, there has been progress in our relations with China after the political change in 2006. All powers have understood that Nepalis do not want to live under the influence of external forces, and we want cordial relations with all counties. On foreign policy, we need to figure out areas of mutual interest. Genuine interests should be accommodated while unjust ones should be strongly resisted.
There is much talk about Chinese railway. Is it feasible?
Railway connectivity between Nepal and China will mean Nepal is no more Himalaya-locked. In a real sense, we will be connected to both India and China as well as with global powers. Railway connectivity between the two countries will ensure our strategic autonomy.
But there are reports that rail connectivity with China is too costly.
It is not true. For example, it takes at least 45 days if you bring goods via seaports from Japan. But with Chinese railway, it would take no more than 10 days. It saves us cost and time. If we have such a railway, the current hassles in Kolkata port would be relaxed because they will then have to compete against Chinese transport links with Nepal. When we initiated a railway line with China, India proposed the Raxual-Kathmandu railway. Both are beneficial to us. India alone cannot meet our demands. We need support from India, China and western countries.
How do you see recent American positions and statements on growing Chinese investments in Nepal?
There is a big tug-of-war to reorder the existing global system. The bipolar world created after the Second World War collapsed in 1989. The short-term unipolar world order with America at the top is no longer feasible. In the post-1989 period, the polarization between North and South has escalated dangerously. Even within countries, the gulf between the rich and the poor is widening. A new world order which can bridge these gaps is inevitable. Now, we should focus on minimizing poverty and strengthening our institutions. Quiet diplomacy may be in our best interest right now.
How would you evaluate the Oli government’s handling of foreign policy?
Despite some shortcomings, I think it is broadly on the right track.
Has the government been successful in balancing major powers: India, China and the US?
We do not have the capacity to balance major powers. Creating an environment of trust with all major powers will be a big achievement. We should have no trust deficit, which might create problems. There should be no suspicion in bilateral relations with those countries.
Ideology aside, is the Oli government tilted toward China?
I will say we have not done enough to benefit from China.
