Share this story!            

LETTERS:

Post letters to Letters to the Editor, The Daily Times, 41-N, Industrial Area, Gulberg II, Lahore, Pakistan Phone: 92-42-5878614-19; Fax: 92-42-5878620 E-mail: letters@dailytimes.com.pk
Letters may be edited for length and clarity

Tourism trials

Sir: The much-trumpeted ‘Destination Pakistan 2007’ celebrations will prove to be a futile exercise if the government does not ensure smooth communication facilities in areas which can attract tourists. Chitral, with its scenic beauty and unique culture, has the potential of becoming a bustling tourist destination if its communication problems are resolved.

The annual Shandur polo tournament along with two other festivals of the valley have been included in the Destination Pakistan 2007 celebrations. However, so far the government has failed to release funds for the road to Shandur, despite President Musharraf’s directives in this regard four years ago.

In winter, the district remains cut off from rest of the country and PIA flights become the only means of transportation for the people. Since the national flag carrier operates flights to the valley only from Peshawar, people living in other parts are left without access. The government should operate direct flights to Chitral from Islamabad as well.

How can we expect foreigners to travel to Pakistan, when Pakistanis have a hard time travelling within the country?
ZAR ALAM KHAN
Via email

In PPP’s defence

Sir: In his article titled ‘Money matters’ (February 14, Daily Times), Dr Manzur Ejaz has wondered whether in matters of economic policy the PPP is any different from the other “proud-to-be right-wing parties”. The PPP is different, for even while pursuing a free market economic policy, its performance was different from that of other governments that preceded or followed it in critical areas such as labour rights, agricultural production, developmental infrastructure and privatisation.

The PPP did not resort to retrenchment of labour forces. In the agricultural sector its policies were aimed at ensuring that the peasants received the input needed to increase crop production and income in time. In its time increased educational and health expenditures as well as infrastructure developmental expenditures were invested in the development of human resources and in reducing the gap between the rich and the poor.

Privatisation was carried out according to strict benchmarks set by consultants. Not a single unit was sold at a throw-away price, as has been done by the present regime in the case of HBL, PTCL and the KESC. More importantly, privatisation was carried out without resorting to a golden handshake.
FARHATULLAH BABAR
Islamabad

Photo-sensitive

Sir: I frequently come across pictures taken by your staff photographers covering various aspects of everyday life in Pakistan. Most of the time these photographs tell stories of how disorganised we are in keeping our cities clean. It is disheartening to see pictures of broken roads with pools of rain water, choked sewerage lines, manholes without covers, littered parks with broken benches and fences, overflowing garbage cans, roads resembling the canal after rain, awkward traffic jams, smoke emitting vehicles, overloading on public transport, etc. As one would imagine, these pictures say less about the negligence of the authorities and more about our people and their civic manners. Are these the signs of a civilised nation?
NASIR RIAZ
Tehran, Iran

Water works

Sir: Your editorial titled ‘Baglihar Dam and our “lower riparian alarmism”’ (February 14, Daily Times), on the World Bank’s verdict on the Baglihar Dam dispute between Pakistan and India is notable for its balanced stance, and more especially for the incisive observation: “It would be a mistake not to learn all the lessons embedded in the water dispute and its final denouement.” Both India and Pakistan have claimed victory on this issue, making it appear a win-win situation for both sides. Let all other disputes be resolved likewise, but sooner than later, and hopefully without the need of third party mediation.

You mention the ‘Sindhi rejection’ of the Kalabagh Dam, which has been dealt with wisely by President General Musharraf by not pursuing the project. There have been earlier reports that Balochistan and NWFP have not been dealt with in an even-handed manner in their disputes with the Punjab province. The president’s next step should be to resolve their problems amicably.

Lower riparian versus upper riparian disputes are not necessarily international in character. They can be intra-national too, as the experience of both India and Pakistan shows. Right now fierce disputes are raging in South India on the question of sharing river waters equitably. The problem, more often than not, tends to be that what is ‘equitable’ for one is not so for the other.
KANGAYAM R RANGASWAMY
USA

Softer images

Sir: The present government’s quest to cultivate a ‘softer image’ for itself is hard to understand. I find it ironic that female madrassa students, armed with sticks and guns, can occupy a children’s library and succeed in their demand for the reconstruction of an illegal mosque. At the same time the mullahs, having imposed a narrow version of Islam in the tribal areas, can orchestrate a deal with the government. Bugti demanded rights for the Balochi people, and the application of the ‘writ of state’ cost him his life. Sherry Rehman talks of women’s rights and democracy and is stabbed during a political rally.

The state appears to have two sets of rules of engagement, one to deal with political groups and the other to negotiate with religious zealots. No wonder Pakistan is tripping all over itself on its road to moderation and enlightenment.
TAHMINA RASHID
Melbourne, Australia

Allowances not allowed

Sir: Today’s headline ‘“Talibanisation won’t be allowed”, says Musharraf’ (February 15, Daily Times) is laughable. What in heaven’s name gave our press the notion that anyone will ask the president’s permission to Talibanise the country? Terrorists did not ask his leave regarding the two Waziristans, Tank, Bajaur or any other place that has already been Talibanised. They didn’t ask him before setting out to Talibanise the Children’s Library of Islamabad.

The president also tells us that FATA will be incorporated into the rest of the province. Perhaps he should also tell us when he would back-track on this assertion.
SALMAN RASHID
Via email

Absentee parliamentarians

Sir: It is disappointing to hear that our parliamentarians are constantly absent from parliament, turning it into a ghost house where the only serious business is walkouts or noisy scenes featuring verbal brawls. This makes little sense on the part of our politicians and shows their apathy towards the electorate. Out of a house of 342, a meagre 86 members are usually required to ensure quorum, but even that number seems difficult to secure, and the speaker, every now and then, has to adjourn the house.

Isn’t it ironic that despite the government having over 200 legislators, including 125 ministers, state ministers or secretaries in the house, it has completely failed to ensure the much-needed quorum? This unfortunate scenario has amply augmented the opposition’s hue and cry about lack of quorum, which has been afflicting the lower house of parliament since 2001. Only recently our prime minister was blaming the opposition for was engaging in negative politics; but what about his own colleagues, who are making a joke of parliamentary norms by not even fulfilling their fundamental obligations?

The ban on the entry of journalists in the parliament cafeteria must also be seen in this context. Our parliamentarians do not want journalists to cover their indecency and bickering, which is the hallmark of their person.
YASSIR RASHEED
Rawalpindi

Smokers’ choice

Sir: The bandwagon of local smoking bans now steamrolling across the nation has nothing to do with protecting people from the supposed threat of ‘second-hand’ smoke. Indeed, the bans are symptoms of a far more grievous threat — decades of unlimited government power. The issue is not whether second-hand smoke is a real danger or a phantom menace, as a study published recently in the British Medical Journal indicates. The issue is: If it were harmful, what would be the proper reaction?

Should anti-tobacco activists satisfy themselves with educating people about the potential danger and allowing them to make their own decisions, or should they seize the power of government and force people to make the ‘right’ decision?

Supporters of local tobacco bans have made their choice. Rather than trying to protect people from an unwanted intrusion in their health, the bans are the unwanted intrusion. Loudly billed as measures that only affect ‘public places’, they have actually targeted private places: restaurants, bars, nightclubs, shops and offices — places whose owners are free to set anti-smoking rules or whose customers are free to go elsewhere if they don’t like the smoke.

Some local bans even harass smokers in places where their effect on others is negligible, such as outdoor public parks. The decision to smoke, or to avoid ‘second-hand’ smoke, is a question to be answered by each individual based on his own values and his own assessment of the risks. This is the same kind of decision free people make regarding every aspect of their lives.
THOMAS LAPRADE
Via email

Home | Editorial

Share this story!