Member elect Dasho Sonam Kinga (Phd) was elected as the Chairperson after receiving a clear majority of 15 votes, followed by member elects Sangay Khandu with 8 votes and Jigme Rinzin with 2 votes. For the Deputy Chairperson, member elect Tshering Dorji was elected unanimously.

Followed by this, affirmation of office was administered to the member elects by the Head of the Interim Government, the Honourable Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Bhutan, formally indicating the completion of the transition of member elects to members of parliament. The affirmation of secrecy was then administered to the Chair elect and Deputy Chair elect in the presence of the rest of the House similarly.

As we started to disperse, I took the opportunity to be the first person to offer Tashi khadhar and my best wishes to Dasho Sonam Kinga on being elected as the Chairperson of the National Council, to lead us for the next five years. Elections are part and parcel of a democratic set up and participation as voters and contestants remain very important but what is even more important is not to forget to respect the outcome at the end of the process. I feel honoured to have been nominated and supported. I feel proud to have particpated with such fine minds as Dasho Sonam Kinga and Hon. Jigme Rinzin, colleagues I have come to respect and admire greatly.

This important day marks the beginning of the new term of the National Council.

I wish Dasho Sonam Kinga all the very best as he assumes the position of the Chair and Hon. Tshering Dorji the position of the Deputy Chair. I look forward to another fruitful 5 years as you collectively steer us through.

I must also mention here that my respect for BKP as a political party has grown when the party leadership in his reaction called all supporters to remain calm and instead shared intent to work towards strengthening the party. It will be remembered as a great example.

However, as I was saying it must be looked at beyond that. In my own rough analysis, this development has brought Gasa dzongkhag to the center of Bhutanese politics. With so little voters, why did it make it to the center one may wonder. It comes to me without surprise because our Constitution requires each and every district to have a minimum of two and a maximum of seven National Assembly constituencies. It is a deliberate provision so that minority interest is always under consideration too. That is why a small constituency which otherwise would have been insignificant today has taken center stage.

This is one instance which has allowed a political party to show how one can gracefully deal with disappointment even after a great deal of effort has been put into something so important. It has also shown our Constitutional intent to protect minority interest in a democracy which often gets away with majority power.

It might be important as a society aspiring towards growing into a democracy whose foundations are laid out on the principle of rule of law to look at and understand the predicament, as some may refer to as that the National Council has been in, be looked at with a slightly more intelligent or wider lens. I prefer referring it to as the phase, can not be fitted forcefully into one single channel of thought. Simply because it is not fair for the rest of the country to be made to believe it so. It is not only about post service benefits, the concerns expressed by the National Council and other equally important institutions need to be understood. Some may agree when I say we have made ‘not see the forest for the trees’

The whole interpretational space has been reduced to such narrow trivialities and I worry if we are setting in motion a self-fulfilling prophecy. Individually, the post employment benefit is big if not huge, but to pick it out and compare it to the Constitutional implications is like comparing apples and oranges. It is about our Constitution and a question that needs answering for all times to come. It seems very unsettling to see the media pay less focus to this important discourse but instead continue with their favorite subject of pounding MPs with benefit artillery. I believe, engrossed in this favorite distraction, many questions that needed attention may have skipped focus. It is true that the Election Commission of Bhutan, as a Constitutional body has a sacred duty, but so does Parliament and Judiciary. We should not mistake respecting institutions for respecting the Constitution. Respecting Parliament is not to be understood as the same as respecting the Constitution. It is in respecting the Constitution in its entirety that we uphold it. And so Parliament enacts laws, the executive makes policy decisions, the constitutional bodies decide within their jurisdictions and when differences in interpreting laws arise, the Judiciary is approached. The interpretation of law is not as simple as one may want it to be. Therefore, sometimes differences in opinion emerge and in this case, difference between how the National Council and the Election Commission of Bhutan read Electoral Laws which has relation to participation of incumbent Councillors.

Quite simply the Constitution requires that the National Council to stay in continuity, which means it must at all times have at least 3/4th of its members ready to pass any law. This is so that as soon as a Government is constituted after the National Assembly elections, Parliament is ready to carry on business. Otherwise the Council would be understood to cease to exist, which many of us believe would seriously violate the spirit of the Constitution. Ofcourse, the Election Commission believes that as contained in provisions in the Constitution, for a free and fair election to be conducted, incumbents need to resign. The National Council respects its decision but also finds itself unconvinced of this interpretation. The debate, in the center of which lies this fundamental difference in opinion has and remains to be about upholding our Constitution. While the implication on post service benefits, although important as individuals, can not more important than our Constitution and only set out to reconcile this difference.

Whatever the outcome, in invoking Constitutional provisions, I am confident that no law has been breached nor has any institution been undermined. Every institution has been acting earnestly in carrying out its mandate. However, the point needs to be driven home that in approaching the court for interpretation when differences of opinion arise, is infact respecting our Constitution for rule of law is and should be at the heart of our democracy.

Reading news from kuensel on the news media being left out from discussions during this year’s annual education conference appears to be the case and a cause for concern for those who believe in transparency as a critical element of good governance and the freedom of press. The shift from the news media being allowed to be present during discussions to this drastic measure of not allowing them to be present calls for a deeper level of thinking.

The reasons cited for such a action was earlier experiences of the ministry with the news media of mis-interpreting, mis-quoting and covering the conferences rather negatively (as perceived by the ministry). Another reason cited in the article was also that the presence of news media making discussions difficult. I read it as creating discomfort in discussing issues openly. Looking at these concerns in isolation perhaps one may agree that until the news media learn to do a more professional job, no chances be taken. But, as is the case in society, nothing is as simple as that. We will make mistakes and we will need to learn from them.

The Government initiated ‘meet-the-press’ platform and the Parliament conducts its proceedings openly, all advocating transparency. Interestingly the ministry of education decides to close doors at this years annual conference. Is there a question of disagreement on transparency within the Government? Citing these reasons alone can not justify being refused presence, not unless the discussions concern national security and other similar concerns. Besides claims of similar experiences have also been made by members of the Government and also Parliament but it continues as it has. Transparency allows for questioning, criticizing and engaging which will allow us to learn and move forward. As stated the news media would be given access to information after the closing of the conference. True, but would all of the contributions from participants be captured? Closing out the news media from discussions is both symbolic and interpretive of extreme apprehensions, but will it be productive? Is this the best way to move forward? Will others follow suit with similar excuses?

I believe we must promote transparency to the extend it benefits the public. Closing doors to the news media that have always been included for annual conference discussions does not bode well with our desire to promote deepening of democracy and more specifically transparency.

]]> The Bhutanese society is increasingly getting use to the idea of having members from the media present at important discussions. Often we hear the complaint that not enough coverage is being accorded to concerns and discussions from districts (MDA,2010) and understandably so, news media is a very important actor in a democracy. At a time when more want coverage, to want less is definitely a notable change.

Reading news from kuensel on the news media being left out from discussions during this year’s annual education conference appears to be the case and a cause for concern for those who believe in transparency as a critical element of good governance and the freedom of press. The shift from the news media being allowed to be present during discussions to this drastic measure of not allowing them to be present calls for a deeper level of thinking.

The reasons cited for such a action was earlier experiences of the ministry with the news media of mis-interpreting, mis-quoting and covering the conferences rather negatively (as perceived by the ministry). Another reason cited in the article was also that the presence of news media making discussions difficult. I read it as creating discomfort in discussing issues openly. Looking at these concerns in isolation perhaps one may agree that until the news media learn to do a more professional job, no chances be taken. But, as is the case in society, nothing is as simple as that. We will make mistakes and we will need to learn from them.

The Government initiated ‘meet-the-press’ platform and the Parliament conducts its proceedings openly, all advocating transparency. Interestingly the ministry of education decides to close doors at this years annual conference. Is there a question of disagreement on transparency within the Government? Citing these reasons alone can not justify being refused presence, not unless the discussions concern national security and other similar concerns. Besides claims of similar experiences have also been made by members of the Government and also Parliament but it continues as it has. Transparency allows for questioning, criticizing and engaging which will allow us to learn and move forward. As stated the news media would be given access to information after the closing of the conference. True, but would all of the contributions from participants be captured? Closing out the news media from discussions is both symbolic and interpretive of extreme apprehensions, but will it be productive? Is this the best way to move forward? Will others follow suit with similar excuses?

I believe we must promote transparency to the extend it benefits the public. Closing doors to the news media that have always been included for annual conference discussions does not bode well with our desire to promote deepening of democracy and more specifically transparency.

]]> http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?feed=rss2&p=937 0 http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=919 http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=919#comments Fri, 13 Jul 2012 05:28:15 +0000 Sangay Khandu http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=919 (Proposed on July 10, 2012 to the 9th session of the National Council)

A trend of increasing mineral extraction indicated by increased production statistics, increasing number of leases issued and revenue generated, leave no doubt that the mining and quarrying sector is slowly expanding. This is attributable to (i) growing exports of minerals, and (ii) increasing domestic consumption by industries as raw materials, and (iii) constructions.

Information from the Department of Geology and Mines allows one to arrive at a rough estimate of direct revenue from mines (direct taxes and CIT from a few mine operators who information is available) of Nu. 377 million. It is a tidy amount for Bhutan. However, a concern has been the environmental impact of mining and quarry given Bhutan’s fragile ecosystem. While the growth in the sector as part of the primary sector is certainly good, environmental concerns can not be understated, especially in Bhutan.

A study conducted by the National Environmental Commission in 2009[1] of 63 mines clearly indicate that there have been ‘less than’ satisfactory compliance to rules and regulations by both regulator(s) and operator(s). Many issues have been identified that the relevant agencies need to work on.

‘It is an accepted fact that mining cases disturbance and damage to the environment. The magnitude of impact on environment depends upon the geological formation of the mining area and the method of mining operation. All mines in the country are of open-case type which could affect the environment by changing landscape, Ph medium of soil and water, flora and fuana, and socio-economic aspects.’ [2]

However, the annual report of the Ministry of Economic Affairs[3] mentions the completion of a draft Mineral Development Policy aimed at bringing changes in the allocation of mines/quarries and to have a properly planned, efficiently regulated and professionally managed mineral industry. It also states that social and environmental consequences and their management are adequately addressed. However, the draft policy is not yet approved. In the absence of such a policy, in 2011 there were 192 applications for operating quarries and mines out of which 12 stone quarries and 1 limestone mine were leased. Pre-feasibility study for 140 sites have been completed out of which 38 are under process.

The aim of the draft policy revolving around the changes in the allocation of mines and quarries and to have a properly planned, efficiently regulated and professionally managed mineral industry seems logical given the impact mining and quarrying has on locals dwelling around the site. A logical understanding seems to me that the people who suffer as a consequence of mining and quarrying around an area benefit out of it more than any other. The pros and cons of economic returns between ownership by the private sector and nationalization (soverign fund and/or non-transferrable shares by every Bhutanese and others) need to be studied. This is nothing new for Bhutan given our investment approach in the hydropower sector too and earlier approach of establishment of NRDCL.

 It is based on this premise that one may believe that a change in the model of operation of mines and quarries in Bhutan needs a re-visiting. Any such important debate needs a sound basis which is why a proposal to conduct a study of the sector is being proposed, both environmental and others.

Therefore, a motion proposing a study of the mines and quarry sector is made but not limited to the list. In order to facilitate a meaningful study, it was proposed that a committee of the National Council be tasked with the mandate of drawing up a Terms of Reference for the study and then submit its findings to the 10^th session of the House for discussion:-

(i)                    Environmental impact of mining and quarrying in Bhutan,

(ii)                  Rationality of revenue and market prices of minerals mined and quarried in Bhutan, and

(iii)                Pros and cons of nationalization of mines and quarries in Bhutan.

The Honorable Education Minister responded to my question with a date this time around, July 12, 2012 earlier today during Question Hour in the National Council. A committee, which will approve the establishment of private colleges in Bhutan under the Ministry may finally be ready to allow other private colleges to be set up in Bhutan in addition to RTC. The three proposals that have been shuttling between the Ministry and the promoters have also re-submitted their expressions of interest with proposals. We may finally see a decision by the committee, this is wonderful news.

I had submitted the same question during the 7th session but did not find a satisfying response and therefore, had called the attention of the Government to institute a transparent and fair protocol for allowing establishment of private colleges, a necessity and important to expedite the process. Today’s response with this date is positive development which will allow many young Bhutanese men and women to study in Bhutan without having to travel out of the country which becomes expensive and also a cumbersome and worrying journey for the family members as well. This will also allow for some quality regulation which has become a concern of late. The Bhutanese private sector can also take part in this important aspect of our development and contribute by providing options which today remains very limited to studying in the country other than public institutions and RTC. I hope when the date comes, more private colleges will be approved and can begin setting up institutions with support from the Government that is being discussed to be accorded to the Education City Project, it only makes sense that our own gets it if not more.

Discussions on it began on the premise of inclusion of RTI in the Government’s legislative priority list. It is also enshrined in the Constitution of Bhutan. Based on these, questions were posed to the Government concerning the legisation of RTI in Bhutan on several occassions by a few members during question hour of the National Council. It was understood through responses of the Government that the RTI draft was being prepared and subsequently, submitted to the cabinet for consideration. Eventually, through a statement made by the Honourable Prime Minister, it was made known that the RTI legislation was not a priority. Having interacted with the Government through the Honourable Minister for Information and Communication, both at discussions level and question hour in Parliament, I then decided to take the initiative of drafting a RTI Bill as a private member’s Bill as allowed  by our laws. This culminated in the submission and subsequently, discussions in the plenaries of the National Council.

 Through lengthy discussions in the House plenaries with a few colleagues supporting taking the proposal to debate, some expressed concerns and hesitation. Reasons submitted for hesitation primarily concerned lack of time to do a thorough consultation and the timing of the proposal, from unpreparedness of the society, the news media and the bureaucracy. While there was a lot of support to the idea of enhancing transparency in governance, there was less support for the idea of a debate on a RTI law in Bhutan today. Subsequently, there were several appeals to consider shelving the draft as there were also concerns that voting on it could result in unnecessary labeling and accusations against fellow law-makers of being seen as corrupt if not in favour of the Bill. Members felt that their inability to lent support to the Bill may be misunderstood as having corrupt intent and also being corrupt. While I still believe a RTI law would greatly benefit governance as the proposed draft combines 3 elements of transparency, public service delivery and public records management, which would benefit the populace, in one way or the other, as a member I respect the decision of the National Council to shelve it for now. However, I still see opportunity with this initial sensitization for continued discussion at a wider level. With signs of the Government still working on creating awareness, I believe we may still see the debate grow richer.

Having made an earnest attempt at presenting my case for a RTI law in Bhutan, looking at developments thus far, it has become evident that the proposed RTI Bill has not been able to garner enough support in the House. I do not agree with most cited but I believe without enough support, the Bill may not have made past the initial stage of proposing a motion to introduce. Therefore, at the 65^th plenary earlier today, yielding to popular decision, I agreed to respect and abide by the decision of the House to shelve away the proposed draft RTI and instead discuss RTI as another agenda and not a legislation proposal during the 9^th session. This debate will make another attempt at continuing with on-going sensitization efforts.

As the sponsor of the proposed RTI draft, I am quite certain that the RTI awareness efforts and discussions, as indicated by the Government’s on-going initiatives will continue to help us in cultivating a vibrant culture of civic engagement and social accountability. I also want to thank each and everyone who has taken the time to read and comment on RTI, your support in this important debate will have to continue to contribute as we embark on creating more awareness.

Is the RTI debate too soon for Bhutan, that is if we really ever had a debate on it.

Many may probably say yes but there are others who feel, it is as good a time as any to debate it. While not many would refute it’s importance in democratizing governance, the concern really for many with whom I have spoken or interacted with, who have expressed reservations, seem to be one revolving around unpreparedness as a society. As I have already shared my thoughts on it several times, I will like to make an attempt at making a short opinion once again.

It has been my experience through these four years in office that every parliamentary session and for that matter, almost each plenary of the National Council sitting, issues raised and discussed ranged from delayed land compensation to poor public service delivery, to inaccessibility to certain information or absence of good and meaningful information, from poor accountability to non-uniform application of laws and rules and found a resounding consensus that our good governance initiatives needed strengthening. Interactions in public too found overlap with many of these issues, all pin-pointing towards seeking and demanding better accountability. I do not find any disagreement here, or atleast that’s how I feel. That is one of the primary reasons for my proposal for a debate in the National Council on RTI.

A view, perhaps of which a debate is become even more important is that, is it, as a society too early for Bhutan to debate RTI or consider enacting a RTI legislation? I believe this is a very important question put forth for consideration. After all, the RTI law has to be driven  by us Bhutanese for it to really effect change, it will not, like many other laws, act on its own. So are we ready?

Is there a demand? Will RTI become just another law?

Many issues concerning transparency and accountability as I read it, is indicative of the need for RTI. For further understanding, a consultative process is due and could be undertaken to further enrich the debate if we were to agree on a debate. But news of reports with potential to bring out the truth to start an honest discussion not coming out in public, I would think, without grassroots calling for it, could be a logical demand for more transparency. This is one of the primary reasons on which I base the need for such a debate to happen. Unlike laws which need agencies to come out and act, RTI will see the public come forth and use the law and by public I mean individuals, groups of individuals and the news media. It will drive the process forward and seek implementation in the process. So with greater awareness of the law that would begin with the initiation of the debate and other consistent efforts, it may see progressive usage with an increasing civic engagement, bringing people into more contact with decisions. This I feel also is an important component of our greater aim of becoming a vibrant democracy and it is in our interest to cultivate and further a culture of democracy.

No additional process in creating information for RTI

As far as information is concerned, each time a decision is made affecting lives, an important piece of information is created and stored somewhere even today without RTI. So to produce information for seekers as a result of RTI would not result in the creation of any new information. It has simply to do with providing it to the public.

 Will seats of power like RTI?

Generally the answer is quite the obvious.

I believe we are ready for this important debate. Some may think its a bit too early and others may strongly believe it is time but I think without a debate, we can never really know if we are here. A parliamentary debate is ideal but a public debate, to see what we think of it as a society is critical too. As parliament considers it, there is nothing to hold back a debate in public on this important aspect of good governance. This is not to indicate a retiring effort but to encourage more engagement so that in the end, more Bhutanese become part of this on-going consideration.

]]> Power point presentation on RTI to the NC by Sangay Khandu

Is the RTI debate too soon for Bhutan, that is if we really ever had a debate on it.

Many may probably say yes but there are others who feel, it is as good a time as any to debate it. While not many would refute it’s importance in democratizing governance, the concern really for many with whom I have spoken or interacted with, who have expressed reservations, seem to be one revolving around unpreparedness as a society. As I have already shared my thoughts on it several times, I will like to make an attempt at making a short opinion once again.

It has been my experience through these four years in office that every parliamentary session and for that matter, almost each plenary of the National Council sitting, issues raised and discussed ranged from delayed land compensation to poor public service delivery, to inaccessibility to certain information or absence of good and meaningful information, from poor accountability to non-uniform application of laws and rules and found a resounding consensus that our good governance initiatives needed strengthening. Interactions in public too found overlap with many of these issues, all pin-pointing towards seeking and demanding better accountability. I do not find any disagreement here, or atleast that’s how I feel. That is one of the primary reasons for my proposal for a debate in the National Council on RTI.

A view, perhaps of which a debate is become even more important is that, is it, as a society too early for Bhutan to debate RTI or consider enacting a RTI legislation? I believe this is a very important question put forth for consideration. After all, the RTI law has to be driven  by us Bhutanese for it to really effect change, it will not, like many other laws, act on its own. So are we ready?

Is there a demand? Will RTI become just another law?

Many issues concerning transparency and accountability as I read it, is indicative of the need for RTI. For further understanding, a consultative process is due and could be undertaken to further enrich the debate if we were to agree on a debate. But news of reports with potential to bring out the truth to start an honest discussion not coming out in public, I would think, without grassroots calling for it, could be a logical demand for more transparency. This is one of the primary reasons on which I base the need for such a debate to happen. Unlike laws which need agencies to come out and act, RTI will see the public come forth and use the law and by public I mean individuals, groups of individuals and the news media. It will drive the process forward and seek implementation in the process. So with greater awareness of the law that would begin with the initiation of the debate and other consistent efforts, it may see progressive usage with an increasing civic engagement, bringing people into more contact with decisions. This I feel also is an important component of our greater aim of becoming a vibrant democracy and it is in our interest to cultivate and further a culture of democracy.

No additional process in creating information for RTI

As far as information is concerned, each time a decision is made affecting lives, an important piece of information is created and stored somewhere even today without RTI. So to produce information for seekers as a result of RTI would not result in the creation of any new information. It has simply to do with providing it to the public.

 Will seats of power like RTI?

Generally the answer is quite the obvious.

I believe we are ready for this important debate. Some may think its a bit too early and others may strongly believe it is time but I think without a debate, we can never really know if we are here. A parliamentary debate is ideal but a public debate, to see what we think of it as a society is critical too. As parliament considers it, there is nothing to hold back a debate in public on this important aspect of good governance. This is not to indicate a retiring effort but to encourage more engagement so that in the end, more Bhutanese become part of this on-going consideration.

]]> http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?feed=rss2&p=878 3 http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=843 http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=843#comments Thu, 19 Apr 2012 06:15:55 +0000 Sangay Khandu http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=843 I believe when faced with a problem or a challenge, one can truly understand one’s capability. Our most recent problem, the rupee crisis, as has come to be known, is one such challenge and I hope, collectively we can prevail and grow stronger through.

Sometime last week the Government decided to address the nation on the issue on the national television; a most welcome effort considering the amount of panic and concern that was beginning to spread and show. It could have come much earlier and should have been the first step as a precautionary measure, if for nothing else. The sporadic interventions by the central bank did not help too, especially given our poor financial literacy. But even otherwise, many educated lots failed to see the bigger picture, it all appeared to indicate grounds for panic instead. So when many of the Bhutanese say they are not happy with how the Government and the Central Bank (mis)handled the situation, I tend to find reasons to agree with them.

The simplistic explanation for the problem being ‘too much importing and too little exporting’, one can understand that we have a structural problem. We need to focus enough on (i) increasing exports, and (ii) encouraging enterprises that substitute imports. These changes are easier said then done but no one is arguing it can be done otherwise, we need time and all the more reason to get started at the earliest. I believe that it was in this direction that the department of micro, small and medium enterprises was created under the ministry of economic affairs. One wonders if the department could have shared information with us to allow us to understand developments in the area. Another interesting development in our country that comes to my mind has been the financial market. I am quite certain the Central Bank and the Government was aware that by having more financial institutions and more specifically banks, loan amounts would increase and that is exactly what has happened, by both the Government and the private. It would have needed a lot of thinking through before opening up. These structural issues will need addressing no doubt but meanwhile, decisions that are being taken must not hurt sectors in our economy that are critical, I hope more thought is being given as decisions are being made and orders passed. Hasty and bad decisions can hurt us and may take a long time before we can begin to think of investor confidence and the likes.

However, in my view what has not been fair has been relating that to the Honorable Prime Minister’s presence at the UN conference on GNH in New York. I understand that the conference was the culmination of months of work and a commitment which had been slated out long before the rupee problem started to come out affecting the public as it has. While the Government’s poor response at such a time can be questioned, Bhutan’s successful hosting of the conference should on the contrary come as important times in our modern history.

The realization of this conference with the support of several countries in the world attests our growing circle of supporters. A noble vision propounded by our fourth King became the theme of the conference and as a Bhutanese it was a proud moment for me, like any other Bhutanese I would imagine. But my argument for the need for us to continue pursuing it further is not simply based on emotional reasoning, not that it is not tempting or big enough a reason for any Bhutanese. But for skeptics, I want to share a reason that they may consider worth contemplating on.

For many in the world, Bhutan has come to be associated or even been known for GNH. I have personally attended lectures by world reknown thinkers and leaders, here in Bhutan simply because of their interest in GNH and hence, Bhutan. I was in Japan last year as part of a parliamentary delegation and everywhere we went, GNH was a burning topic of curiosity and Bhutan was part of it. We have received a lot of support because of our good environment conservation policies and efforts, and taking the democratization process itself as a component of GNH as visioned by our fourth King. All of this has helped us move this far. If we agree then what we are saying is that GNH has been responsible for much of the goodwill we have today in the international community. What the present Government is doing is continuing on this course and the conference as I said, is an indication of support what we have. For a poor country without the economic might to persuade support or military muscle to convince concurrence, GNH definitely has been our only significant contribution, lending enough ‘presence’ for support or anything else. Now that it has happened, it is more likely Bhutan has a wider net of supporters. We can not help but imagine how else would anyone be interested in what we have to say or that such a small country even exists. It is in my opinion because of Bhutan’s ‘soft power’; this GNH that has allowed us to share the world stage when it comes to conservation efforts and providing the world with an alternative development paradigm. This power has benefited us so far and would only be natural that we receive these benefits as we strive forward to achieve our common aspirations. While the Government may had roused enough interest and support in the GNH effort abroad, some critics claim it has not quite happened this way in our own context at home. We have not been taken by it as it has caught on with supporting countries. Trying to create that understanding and desire to go there together may be a crucial missing link. It would take more than just political will, we will need a national desire to have a continued, concerted and sustainable effort.

I believe what the Honorable Prime Minister and the Government has achieved and is doing, in furthering the GNH discourse in the international fora is admirable and I can only hope that leaders in succession, can continue to contribute similarly. Precisely a reason why the Government needs to focus on the domestic front and connect at a deeper level on the subject of GNH. Meanwhile, we can not risk not recognizing and capitalizing on our soft power. It is not an overstatement when people around the world say they are following what is happening in our country with regard to propagators of GNH. While in taking out to the world this noble vision we have received a lot of recognition, we have also taken on a huge responsibility to see it through in our own country so that our supporters, our friends can rejoice in our collective success.

]]> I believe when faced with a problem or a challenge, one can truly understand one’s capability. Our most recent problem, the rupee crisis, as has come to be known, is one such challenge and I hope, collectively we can prevail and grow stronger through.

Sometime last week the Government decided to address the nation on the issue on the national television; a most welcome effort considering the amount of panic and concern that was beginning to spread and show. It could have come much earlier and should have been the first step as a precautionary measure, if for nothing else. The sporadic interventions by the central bank did not help too, especially given our poor financial literacy. But even otherwise, many educated lots failed to see the bigger picture, it all appeared to indicate grounds for panic instead. So when many of the Bhutanese say they are not happy with how the Government and the Central Bank (mis)handled the situation, I tend to find reasons to agree with them.

The simplistic explanation for the problem being ‘too much importing and too little exporting’, one can understand that we have a structural problem. We need to focus enough on (i) increasing exports, and (ii) encouraging enterprises that substitute imports. These changes are easier said then done but no one is arguing it can be done otherwise, we need time and all the more reason to get started at the earliest. I believe that it was in this direction that the department of micro, small and medium enterprises was created under the ministry of economic affairs. One wonders if the department could have shared information with us to allow us to understand developments in the area. Another interesting development in our country that comes to my mind has been the financial market. I am quite certain the Central Bank and the Government was aware that by having more financial institutions and more specifically banks, loan amounts would increase and that is exactly what has happened, by both the Government and the private. It would have needed a lot of thinking through before opening up. These structural issues will need addressing no doubt but meanwhile, decisions that are being taken must not hurt sectors in our economy that are critical, I hope more thought is being given as decisions are being made and orders passed. Hasty and bad decisions can hurt us and may take a long time before we can begin to think of investor confidence and the likes.

However, in my view what has not been fair has been relating that to the Honorable Prime Minister’s presence at the UN conference on GNH in New York. I understand that the conference was the culmination of months of work and a commitment which had been slated out long before the rupee problem started to come out affecting the public as it has. While the Government’s poor response at such a time can be questioned, Bhutan’s successful hosting of the conference should on the contrary come as important times in our modern history.

The realization of this conference with the support of several countries in the world attests our growing circle of supporters. A noble vision propounded by our fourth King became the theme of the conference and as a Bhutanese it was a proud moment for me, like any other Bhutanese I would imagine. But my argument for the need for us to continue pursuing it further is not simply based on emotional reasoning, not that it is not tempting or big enough a reason for any Bhutanese. But for skeptics, I want to share a reason that they may consider worth contemplating on.

For many in the world, Bhutan has come to be associated or even been known for GNH. I have personally attended lectures by world reknown thinkers and leaders, here in Bhutan simply because of their interest in GNH and hence, Bhutan. I was in Japan last year as part of a parliamentary delegation and everywhere we went, GNH was a burning topic of curiosity and Bhutan was part of it. We have received a lot of support because of our good environment conservation policies and efforts, and taking the democratization process itself as a component of GNH as visioned by our fourth King. All of this has helped us move this far. If we agree then what we are saying is that GNH has been responsible for much of the goodwill we have today in the international community. What the present Government is doing is continuing on this course and the conference as I said, is an indication of support what we have. For a poor country without the economic might to persuade support or military muscle to convince concurrence, GNH definitely has been our only significant contribution, lending enough ‘presence’ for support or anything else. Now that it has happened, it is more likely Bhutan has a wider net of supporters. We can not help but imagine how else would anyone be interested in what we have to say or that such a small country even exists. It is in my opinion because of Bhutan’s ‘soft power’; this GNH that has allowed us to share the world stage when it comes to conservation efforts and providing the world with an alternative development paradigm. This power has benefited us so far and would only be natural that we receive these benefits as we strive forward to achieve our common aspirations. While the Government may had roused enough interest and support in the GNH effort abroad, some critics claim it has not quite happened this way in our own context at home. We have not been taken by it as it has caught on with supporting countries. Trying to create that understanding and desire to go there together may be a crucial missing link. It would take more than just political will, we will need a national desire to have a continued, concerted and sustainable effort.

I believe what the Honorable Prime Minister and the Government has achieved and is doing, in furthering the GNH discourse in the international fora is admirable and I can only hope that leaders in succession, can continue to contribute similarly. Precisely a reason why the Government needs to focus on the domestic front and connect at a deeper level on the subject of GNH. Meanwhile, we can not risk not recognizing and capitalizing on our soft power. It is not an overstatement when people around the world say they are following what is happening in our country with regard to propagators of GNH. While in taking out to the world this noble vision we have received a lot of recognition, we have also taken on a huge responsibility to see it through in our own country so that our supporters, our friends can rejoice in our collective success.

]]> http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?feed=rss2&p=843 4 http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=834 http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=834#comments Thu, 12 Apr 2012 19:08:52 +0000 Sangay Khandu http://www.sangaykhandu.com/?p=834 Have you visited the neonate ward at the JDWNR hospital? If you have then you will probably understand what I am about to describe.

The unmistakable sound of fans at work, beep sounds from machines like the turbines of a plane, murmur of conversations amongst parents and attendees and the occasional sound of little babies crying.

Tonight, it’s a full house. There are no vacant spots on any of the phototherapy machines. There are no more vacant beds for the new mothers and so, some decide to make do with sleeping near the machines, closest to their little ones. I am here too, along with several other parents. We are in the section with ‘mild jaundice’ and in between helping ‘breast feed’ and ‘shuttling my little one back under the ‘therapeutic lights’, I have decided to share my thoughts on the year it is, that is the Dragon year.

Dragon year is a special year in the Bhutanese calendar like in many other Asian countries. It’s also said the dragon year sees the most planned birth of young ones in this part of the world. I wonder if we are into it too? I would have liked to walk a floor down and seek some information (always happy to have more info) but I have an urgent task tonight and I am afraid I will stick to generalizations. I wonder how many little Bhutanese have been born and how many more will be born this year? But for now I am simply happy to be one among them, a proud parent of a dragon baby girl.

But what could this mean for our dragon children? Our cultural understanding allows us to understand that it’s an auspicious sign and therefore, children born under the dragon sign are lucky, bringing them many reasons for happiness. Trying to think a little further, while the dragon is a lucky sign and to have children blessed with supposedly more reasons for happiness, aren’t we really increasing competition then by bringing in a huge unusual generation of young ones? A simplistic explanation, more children born during the dragon year would mean unusually longer queues at hospitals, increasing the risks of not receiving medical attention in time. It would also mean more challenges to get enrolled at early school. It could even possibly mean higher ‘cut-off’ marks for scholarship admissions for higher studies. It could also mean fewer jobs and more applicants.

I know this sounds a bit too pessimistic and I would like to believe that each sign is lucky in their own way and that we are not yet engineering our society by trying to choose certain years over the other (we are perfectly free and capable to do so if we should choose to) while deciding to have children, but ours is a society, riveted around superstition and age old sayings.

These are thoughts that come to mind as a parent of a dragon baby girl, as I sit here amongst many parents with dragon babies tonight. I sense irrespective of under what sign our children maybe born, each one of us as parents, as we look to our little ones, we wonder what of their future.

Fellow Bhutanese, I realize this is not a new question. Many before us have asked it, we are thinking about today and many will continue to do so long after we are gone.

What can we do for our little ones so that they may have a good life? It’s a question that will find an honest answer in our hearts but can we have the courage to live that honest answer? I am going to think a little more, clear the clutter as they say. Good night fellow Bhutanese, signing off from the neonate ward of the JDWNR hospital.