Submit your Article

Ever wondered how easily the organs so well protected by bones and muscles within the human bodies fall victims to the environment around us? We need to screen the air through masks, visors, or windshields. We need to fight with the visible and invisible impurities. And no, it’s not just the respiratory problems that we suffer from due to air pollution but diseas­es like cancer and heart diseases too, according to doctors. As I was gathering more knowl­edge on the health impacts of air pollution during the Air Quality Awareness Week last week, I recalled the time my parents would go on morning walks, from Banasthali to Swoyambhu, without covering their nose or mouth. Walking by the side of Peepal trees, breathing fresh air brought by the hustling of the leaves, listening to cuckoos—they are things I can only dream of now. I live in Syuichatar now, very close to Kalanki where construction of an underpass has taken a toll on our health. For the past two years, pass­ing through the area has been a bit like going through a war zone, where bombs were dropped, messing up the whole area.

Development in recent times in the urban areas of Nepal have been very dirty. In winter, its dust all over the roads; come monsoons, there’s awful lot of mud and slush, and once the skies clear and sun shines, up goes the dust air too, just like fog. Our municipality and the govern­ment are strangely wise, who send people with brooms on the roads instead of road cleaning machines.

It’s obvious that those who live closer to construction sites or facto­ries suffer more. Children and elder­ly who do not have strong immunity fall sick, which reflects in higher rates of hospital attendance, as per doctors and researchers. Still, some­thing as simple as vacuuming the roads, to take care of at least one kind of air pollutant, has never been done and yet we dream of becoming cleaner and greener, maybe Singa­pore if not Switzerland!

Although our constitution regards clean environment as our “right” and we can be “compensated” if we suffer from unhealthy environment, no one knows how to claim that compensation. Pollution has limited our fundamental rights—our free­dom of movement is compromised. Freedom of speech also gets affected when you are walking on the roads that are clouded with dust, not to mention additional spending in med­icines, soaps and detergents.

But why isn’t there enough buzz or pressure to demand the right enshrined to us by our constitution? Maybe it’s not sexy enough for poli­ticians. Maybe we are fine covering ourselves. No doubt, roads need to be built and expanded, indus­tries must run, people need to be employed, those who can afford to buy vehicles must be allowed to do so as well. The economy should thrive, not through “dusty develop­ment” that is unfair to citizens but with the “duty to protect” people from diseases caused by pollution.

[email protected]

Barely six months into the implementation of the federal structure, the first signs of conflict between the three tiers of government are visible. State governments are openly criticizing the federal government for what they see as the Cen­tre’s attempt to ‘hoard resourc­es’. While not unexpected or unnatural, these early manifesta­tions of conflict require a careful handling if our federal journey is to be smooth. There are two primary sources of conflict: resource and respon­sibility. Instinctively, all tiers of government want to have as much of both as possible. But the principle is clear: federalism is both a self-rule and a shared-rule—with downward delegation of basic services. As such the fed­eral government bears as much responsibility as subnational gov­ernments to ensure that there is adequate resource.

As both the federal and provin­cial governments begin prepa­rations for the next fiscal year’s budget, the Ministry of Finance’s ceiling of Rs 15 billion budget to each provincial government is being challenged. The current formula for sharing revenues between the federal and subna­tional governments is also being contested. Under the Intergov­ernmental Fiscal Arrangement Act, the federal government keeps about 70 percent of the revenue from taxes and 50 percent of the royalty from natural resources.

Four types of transfer

As experiences from other federal countries show, about two-thirds of all spending takes place at the subnational level. Even in Nepal’s context—as the functional analysis carried out by a UNDP-supported project sug­gests—out of the 1,796 services that the Nepal government provides, more than half are functions of the subnational governments. The four different types of transfer that the Intergovernmental Fiscal Arrangement Act has provisioned will provide additional resources to the lower levels of government to meet their responsibilities: equalization, matching, condi­tional and special grants.

While the first three grants are aimed mostly at delivering basic services and maintaining certain national standards set by the center, the last grant seems to be aimed at supporting the sub­national governments for infra­structure development. It is obvi­ous there aren’t enough public funds to meet the infrastructural requirement of all states. This is what seems to worry the state governments the most.

PPP model

As the states are in formative stages, building infrastructures is a key priority for them. This is where private capital—both foreign and domestic—can come into play. Bridges, highways, drinking water projects and sewage plants can all be construct­ed under a public private partner­ship (PPP) model. This requires a strong legal framework and the capacity to design projects and provide regulatory oversight at both the federal and state levels. There are many variations of the PPP model that have been tried and tested by other countries. And there are several multilat­eral organizations that can help bring in the expertise initially to build our national capacity to design and execute these PPPs. The private sector can not only fill the funding gap, but can also create a virtuous cycle of employ­ment creation and revenue base expansion for the state govern­ments—which in turn can be used for funding additional services and infrastructure.

While the state governments are within their rights to press the fed­eral government for more funds, they may also want to explore alternatives. Instead of merely tweaking the revenue distribution formula, the Intergovernmental Fiscal Council should also look into other emerging approach­es to development finance. The shortage of public finance is also an opportunity to engage the pri­vate sector more effectively in national development.

Stepping into a vehicle in Nepal is, I sometimes feel, a bit like playing Russian roulette. On my very first trip here as a tourist, the bus I was on coming from Pokhara to Kathmandu had a minor crash. Now whether it was the driver’s fault or the fault of the bridge rail­ing which was just kind of standing there, right at the edge of the bridge, I may never know. Luckily, the only one who was injured was me. Due to nerve damage, it was more than seven years before feeling came back into my big right toe. But it was ‘only’ a very minor accident. But every day we read about bus and jeep crashes as the complexity of the landscape, combined with some less than perfect driving, takes its toll. So where does that leave us, the passenger, who needs to get from A to B? Even driving our own bike, cycle, or car leaves us open to others’ bad driving or the whims of the universe. Sure, in every country there are accidents, and some pretty major ones, but what I am really getting at is: why, given the hilly and often bad road conditions, are drivers so gung-ho?

Bus drivers are more often than not young guys with an image to keep. And who doesn’t like a young, leather-clad stud, with his own (albeit 48 seater) vehicle? When I lived out in the sticks, the local girls’ eyes lit up at the arrival of certain bus drivers and more often than not there was at least one female sitting up front to keep him company.

Even the older guys drive as though the devil is on their tail. Overtake on a blind corner? Why not! Every driver gets excited when a bit of the road opens up. Here is a chance to demonstrate his ability to be in the next Grand Prix. I’m quite surprised there are not more road accidents in Kathmandu than there are. Despite the lack of official driving lessons and knowledge of road signs, drivers in Nepal are fully present 99 percent of the time.

Avoiding a stray dog, cow or child is part of what driving is all about, and at that they are experts. Wander onto the road in a British town and you are likely to become toast whether you are a distracted human, stray dog (highly unlikely), or a cow (extremely unlikely). Fully trained and well equipped with a deep understanding of correct road procedures, your average British driver is under-prepared for unusual occurrences. So, yes, despite being, on the whole, horrible drivers deal­ing with horrendous roads, Nepali drivers do have their plus side.

And, what is with this extreme, yogi like patience? Being stuck in a traffic jam does not ruffle feathers. Drivers will wait not only patiently but with what appears to be medi­tative mindfulness while the line of cars in front does not move for 10 minutes, or a truck is unloading its goods. Or, my favourite and a reg­ular occurrence on my road, baby chicks are herded up by mother hen.

Indeed, maybe us pedestrians need to adopt the guise of chickens in order to cross the road. (I’m sure there is a joke in their somewhere!) Certainly those of us in the guise of zebras are not doing too well. I have noticed that most pedestrians have taken to using zebra crossings. So, obviously it must be those motor­bike helmets and the metal walls of vehicles stopping the flow of infor­mation on these odd, and often fad­ing, white stripes on the road from entering the heads of drivers.

While road safety is a very serious topic, sometimes you just have to shrug your shoulders and smile. That, or cry…

These days Prime Minister KP Oli is being compared with King Mahendra by two different groups. The first views him as a nationalist just because he stood up to India during the Indian embargo and signed vari­ous agreements with China to end our sole reliance on India. The other group feels he is displaying dictatorial tendencies, and hence the comparison with Mahendra. PM Oli doesn’t like being com­pared with the late king. The iro­ny, though: the prime minister, who finds it insulting being com­pared with “dictator” Mahendra, has no problem marking the birth anniversary of Lenin, whose bru­tality knew no bounds. Lenin had even the children of the House of Romanov killed in a gruesome manner and is reputed as the father of the totalitarian system.

Anyway, both groups compar­ing PM Oli with Mahendra are wrong. He is no Mahendra. At least not yet.

Mahendra, the nationalist

Mahendra’s crowning achieve­ment is not limited to standing up to India’s undue interference, unlike what the first group mis­takenly believes. While he stood up to Indian interference, he was also receptive to its valid con­cerns. He handled India diplomat­ically, not with bellicose rhetoric; and he made China happy, not by flattering it or submitting to its will, but by being a reliable friend. Nonetheless, most of his foreign policy achievements are attributed to BP Koirala, as if the monarch was in deep slumber until his 1960 coup.

Mahendra could get Chinese help to build a highway con­necting the two countries at the height of political turmoil in China, whereas our new leaders including PM Oli have not been able to persuade the Chinese to reopen the highway which the Chinese side closed after the dev­astating 2015 earthquake. And Nepal’s conspicuous absence from this year’s Boao forum in China, despite it being one of the founding members, and China’s indifference to it, is telling.

PM Oli may have all the good intentions but he is yet to dis­play finesse and learn the delicate tight rope walk in dealing with the neighbors. Therefore the first group is wrong to compare PM Oli with Mahendra. It is way too early to bestow him with the honor.

Mahendra, the dictator

If Mahendra is to be judged sole­ly on the basis of the party-less Panchayat system he introduced, then all of today’s political forces need to be judged on their past.

PM Oli and his comrades should be judged on the senseless vio­lent acts against the alleged class enemies. The Nepali Congress should be judged based on the crimes it committed in the name of democracy, which included hurling a bomb at the monarch and hijacking a plane. Let’s not even talk about the Maoists and their brutality.

While we are made to remem­ber Mahendra’s “sins” against democracy, the fact that he was working on a democratic consti­tution just before his death is rare­ly mentioned. Nor do we credit him for his revolutionary land reform. Mahendra made careful and calculated moves and did what he had to in order to uphold Nepal’s interests. And he is hated for this reason by the leaders and scholars who would rather Nepal compromised its sovereignty and surrendered itself to foreigners. He is hated to weaken Nepali nationalism.

Moreover, Mahendra is made a villain to make BP Koirala a hero. Mahendra needs to be portrayed as a dictator to strengthen and perpetuate the maha manab (‘Great Man’) BP cult, to glorify the violence and crimes against the country and people by the Congress and the Communists in the past and justify their present misdeeds in the name of democ­racy. And he needs to be demon­ized so that current leaders can continue with their politics sans principles.

Mahendra is feared, hence rid­iculed, to hide their own infe­riority, because today’s rulers have been unable to achieve what he did in his brief direct reign of 11 years. Also, it is profitable to loathe him because we are a country full of sellouts and turn­coat intellectuals who have long sacrificed their ability to reason for lucrative positions, junkets, money and whiskey.

Needless to say, the second group is wrong too. PM Oli, despite good decisions here and there, and so far seemingly bet­ter than his predecessors, is no Mahendra. Mahendra was far more democratic, patriotic, pro­gressive and visionary than what KP Oli was or is at the moment.