Submit your Article

 While talking about our econ­omy, we can analyze it in two ways. One is describing the positive things that have hap­pened. The second is to describe what positive things have not hap­pened or the negative things that have. Most people focus only on negatives but I would like to discuss both the sides. First, let’s discuss positive things. For the past 25-30 years, education has improved by a lot, so has peo­ple’s lifespan. We live to be 70 now than die at 35, as my school textbook used to inform me. So people’s aver­age lifespan has doubled. Of course, there are people, for instance the Dalits of the far-west or western hills, who do not average 70 years. But that is something we have to work on.

Poverty has been reduced by almost half, a huge achievement. From around 42 percent in 1995, the proportion of absolutely poor or very poor who do not get two meals a day has come down to 21 percent. It is a huge achievement.

There are, of course, 20-21 percent who are still poor, who do not have two meals a day. Also, 35 percent of our children are stunted as they do not have nutritious diet. Being stunted means not only are you are physically deficient you are also mentally ill.

Another positive is that we are growing at about 6.5 percent, which is not very high but not very low either. It is about the approximate growth in India and now also in China. So the growth rate is rea­sonably high, although it is not the rate we should be satisfied with; we should grow at about 10 percent annually. Plus, in infrastructures such as roads and hydro, we are doing well. We will be self-sufficient in hydro production starting next year and there will be surplus to sell. The NEA has thus been asking us to cook food with electricity.

Now let’s talk about the problems. First, I say one-fifth population is absolutely poor that cannot afford two meals a day. That is a sad sta­tistics and should trouble our state and government that promised to institutionalize socialism.

Socialism is particularly needed for the poor, females, Dalits and other marginalized groups. It is not an immediate priority for those who are well off. But our government would have failed if it cannot meet the needs of the very poor, women, Dalit and so forth.

Inscribing socialism in the con­stitution is one thing but actually implementing it is another. So the government should think seriously about what socialism means. Of course, the constitution does not merely says socialism, it also says socialism based on democratic norms and values. So it is not social­ism of the variety implemented in the Soviet Union or China.

It is more democratic socialism, or socialist democracy as they call it in Northern Europe, which means you have individual liberty, freedom of association and so forth. It also means the economy to a large mea­sure will be run along capitalist lines but revenue will be spent on social welfare. There is some way to go have that kind of socialism in Nepal.

The second point is that we do not have an investment-friendly cli­mate. We live at a time the Foreign Direct Investment is open across the world. The fact that we are poor does not mean we should have no investment.

Investment can flow across the world in principle. But there are hin­drances in Nepal obstructing people from investing. The government should open up to international investment. Now, a sizable number of people in Nepal can invest. But their investment is going mainly in three or four areas: land deals, con­struction, schools, and health.

Other sectors are short of invest­ment. For instance, there is insuffi­cient investment in tourism, agricul­ture, even in hydro. It is important that we take all possible steps to open investment in other areas, the principal avenues through which poverty can be reduced.

Poverty in Nepal was reduced by half within the 25 years primarily, not exclusively, as many Nepalis were employed in South East Asia, West Asia and other countries. So why can’t we have more jobs right here? Investment is the prime ave­nue through which we can increase employment.

Some sectors are growing, for example hydro and roads but agri­culture has no investment, even though it creates 60 percent jobs in Nepal. We have come a long way from the time agriculture contrib­uted 75 percent of total GDP in 1970.

Now, it is more like 25 percent. But the number of people who rely on it is still high. So agriculture may not generate as much GDP as it did but continues to provide job oppor­tunities to most of the population.

Many rely on agriculture, at least for their household income. If agro productivity continues to decline many will suffer. It vital that agricul­ture productivity be increased; and in its subsectors like hatchery, dairy, fruit cultivation, green vegetable cultivation, it has increased. We now hear stories like how a family earns up to Rs 1.5-2 million a year from the orange they grow.

You can grow vegetables, tree crops and other products. Tree crops will be very important in dry areas. They are water-efficient unlike other crops which require much water. Tree crops, of course, pay back in 10-15 years, not immedi­ately. It is not like you bring a cow and it starts giving milk right away. Tree crops take longer but their rate of return is much higher and they are much more climate-change friendly. So growing trees and for­ests is important.

With bigger roads and even rail­roads between Nepal and China, we can sell high value crops in their markets. Even bus and truck corri­dors with China will open up huge opportunities for Nepal.

It is important that the govern­ment gives due attention to agricul­ture. That will help especially the poor in rural areas. Health and edu­cation are fundamentally important for growth but in a narrow way. Hydropower, agriculture produc­tivity, tourism and connectivity are important for Nepal and we must open up more with China. It is not only an economic imperative but also a political one. We are now like a stadium with only one gate so in my life-time I experienced three blockades. We cannot let happen that again.

We must open all avenues of exchanges and connectivity with other neighbors and friends rather relying on only one neighbor. That is imperative from both economic and strategic viewpoints.

Finally, it is important we govern well. The main problem in Nepal is governance, particularly in the bureaucracy and political parties. The parties have monopolized most sectors, capturing universities, bureaucracy, school boards, and community forestry. Monopoliza­tion of power by political parties leads to economic depression. The bureaucracy is too bound by rules.

Some bureaucrats are not working properly, while others live in fear. Corruption has not decreased. So how can there be economic growth? There should be timely decisions at the source. The main blockage is in Singhadurbar O

Based on a conversation with Kamal Dev Bhattarai

 We are delighted to bring to you the 100th issue of The Annapurna Express. In the past two years, we have always tried to adapt our content and design based on your feedback. Our goal remains the same: to publish a comprehensive weekly newspaper that is both informative and fun to read. Rather than follow the crowd, APEX has been able to craft a unique niche for itself even in Nepal’s crowded newspaper scene. Our experimentation continues, as we look to add more value to our readers.

Yet the state of the country worries us. According to government figures, the economy continues to grow at over 6 percent, a middling rate for a country in Nepal’s state of development. But what is holding us back? Why are most sectors of our economy stagnating? There is scope for improvement everywhere: BFIs, construction, advertising, media, vehicles, services, you name it.

This should be the most important national issue right now. If our industries and businesses cannot thrive, it is hard to see the government realize its vision of ‘Prosperous Nepal, Happy Nepali.’ To mark our 100th issue and second anniversary, APEX thus sought the advice of experts in multiple fields to find out their problems and seek some solutions. In this special issue, we also explore ways to boost the overall economy.

With the broader contours of federal Nepal now in place, it is vital that the country quickly embarks on the path of economic development, if only to secure the recent political gains. It is not enough for a handful to feel rich; the common man on the street must feel empowered today to at least fulfil his basic needs and to dream of a better tomorrow.

APEX wants to prosper with the country. We hope we have contributed to the vital political and economic debates in Nepal over the past two years. Perhaps we also entertained a few of you. Let us know. Any kind of feedback is most welcome. On this occasion, we would also like to express our abiding faith in democracy, nationalism, and national unity Again, thanks to our readers and advertisers for bringing us this far. Keep supporting us.

Sachan Thapa

Publishing Director

The Annapurna Express

The party-less Panchayat regime had adopted a policy of attracting educated men and women into politics by reserving four seats in the Rastriya Panchayat for university graduates. In the 125-strong parliament, 90 would be elected from zonal panchayats and 15 from class-based organizations. The king used to nominate another 16. At least four more of the elected MPs would be bachelor’s
degree-holders.

In its early days, the Panchayat system had four tiers of government: villages/towns, districts, zones, and the Rastriya Panchayat at the top. Holders of bachelor’s degree would contest direct first-past-the-post elections, whereas others fought indirect elections or were nominated for the post. For the graduate seats, not only the candidates but the voters were also required to have a bachelor’s degree from a university or similar
educational institution.
A total 105 members of the Rastriya Panchayat were indirectly elected, after going through the successive village/town, district, and zone levels. Only members of zonal panchayats qualified to be Rastriya Panchayat members. So elections for the Rastriya Panchayat was held among the limited members of zonal panchayats. This provision also applied to the class-based organizations.
But the bachelor’s degree-holders were allowed to contest direct elections. A month prior to the poll, an election officer was appointed, also a bachelor’s degree-holder. The officer would supervise, control, and direct the preparation of voters’ list. The officer would also designate a polling station. Salaried government employees did not qualify as candidates but they could cast a vote as government employees above the officer level were also university graduates.
The graduate provision was a unique experiment in the Panchayat system. The indirect elections for 105 seats didn’t ignite much excitement. Only the loyal Panchas were involved there. On the other hand, politically conscious enthusiasts entered the fray for university graduate seats. The contest gave a different vibe to national politics.
There used to be only limited voters in the zonal panchayats. The contestants were chosen on the orders of the zonal administrator who took orders from the palace. Votes had to be cast as ordered. For the graduate contestants, neither the palace nor the zonal administrator had much influence. While other contestants made rounds to the zonal administrators to curry their favor, the graduates toured the country accompanied by educated men and women. They visited different districts for a month looking for university graduates, meeting them, and handing out election
manifestos and pamphlets.
One sad thing about the provision was that the prospective candidates had to pledge ‘allegiance to the party-less system’ while filing their candidacy. After signing the candidacy paper, they were considered to have come into the party-less fold. Upon election, they had to take oath of ‘complete loyalty to the king and his successors’.
The graduate elections were held thrice—in March 1963, August 1967 (the April elections were postponed), and May 1971. The constitution was amended and the fourth elections did not happen. Panchayat supporters had by then concluded that the anti-Panchayat elements were misusing
this provision.
The first graduate elections in 1963 were held to little fanfare. Nepali Congress members were not interested as the party was pursuing armed revolt at the time. However, Nagendra Prasad Singh, who was close to Nepali Congress, contested the election. Advocate Krishna Prasad Dhungana, who was close to the communist party, had also filed candidacy. There were only a few other contestants. The candidacy of Singh and Dhungana got some attention due to their political backgrounds. The first time, Kumar Das Shrestha and Ramji Prasad Sharma got elected besides Singh and
Dhungana O
Next week’s ‘Vault of History’ will discuss emergence of some pro-democratic and pro-republic leaders through graduate constituencies

 “In the beginner's mind there are many possibil­ities but in the expert's, there are few,” says Shunryu Suzuki in his 1970 master­piece Zen Mind, Beginner’s Mind. With his remarkably ordi­nary but penetrating wisdom put out in under 120 pages, the Zen master goes deep into the minds of the readers and enables them to have a very simple but profound perspective of living.

Anyone who has a begin­ner’s mind has the most beautiful mind. It is a mind with infinite possibilities. It does not have assump­tions. It does not belit­tle things and say—“Oh, I know it already. I have already accomplished that." Instead, it sees things anew each time.

You may be seeing your friends or kids for a hun­dred times, and each time your recognition of them may build on the memory of the last time you saw them. So you are not seeing them alone; you are seeing them as well as the memories that you have in the mind. And there are other impressions of the past that compound your vision.

It’s also the case with a new person or thing that we hav­en’t seen before. Oftentimes when we see them, we have a skeptic’s mind. As we aren’t familiar with them, we feel the need to be critical right from the beginning. So we see them as they are, plus our suspicions of them. While such seeing is sometimes helpful in protecting us, we miss the entire point most of the times.

What happens if we start seeing with a beginner’s mind—unclouded, unprej­udiced, and free from what we already know? What hap­pens when we put aside the ‘I’ and ‘know’ parts when seeing things? We see people and situations exactly as they are. We have a real appre­ciation of them. It widens our vision. It develops our wisdom. It enables us to do many things—understand things precisely, become better prepared to respond to situations, love people, develop compassion, con­serve environment, and keep ourselves out of trou­bles. In a sense, we can live fully.

In this space, I wish to dis­cuss things that resonate with our everyday lives, from a beginner’s perspective. If whatever I talk may sound familiar, I humbly ask the readers to try to see it with fresh eyes, discard the things that do not make sense, and if anything remains, let it remain.