C'da, >Now all of a sudden you want accountability from both GoA and GoI. I am glad to >see that at least *you* are changing your tune--that GoI might have some >responsibility here.
Not true, many times I have said the the blame had to be shared (GOI,GOA, and the people). In fact, I remember, you distinctly refuting that. So, this is NOT all of a sudden, as you claim. Quite often, I have said 'IF' the center is to be blamed, so be it, and the same goes for GOA, and people in Assam (or other parts) who have elected these ministers to uphold law & order, dispense democracy, and govern properly. But somehow, you seem steadfast in your belief that the people have no power to do anything (and that is why some have chosen to take to insurgency etc.) Well, I do put some responsibility on the people. I believe (and I may be wrong) that if people sit by and not do anything, then criminal elements in Govt. will take advantage. People alongwith the media, basically have the responsibility to come forward to expose any wrongdoing. Yes, in a country like India, sometimes these work, and other times they don't. But sitting by quietly (or joining a militia) is not an option - as both have serious consequences. > You and Ram and other good Indians have been doing a fabulous job of > shielding the GoI; I defend the GOI only in cases where the responsibility lies primiraly with the State Gov. Just like the case with the funds for Manas/Kaziranga. In such a situation, one cannot go back and dig deep into history, and claim that the GOA is after all following Central mandates etc. The GOA in this particular case really does not have a leg to stand on. If we talk about illegal immigration, yes the Center has the primary responsibility. But the state and its people are not completely absolved of all responsibilities. The GOA has a very active role to play and make sure it keeps the Center on its toes in this regard. The people should not be hiring illegals or doing business with them. Now, when I say 'people', obviously, I do not mean someone the poor or helpless in many villiages. Its mostly the educated and powerful people who live in the big cities and towns who can make a difference if they voice their opinions. >Too bad you all have gotten so used to looking thru self-imposed blinders, that >you are terrified of looking at the real world. And it took Dinesh's views, a non->Assamese's version of events, put you in the defensive. Blinders! Well, I try to look at the issues from all angles, maybe I haven't been through enough. But, I would venture, we all have or biases, don't we? >Dinesh's views, a non->Assamese's version of events, Don't know who that is. Sorry, I must have somehow missed that post. In any case, I would need a lot more than a single person's views to make me change my views drastically. I know we don't agree on many issues, but I do throughly enjoy these discussions. The discussions does give us a great insight into what others base their views on (even if they are opposing views). -- Ram On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 21:27:11 -0600, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rajen: > > > You and Ram and other good Indians have been doing a fabulous job of > shielding the GoI; the entity that holds the powers, that has usurped the > resources and is the entity that is responsible for establishing and > maintaining the institutions of democracy that functioning societies depend > upon, to make sure that their elected governments are doing their job; from > being criticized or blamed for its inability to live up to its > responsibilities. > > > Now all of a sudden you want accountability from both GoA and GoI. I am glad > to see that at least *you* are changing your tune--that GoI might have some > responsibility here. Not that I do not hold GoA respnsible, but I believe in > going after the 'haati-swr' before I go after the 'bengena-swr'. I am not > one to suck-up and piss down, if you hadn't noticed all these years in Assam > Net. I might join you , should you be able to articulate a halfway coherent > means for achieving that. For what I have seen and read all these months and > years in Assam Net, all you guys have proposed is railing about how wrong I > am to point out GoI's dereliction of its duties. Too bad you all have gotten > so used to looking thru self-imposed blinders, that you are terrified of > looking at the real world. And it took Dinesh's views, a non-Assamese's > version of events, put you in the defensive. > > But if you can demonstrate, unequivocally, that you are willing to take your > blinders off and look at issues for what they are, you can count me in on > your side. But I am not one who believes in a make-believe world, like you > all have demonstrated, time and again, that you are beholden to. > > Sorry I had to say it like it is.I know it sounds harsh. But comes a time > one has to say it like it is. > > > Take care. > > c > > > > > > > > > > At 10:53 AM -0600 3/3/05, Barua25 wrote: > Chandan: > I see Chandan Mahanta, a NRA, shouting in the net and trying to make GOI > accountable. > What we need is the people of Assam to hold both GOA and GOI accountable for > their lapses and not to let them go. > That is what Ram and I have been shouting for in the net. > Are you willing to join us in trying to help people of Assam do that? > That is why I asked you in my last mail, what point you are trying to make > by blaming the system. > > We have 2 options. > We can shout and try to make point > or > We can try to help people of Assam. > I am for the later. > Rajen > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Chan Mahanta > To: [email protected] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; D K Mishra > Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 7:26 AM > Subject: [Assam] Re: Credibility Of MoWR!!! > > For those who might be interested in holding their governments accountable. > > > cm > > > > > At 12:14 AM +0600 3/3/05, D K Mishra wrote: > The data about irigation in different states , as provided by MoWR are > fake and misleading. I can say this on the authority of data supplied by > WRD of Govt. of Bihar. The annual reports of GoB suggets that, > > Major > irrigation projects in the state (with command areas in excess of 10,000 > hectares) include the Kosi and Gandak in North Bihar, and the Sone canal > network in South Bihar. There are a number of medium-sized schemes, > defined as those with commands between 2,000 and 10,000 hectares, and > hundreds of minor irrigation projects. However, as of 2003, irrigation > potential (area connected to the irrigation network) was only 2.8 > million hectares and the area actually receiving water from the networks > was limited to 1.6 million hectares. > > Scrutiny of records show that > both irrigation potential and actual irrigation (area receiving water) > increased in the state until 1990 when it attained its peak of 2.148 > million hectares after which actual irrigation saw a steady decline even > as potential irrigation continued to rise. Between 1990 and 2000 (when > the state was bifurcated into Bihar and Jharkhand), there was additional > potential irrigation of 113,000 hectares but actual irrigation fell by > 653,000 hectares. The area irrigated by surface networks has stabilized > around 1.6 million hectares for the past ten years. Considering that > 404,000 hectares was under irrigation in Bihar at the time of > Independence in August 1947, the increase in actual irrigation of 1.2 > million acres over the past 56 years is not a noteworthy achievement. At > that rate of average > growth of actual irrigation, it will take about > 230 years to achieve the irrigation targets and if we only consider the > growth rate in the past 15 years of misrule in Bihar, the targets would > never ever be achieved since the growth has been negative. One can only > extrapolate as to when the irrigation department of the state would > cease to function. > > According to the water resources department (Minor > Irrigation), irrigation potential of 222,000 hectares had been created > by 2000 of which 84,800 hectares is through surface irrigation schemes > and 132,200 hectares is by lift irrigation and energized rural pump > sets. However, reports indicate that the surface irrigation schemes have > not operated at more than 60 per cent efficiency while the lift > irrigation schemes operate at a maximum efficiency of 10 per cent. > Ageing machines, erratic electricity supply, incompetent management and > indifference of users are stated to be the causes of underutilization of > these facilities. > > There were a total of 2,316 Lift Irrigation > Schemes in the state of which 679 are defunct because of electrical > problems, 104 do not function because of mechanical problems, and 826 > schemes suffer from a combination of both these defects. Another 221 > schemes have fallen into disuse because of the shifting of the river > course away from the sump well or due to sand-casting (intake covered by > sand). Thus, only 482 schemes, or less that 21 per cent are > operational. > > There are 5,558 State Tube Wells (STW) in the state with > a command area of 307,000 hectares. Of these, only 5,122 have received > electrical power. In the case of STWs, too, the operation record is poor > - 2,886 sets are inoperative because of electrical faults, 85 because of > mechanical trouble, and 302 because of defects in the power supply > transformers. As a result, according to the annual report of the Minor > Irrigation Dept, against a potential of 112,000 hectares, State Tube > Wells irrigated only 19,468 hectares of land in 1999-2000. > > Bihar (now > Jharkhand) Hill Area Lift Irrigation Corporation (JHALCO) established in > 1975 under Tribal Sub-Plan commissioned 394 Lift Irrigation Schemes in > the tribal areas of Jharkhand. According to reports, 284 of these > schemes are no longer functioning. Not surprisingly, if the rains are > delayed by only a week the state faces drought. > > Actually, both the > data, whether it is given by Delhi or by Patna are fake if the farmers > are to be believed. They do not trust the irrigation establishment and > most of agriculture is based on their own enerprize. The Irrigation > Department claims all the development to its credit. > > I am sure, the > situation in other states too, may not be as rosy as presented to be. > There is a need to strengthen the counter-research to blast the bogus > claims made by the irrigation bureucracy. > > Dinesh Mishra > > ________________________________ > > _______________________________________________ > Assam mailing list > [email protected] > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam > > Mailing list FAQ: > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html > To unsubscribe or change options: > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam > > > _______________________________________________ > Assam mailing list > [email protected] > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam > > Mailing list FAQ: > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html > To unsubscribe or change options: > http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam > > > _______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [email protected] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam Mailing list FAQ: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html To unsubscribe or change options: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
