Tuesday, August 23, 2005

Rural Employment Guarantee Bill

I like to bring to your attention, the following landmark jobs bill passed by the Indian lower house. Details are given on BBC web page.

While some economists will oppose it and raise questions, a vast majority of people in Pakistan need such employment and will support it.

India estimates the cost at between £3bn and £17bn. Pakistan's population is about one seventh of India's. Accordingly, the cost may be between 430 million and 2.4 billion pounds.

At the lower end of cost estimate, it is totally afffordable for Pakistan. Furthermore, with new assured employment, there will be less need for other poverty reduction programs. Accordingly, there will be some savings in the current poverty reduction related expenses. One can find ways and design the program in such a way as to limit the maximum costs.

I seek and welcome suggestions from my readers on ways to make it affordable and fully practical.

In any case, it will generate tremendous economic ativity and eventually boost growth and tax revenue.

"Landmark Indian jobs bill passed The scheme targets India's 60m rural households The lower house of India's parliament has passed a landmark bill aimed at guaranteeing 100 days of employment each year to every rural household. The Rural Employment Guarantee Bill was passed unanimously after a marathon 13-hour debate.
The bill seeks to provide a job to one member from each of India's 60m rural households.
Analysts say it is the first step towards a welfare state in India where 70% of the population live in villages.
The bill will now go to the upper house for approval where it is expected to pass easily.
It will become a law if passed by the house and after it gets the president's assent.
Election pledge
Correspondents say the bill is the most ambitious pro-poor scheme launched by an Indian government.
It was an important plank of the Congress Party's election campaign last year, and is supported by its communist allies.
People employed by the scheme will work on projects such as building roads, improving rural infrastructure, constructing canals or working on water conservation schemes.
The government say special priority will be given to women under the scheme, which will be launched in 200 districts this year and will extend to the entire country over the next four.
The scheme is estimated to cost between £3bn and £17bn and critics say it is not clear how the government intends to meet the costs. "

Kind regards,
Ali Nawaz Memon

Tuesday, August 16, 2005

Save Pakistan from real enemies

----Original Message Follows----From: jami chandio <jami8195@yahoo.com>Reply-To: SindhPost@yahoogroups.comTo: PetarianTalk@yahoogroups.com, sindhconsultativeforum-scf@yahoogroups.com, sindhorg@yahoogroups.com, List SindhCivilSocietyNetwork <sindhcivilsocietynetwork@yahoogroups.com>, List sindhiat <sindhiat@yahoogroups.com>, List SindhiRights <sindhirights@yahoogroups.com>, List sindhlist <sindhlist@yahoogroups.com>, List sindhmedia <sindhmedia@yahoogroups.com>, List sindh-politics <sindh-politics@yahoogroups.com>, List SindhPost <sindhpost@yahoogroups.com>, List sindhtoday-network <sindhtoday-network@yahoogroups.com>, List sindhiana <sindhiana@yahoogroups.com>, List pakistanpolitics <pakistanpolitics@yahoogroups.com>, List pakistanforum <pakistanforum@yahoogroups.com>, List helpasia <helpasia@yahoogroups.com>Subject: [SindhPost] Save Pakistan from its real enemies...Date:

Mon, 15 Aug 2005 22:10:55 -0700 (PDT)

Dear all,

It seems interesting that many responses are coming upfrom various perspectives. Serious discussions arealways helpful not merely for the accident of ideasbut for the sharing of perceptions/experiences to cometo a better understanding of the issues. Butespecially i would like to respond Saleh Bhaee's mail.

There are well-established norms of intellectual andpolitical discussions and one is the objectivity.Saleh bhaee has not addressed the real issue rather itwas a self deceptive kind of HIDAYATNAMA with sametraditional status-quo approach that since we areMuslims so the issues of demographic security,indigenous people's right to rule, provincialautonomy, Security and development of language,political and economic rights, democracy, balance oftrue representation of indigenous people from allprovinces in all federal institutions, equal access todecision making institutions etc..are not the issues(because we all are Muslims).

First of all I have a serious problem with thismentality, which could only serve the interests ofoppressors and the establishment, and all those whohave stakes in status quo. Being a responsible civilsociety we must have moral courage and intellectualhonesty to address the complex and hard realities. Letme take all the arguments one by one, because this isnot merely mindset of an individual but this is atypical mentality and that must be dealt with seriousand rational arguments not to change them but to put aclear picture before rest of innocent minds like ourfriend Mansoor. ( mansoor! yes we have weaknesses thatevery society has but I did not discuss the sociologyof Sindh it is political and economic debate. I hopeyou understand the difference)

1) Religion alone cannot be a binding force in anysociety especially in political and economic affairs,so is the case and condition with Muslims too. Therecould be hundreds of conflicts among various classesor interests groups of same religion. Religion is anindividual matter.Secondly belonging to same religion does not justifyexploitations and oppressiveness’ cannot rationalizepolitical and economic conflicts if they are notresolved on just and fair grounds.

2) Yes, I do agree that the whole world is movingtowards regional and global integration and we arepart of the world. I also believe that thisintegration is persuasive image of today's world butdoes it mean that all the societies and nations havegiven up their identities, legitimate political andeconomic interests? Their geographical homelands,their languages, cultures, literature? I am sorry tosay this is again a very self-deceptive and wrongperception/argument. Take example of Europe. Despitethe fact that they have expedited the process ofintegration but every country and society have madeenormous constitutional measures to safeguard theirlanguages, cultures, literature, art, culturalidentities, political and economic rights. Even in thecountry like Belgium they have two parliaments, onefor French and second for Flemish people only becausethey have various conflicts. Just give a singleexample where due to emerging phenomenon ofintegration local societies have given up all theirinterests. This is either a very simplistic childishargument or a highly biased and unjustified approach.

3) Let us address this question that whysocieties/nations want the security of theiridentities, languages, political interests, historicalrights, autonomy and authority on their resources?Simply because it has great link with their economicrights and stability. Economic rights are not socialislands they are closely linked with all the factors Ihave already mentioned. Would you kindly place asingle example of any society/nation having nohistorical rights, no cultural identity, no politicalautonomy and demographic sovereignty/stability, nocommand on resources and participation in decisionmaking institutions can be developed economically?Denial of cultural and political rights leadssocieties/nations to economic downfalls and this iswhat we are facing in today’s Pakistan.

4) You have said that KALABAG DAM is the merely issueof landlords and feudal and it is not opposed by allthree provinces but by the Sindhi feudals. Bhaeejanwhat an “innocent” argument? First of all let me tellyou that since 1988 all the elected provincialassemblies of Sindh, Balochistan and NWFP haverepeatedly passed resolutions against KALABAG DAM notonly once and twice but thrice. Even in this MusharafGovernment it has happened. Sindh assembly passedunanimous resolution. Secondly I must correct you itnot the state made feudal that oppose KALABAG DAM butthe absolute majority of the people of Sindh that alsoincludes Punjabi speaking settlers who oppose it. Areyou living on this planet? People are strugglingagainst this anti Sindh and consequently anti Pakistandam since decades and you say that this is the issueof feudal rather they don’t oppose it. Let me tell youone thing more. It is not merely the issue of KALABAGDAM. Sindh Punjab water dispute continues since 1857.Several commissions were made by the British toresolve the issue but after Pakistan the issue went into the hands of cruel and criminal establishment andruling class of Punjab. Now the situation is socritical that it has stared posing threats to theintegrity of country. We don’t oppose only KALABAG DAMbut we oppose all the projects of DAMS and canals onup stream of INDUS because we have been the worstvictims of such projects. We can’t trust them; theyare dishonest and shortsighted people with criminalmentality. All the agreements and contracts on waterdistribution have been violated. For example CHASHMAJEHLAM LINK CANAL was made as flood canal but it flowsround the year since day one. Similar is the case withthe construction of Tarbela Dam. Sindh lost the wholeworld f resources stretched from Kashmore to ketiBandar including lacks of Kacho areas on both banks ofIndus as well as the delta and coastal life. No bodyknows as to what was the fate of thousands ofpeasants, fishermen, cattle owners, etc in posttarbela era when inundation of Kacho decreased manfatal and Indus delta as well as coastal lifesustained a severe setback for ever. What about theillegal construction of Graeter Thal canal even theimperial british could not dare to build it. The wholeeconomy of Sindh has virtually been destroyed and yousay that it the issue of feudal. Kindly some timecome to Sindh and see the damages with your own eyes.So we clearly say NO ANY DAM AND CANAL ON UP STREAMINCLUDING KALABAGH DAM AND GREATER THAL CANAL. It isan international water law that no any project can bebuilt on up stream until the lower riparian agrees.But goes on in PYARA PAKISTAN? If the announcement ofKALABAG DAM were made than Sindh would be consideredas a conquered territory not the legitimate part ofPakistan. Tell me what is more precious and importantPAKISTAN or DAM? We should not let the criminal andcynical mindset to play with the future of our cominggenerations and with the integrity of federation.
Let me also clearly you and other friends aboutfeudalism in Sindh. I think it is not the society butagain the establishment that has kept alive thisinstitution due to their unholy strategic interests.In 1988 elections people of Sindh defeated all bigfeudal like Pir Pagara, Jatoi Gulam Mustafa Khan,Nawab Sultan Ahmed Chandio, Mahar and all othersagainst middle class people. Now again they aredominating the political scene only because they suitestablishment’ vested interests. They are openly beingsupported by agencies. Look at the recent process oflocal government elections. They have been given walkover on Sindh along with the terrorists in urbanareas. Feudal are the strategic tools of establishmentin Pakistan and especially in Sindh.

5) Finally this is not fair to call Sindhisseparatists as it is termed by Jimmee Jamshed. Sindhis the creator of Pakistan. It was Sindh assembly thatpassed resolution for Pakistan first but thepunishment for that must be stopped now. Sindhi’s arenot and had never been separatist but now they arebeing compelled to think like that. Pakistan has noany threat from peace loving people of Sindh butdanger comes from Establishment, Dictators, Absence ofdemocracy, Absence of rule of law, lack of provincialautonomy, denial of legitimate rights and above allinsulting and derogatory attitude towards the rightsand demands of people of smaller provinces. Let meclarify we don’t hate any body. People of Punjab andof the world are our brothers. We are talking aboutthe cynical and criminal ruling classes that even posethreats to the long-term interests of the people ofPunjab.

Saleh Bhaee Sindh does not deserve the kind ofattitude we are experiencing in Pakistan and if itcontinues like that than there is limit of everything. ‘PHIR YE COMPANY NAHEEN CHALAY GEE ‘.

Let us save Pakistan from its real enemies.

Regards,Jami Chandio

--- Saleh Khan <sak555@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Jami > > Its good that you opened up and brought your inside > dust on paper. Many people keep > their agendas hidden but you are a bit different and > that is a better news. > > You can call me Saleh Bhai, instead of Mr. Saleh, as > this is a petarians forum and > this is the usual way of calling the seniors, its a > bit traditional and less formal > ( and you seems to value traditions). > > The whole world is going for integration and > unfortunately some of our people are > seeking disintegration. Islam teaches these concepts > of universality and the west > has taken it for themselves, as they have seen its > advantages, but some of us still > seems to be stuck in our limited mentality. > > If you come out of this regionalism thoughts, and > feel yourself to be a muslim, you > would see a wide world with lots of things to > achieve, but if you wanna stay in the > limitations of a language, i am sorry to say, you > are not even sincere to the people > you think you belong to, namely, the sindhis, in > this case. > > A person is said to be a "permenant resident" of a > place when he plans to stay in > that place for good. Do you plan to stay in Sindh > for good? where do you plan to go > once you die? what are you going to reply to the > "munkir nakeer" when they would ask > you questions about your loyalty.. would your reply > be... Sindh? a person will > forget all nationalism on the first sigth of the > "munkir nakeer", and intelligent > are those who prepare a bit in advance. Instead of > having this limited regional > mentality, which is only acting negatively for the > locals, it would be good to use > your capabilities, which i see a lot, and use them > to educate the people and > encourage them to come out of this regionalist > thoughts and see a bigger world > ahead, and step in it to advance,,, come out of this > obsolete mindset, which has > kept behind any development in this region,,and its > my advise. > > Now, coming back to your data, i think its so self > contradictory. > > Pakistan was formed by joining areas of muslim > majority, and Sindh was one of those > areas. Muslims are proud to lay their lives and > sacrifice for their thoughts, they > do not think of their language, but they see the > commands of Allah. Sindhis took > that decision cuz they were muslims and they were > one of those ahead in this > integration. Now you want to do away with their > sacrifices by putting your thoughts > on those huge sacrifices by our ancestors? its a > shame on its own that just cuz of > one's own thinking we play around with such > sacrifices. > > Secondly, Sindh is proud to be a centre of muslim > development. A Sindhi, like all > muslims, consider himself muslim first and sindhi or > anyother thing later. So, if > Sind is joined by other fellow muslims, its a source > of pride for Sind. Places and > countries do not develop by reducing the population > and by secluding them, but they > develop by increasing the market size, by > integration with the world with respect to > movement, freedom of all sorts, and Sind has been > kept far from development by the > local Land Lords, which control the population, and > which never want any real > development to take place, so they have enough > people to work for them,,free of > charge,, sort of slavery, and this is what the > people of Sind has got from most of > their land lords, who, unfortunately had been in > various governemnts too, time and > again, and the only thing they did, like other > politicians, was to fill up their > pockets and raise slogans like,,we do not > want,,kalabagh dam. > > Its not the three provinces who are saying we do not > want kalabagh dam, its the most > unfortuante slogan only raised by the Land Lord > community. Its the very thing we > most need, and we do not jsut need Kalabagh dam, we > need as many more dams as > possible. We talk of peoples development and we are > happy to see their lands > inundated by floods in rainy seasons and go dry in > the dry months.. infact we should > highlight those faces who stand against these > developments, to show to all > pakistanis who are they. > > The need of the hour is to make as many dams as > possible, increase water storage > capacity as much as possible, to stock water in the > times of excess, and release it > in the times of need, and with it generate the most > wanted electricty. If the plan > goes, pakistan would be exporting electricity after > meeting its needs, but we have > many deraded minds who have nothing else to do but > to oppose all development > projects. > > Now coming back to taxes. You have contradicted all > of your mail in this point. > Sindh raises most of the taxes due to the city of > Karachi, where most of the > industries and population is concentrated. Most of > the karachi population is of > immigrants. whether they are from india or from > punjab or from nwfp or from > baluchistan, it does not matter, they all came to > earn a living, and they are most > wellcome, and they are the cause of huge > development, not only for karachi, but for > the whole nation, including that of Sind. So, the > very point of this development is > due to immigrants mainly, besides, many from Sind > are also immigrated to Karachi, > and it can be such a beautiful city , where there is > living for every one if we do > away with this poison of regionalism, which does > nothing else but destroys... > > the mail is gone too long, or i would have shown you > how mistaken you are in your > facts, either by ignoring them, or by using them in > a way to exploit the simple > minds of Sindh, and i dont think there are many > takers in sind for such slogans. > These are stories of the past and i hope you come > out of this to join hands with the > rest of the nation, and to the muslim world in > general. > > Saleh > 7437 J > > > --- jami chandio <jami8195@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Dear Mr. saleh, > > thanx for your response. > > You have every right to be on different position > but > > let me say countries are not sacrad cows or holy > > verses. Pakistan was made on the basis of a > contract > > and that had been shamelessly violeted over the > > decades and it continues till now.let me share a > few > > more facts: > > > > 1) Before partition when the last census held, > Sindh > > was the only province in the ebtire sub-continent > in > > which the indegenious population was more than 93% > > today it constitutes not more than 60%.now > emerging > > threats are posing serious threats even to the > > demographic mojority of indegenious sindhi > speaking > > population of Sindh.Sindhis stronly feel now that > if > > the influx of population on Sindh continues they > could > > be converted in a minority on their own historical > > homeland.Would they love today's pakistan in this > > situation? > > > > 2) Sindh joined pakistan only because of two > reasons. > > > > a) Sindh had a bad experience with Bombay > presedency > > and it was badly and criminally discriminated in > all > > fields especially sindhi muslim population. > > > > b) More provincial autonomy was offered in 1940 > and

Friday, August 05, 2005

Sindh: Adapt a School Program

Adopt A School Program

The innovative idea of adopting a government school started with a Situation Analysis of Basic Education in Sindh by Prof. Anita Ghulam Ali in 1990 for the UNICEF. This analysis revealed the poor performance and infrastructure of government schools in Sindh and proposed the concept of “adoption” of government schools. As a possible enterprise for school improvement. In 1997, Education Department, Government of Sindh, even more convinced of the idea, presented the strategy of the "Adopt a School Program" to the then Minister for Education. This presentation highlighted and proposed the “adoption” of government schools by the private sector in a processed and phased manner.

The strategy suggested the formation of a group comprising of the Department of Education, Sindh Education Foundation and the adopter to revitalize the schools through a strong linkage and mobilization of the parents and the community. The Adopt a School Program was therefore officially launched in 1997 with the following specific objectives to improve government schools in the area of quality, access, infrastructure and community participation:
Mobilization of private sector to assist public institutions.
Increased involvement of parents and communities through extensive community mobilization.
Regular School Monitoring and feedback .
Head Teachers and Teachers Training.
CO-curricular activities Increased/improved school facilities.
Do you want to adopt a school ?
for further specific information call on 92-21-111-145-145 or
So far about 50 schools have been adopted
Check out the list at: