Resolutions for 2009...

Frankly, I’m surprised at how many people have been reading my blogs. And very grateful. I want to thank all of you for your support. Whether you agree with my views or not is unimportant. That you take the time to visit and read and comment is important. And for that, I thank you all very much.

This is my final post for 2008 – my resolutions for the New Year. They’re in no particular order.

1. To read at least 12 books. Or, better still, at least one book each month. Anything remotely resembling a piece of legislation will not count.

2. To see at least 6 Bhutanese movies. And in the theatre; not at home. Anything on TV, naturally, won’t count.

3. To relearn my mother tongue – Khengkha. This was the first language I spoke. I forgot both Khengkha and Dzongkha when, barely 5 years old, I was sent to a boarding school in India. How best to relearn Khengkha? Spend more time with my mother.

4. To go on a trek. Will I ever be able to do the Snowman? I’ve been thinking about it for almost 10 years now.

5. To learn a new hobby. Dramyen? Golf? Gardening? Fly fishing? The possibilities are endless.

6. To keep blogging. It’s hard work. But enjoyable. And, even if one person reads it, well worth it.

7. To redesign this blogsite. Too many people have complained that my blogsite is too much like me – boring!

Happy New Year.

High time...

Lyonpo Khandu Wangchuk announced that the government has called all the dzongdags to Thimphu. And that in January, the government will meet all them. Very good.

It’s almost nine months since the new government took office, and they haven’t yet briefed the dzongdags. So I was getting seriously concerned. Dzongdags, after all, are the chief executives in the dzongkhags, and are responsible for translating the government’s policies and plans into action.

He also announced that a meeting with all the gups and the DYT chairmen would follow. Very, very good.

A shocking reminder...

I offer my condolences to the families and friends of the six people who were ambushed in Phibsoo, Sarpang yesterday. Four of them were brutally murdered and two are said to be in critical condition.

My prayers and support are with them during this difficult period.

This outrageous act was committed by terrorists, and is a direct attack on our nation. We must, as His Majesty the Fourth Druk Gyalpo has repeatedly commanded, “act and think as one” to defend the security and sovereignty of our nation.

I will support, without reservation, the government’s efforts to catch the perpetrators of terror in our beloved land.

Fighting for equity and justice...

It’s been six months since I questioned the legality of the appointment of DPT party workers to the Cabinet. The government has not addressed my concerns. So I’ve decided to go to ACC. Here’s what I’ll tell them:

That in mid-June, five DPT party workers were appointed to the Cabinet. One has since resigned, but four of them continue to work under the government’s payroll.

That on 19th July, the RCSC approved the proposal to recruit four staff on “contract basis” for the Cabinet. By then the DPT party workers had already been working for more than a month.

That according to BCSR 2006 (Bhutan Civil Service Rules), people can be recruited on contract only for: (i) time bound projects and programmes; (ii) temporary vacancies caused by civil servants on long term leave; and (iii) positions where there is an acute shortage of human resources. The appointments to the Cabinet do not fulfill any of these criteria.

That Chapter 4.2.1 of BCSR 2006 requires that “The recruitment of personnel on contract shall be based on merit through a fair, open and competitive selection process.” The job vacancies in the Cabinet were not advertised; the government simply appointed their own party workers.

And that Article 7.8 of the Constitution declares that “A Bhutanese citizen shall have the right to equal access and opportunity to join the Public Service”. This fundamental right to every citizen was denied by the government.

I’ve thought about this long and hard. It’s not about the four people in the Cabinet – I have absolutely nothing against them. In fact, they may be capable. They may be qualified. They may even be deserving.

It’s about how the jobs were given to them. Were their appointments legal? Did the government follow procedure? Or did it disregard the law? Did it misuse power and authority? Was there corruption?

The long arms of the ACC will tell.

The National Council has also called these appointments unlawful, and they will demand a judicial review. This is good news to supporters of democracy. To crusaders against corruption. And to the champions of equity and justice.

Sunday movie...

I saw a movie on Sunday.

Drinchen (gratitude) is a love story that contrasts life in rural and urban Bhutan. And it draws attention to growing conflict between traditional and modern values. It is directed by Kezang P. Jigme, and stars Lhaki Dema (Best Actress 2003 for Chepai Bhu), Tshering Phuntsho and Kezang Tobden.

Drinchen is playing in Trowa, Changjiji. You should see it for three reasons.

One, you’ll enjoy the movie. The storyline is good. It has serious messages, but it is light. It’s enjoyable.

Two, you’ll support the local film industry. Bhutan makes about 18 feature films on average each year. The average film project costs about Nu 2 million and employs about 50 people. In our context, that’s serious circulation of money. And that is very good for our economy.

Three, you’ll support Trowa Theatre. The movie hall, which opened in July this year, has 440 seats, state-of-the-art sound system, air conditioning, backup power generator and a good cafeteria. Good money has obviously been invested to build infrastructure that Thimphu needs. Now Thimphu needs to use it. On both the occasions I visited, there were hardly 100 viewers each.

So go out once in a while. Go see a movie. It’s good for our economy.

Rubbish!...

I am excited about the prime minister’s assurances that Thimphu will be one of the cleanest cities in the world by 2011. But I am not excited about how he plans to do it.

It appears that the government has decided to buy a waste incinerator capable of burning 40 tonnes of waste at a time. It should reconsider its decision.

Incinerators must burn continuously. So they require a constant supply of garbage. And the bigger the incinerator, the larger will be the amount of garbage needed to keep it running. As a result, we may need to produce more, not less garbage. This is not good waste management.

Incinerators pollute. The pollution will spread throughout our country and to our neighboring countries. Plus the smoke, gas and ash produced by incinerators contain dioxins that can cause cancer. This is not responsible.

Incinerators are expensive. In 2004, THPA paid Nu 4 million for a 2.4 tonne incinerator. Guess how much a 40 tonne incinerator would cost? Upwards of Nu 600 million! This, it seems, is what representatives of a Malaysian firm told the government when they visited Bhutan earlier this year to market their product. This is not cheap.

A much more simple, responsible and cheaper solution to our waste problem is to recycle it.

A businessman has already proposed to establish a recycling plant. This is his plan: he collects waste that has been sorted, washes and compresses it, and sells it as raw material to companies – in Bhutan or abroad – who manufacture products from recycled material.

Who sorts the garbage? That’s the catch – we, the producers of garbage do. Waste must be sorted at the source before it can be used by the recycler. But the good news is that Thimphu’s residents are willing to do so. At least, this was the experience in the mid-1990’s when NEC briefly tried a recycling project. Sorting our own waste teaches us to reduce consumption, reuse packaging and recycle – the all important 3R’s of waste management. Sorting our waste also teaches us to respect the environment. That’s GNH.

And there’s more good news: most of our garbage is recyclable, at least 70% of it is. That would mean that only 30% of our waste would need to go into landfills. And that would mean smaller, safer, cheaper and better-managed landfills would do for Thimphu.

How much would a recycling plant cost? About Nu 3 million. The government should finance the plant (donors are already willing) and subsidize its operating costs for the 10 years it would take before he can start turning a profit. In case you’re wondering, there’s a lot of money to be made from the sale of used plastics, glass, PET bottles and metals. Many companies use recyclable waste as raw material to produce finished goods. So the recycling plant would basically compact the waste so that it becomes easier and cheaper to transport.

It all seems so simple, doesn’t it? It is.

Yes, let’s make Thimphu the cleanest city in the world by 2011. But let’s do it responsibly.

(photo of incinerator from www.foe.co.uk)

Thimphu’s shame...

I went on a field trip today. To the Memelakha landfill. That’s where our garbage ends up everyday.

The landfill was built in 1992 and was designed to last for 10 years. But the actual landfill lasted only for 6 years. Since then the area has been used as a dumping ground. It continues to be used as such.

The landfill should have been lined with layers of concrete, plastic and concrete to prevent leakage. It wasn’t. So potentially toxic liquid seeps out of the walls and flows into a stream, which ends up in our river.

As soon as the landfill reached its capacity, it should have been sealed with several layers of concrete and plastic. It wasn’t. Instead, during the last 10 years since the landfill reached its capacity, even more garbage has been dumped on the landfill. The area has now turned into such a big dumping ground that it’s difficult to spot the original landfill.

Pipes should have been inserted into the landfill to release methane that rotting garbage generates. They weren’t. So the landfill is potentially explosive.

I was ashamed by what I saw. We produce a lot of garbage, some 40 tonnes everyday. But most of it is actually recyclable – plastics, paper and PET bottles. The problem is we don’t recycle. That’s the shame. And the garbage keeps piling.

The wall marked the designed capacity of the original landfill. What’s above the wall is what is now a dumping ground.

Garbage overflowing everywhere

Dogs reign supreme here

More dogs

Potentially toxic liquid seeping out

This must be deadly

Almost all of this is recyclable

Easy pickings

If only this had been recycled

Too little is recycled

Paying commission...

Public anxiety over the pay hike issue is on the rise. And a lot of grief and surprise is directed at the huge increase that we, politicians, are expected to get – the pay commission has recommended an increase of 130% for the prime minister, 66% for ministers and 100% for parliamentarians.

The public should be surprised. After all, the previous cabinet had already approved the draft Parliamentary Entitlement Acts and made public what aspiring politicians could expect to earn. And that was essentially Nu 30,000 per month plus 20% for house rent plus a chauffeur-driven car. Everyone knew this. And accepted it.

So most of us had a fairly good idea of what we would get – salaries and other perks – before we joined politics. In fact, many of us were influenced, at least in part, by what we expected to earn. This reality, which some would obviously quickly deny, was, for some reason, disregarded by the pay commission, which has awareded the highest increases to politicians. That’s why the public should be surprised.

But it should also be suspicious. Last July, DPT decided that its 45 parliamentarians would voluntarily contribute 10% of their salaries to their party. How 45 people can all agree to “voluntarily” contribute exactly the same amount is amazing and should, sooner or later, be seriously questioned. But that’s another matter.

For now, consider the obvious: that 10% of 60,000 is 100% more than 10% of 30,000. So while DPT MPs currently “voluntarily” contribute 3,000 per month to their party, they could possibly contribute 6,000 per month. But for that the salaries of MPs would first have to be increased to Nu 60,000.

Surprised and suspicious? You should be.

Happy Lomba...

My mother is a Khengpa and dad is a Haap. So our family has always celebrated both New Years.

Haaps (and Parops) celebrate Lomba, their new year, on the 29th day of the 10th month – that was yesterday.

Celebrating Lomba means eating huge quantities of hoentoe – buckwheat dumplings stuffed with dried turnip-greens, cheese and lots of butter. Good stuff.

Lomba also means sharing this delicacy with friends as an expression of one’s love, affection and loyalty to them.

All this means backbreaking work for Tashi, my long-suffering wife. Lomba would, indeed, be difficult without her!

I wish everyone Lomba Tashi Delek!

Pay lip service?...

Do you know why the government has published the pay commission’s proposal? I don’t.

The pay commission’s proposal is already outdated – the ministry of finance’s proposal being based on it. So why not publish the MOF proposal? In fact, why not publish whichever proposal the government has approved?

Article 30.3 of our Constitution, “The recommendation of the (Pay) Commission shall be implemented only on the approval of the Lhengye Zhungtshog and subject to such conditions and modifications as may be made by Parliament”, can be interpreted in at least two ways:

One, that the government has the authority to approve and implement pay revisions. That parliament’s approval to do so is not necessary. But that the parliament could, if it so chooses, discuss the pay revision before or after it is implemented.

Two, that the government can approve a pay revision, but that it must go through parliament before it is implemented (which is to say, the government cannot really approve pay revision).

I favour the first interpretation. After all, if we hold the government responsible for its performance, then we must give it the authority to perform as it deems fit.

But regardless of the interpretation, pay revision will be discussed by the national assembly on 19th January. So this must mean that the government has already approved some version of the pay revision proposals.

Now the PM has been quoted as saying that he released the pay commission’s full report to “…allow lawmakers to receive public opinion before debating on the pay issue.” I take this to mean that the government has approved the pay commission’s report in full. And that this report will be discussed in the national assembly

But it seems that the government is still unsure – according to Kuensel, the ministry of finance’s proposal is being discussed even now, and the cabinet has not yet reached a decision.

So which “pay revision” will the parliament discuss? I don’t know.

And why has the government published the pay commission’s proposal? I really don’t know.