EDITORIAL : THE DAILY GLOBAL TIMES, CHINA

Seeking truth is key to a civilized society

Imagine this scene: a helpless mother in Guangzhou with a six-month-old baby with cancer posts online for financial help. A cruelly minded netizen, known as "Jinquan Shaoxia" promises her 20,000 yuan but only if she walks on her knees for two blocks. Out of pressing need, the mother complies but the donator disappeared without forking up. A further twist was added when the trickster admitted to engineering the plot to raise attention to the mother's plight.

The Internet rightly condemned Jinquan Shaoxia, but a network poll showed 67 percent of respondents saying they "understood" his "good intentions." Such "understanding" is not normal, which shows that society does not think "Jinquan Shaoxia" committed any serious mistakes. His original motive could offset his deception of the public, but this approach is inappropriate.

 We believe that Chinese society should take this horrific behavior more seriously. Facts should constitute the overriding principle and nothing can interfere with this.

Currently, Chinese society is used to considering motives for behavior and taking speech as the determinant for its attitude. As such, some public figures are keen to stand and argue whilst ignoring the facts. 

Most false news is easily forgiven. Recently, a public figure questioned China's telecommunications sector through the false information that a annual mobile fee in the US only costs $9.9. As public image of China's telecommunications operators was not good enough at present, although the false news was quickly corrected, it did not affect the person's reputation. On the contrary, many people defended him.

The legal foundation in China is not strong enough. When the laws are not sufficiently respected, respect for the facts is bound to be insufficient. In life, we attach importance to whether an "intention" is good or not and this is reproduced online. The reality is that the words of some people are always thought to be right while the others are always wrong.

Chinese society should continue to evolve, based on the principle of seeking truth from facts. In the past, "seeking truth from facts" was often seen as a political slogan, having nothing to do with public opinion. But the truth is that all of Chinese society suffers from not adhering to this principle and that it has become difficult to "tell the truth" in China, not only in official circles, but also on the Internet and in real life. There are many examples in which lies are applauded in Chinese society.

China is rapidly changing and society is often arguing about the conflicts in values that have emerged from social diversification. It should not be encouraged to put value judgments above truth, which in fact is encouraging the public opinion to split along with those  dividing values. This division is completely different from having healthy and diversified public opinion.

China's history shows that the country's development proceeded more smoothly when the principle of "seeking truth" was more respected. In revolutionary times, or during unrest, value judgment was deemed superior. In peaceful times, rationality has more space.

Now, we have no reason not to seek truth from facts above all other ideologies.

 

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY AUSTRALIAN, AUSTRALIA

People power triumphs over Labor spin doctors 

POWERFUL national message from NSW Coalition victory.

SHAMELESS as the spinmeisters of NSW Labor have been, there was no way to spin away the devastating message from the weekend election. People power in its purest form emphatically punished Labor after 16 years in power, reducing what's been the traditional party of government in the nation's most populous state to just 20 or so seats in a parliament of 93. This was a clear repudiation of the 24-hour spin model of government, where media cycles were more important than policy achievements, and spin doctors were more prevalent than competent ministers. The dual intent of voters was clear; they castigated Labor and embraced the Coalition's promise of honest, accountable and responsive government.

This is a tectonic shift in the national political geography that will unleash a tsunami of repercussions across NSW and federal politics. Just three years ago Canberra and all the states were governed by Labor. Since the demise of Kevin Rudd, the Coalition has won more seats than Labor federally, forcing Julia Gillard into minority government; won a surprise victory in Victoria; and now an overwhelming endorsement in NSW. For population, economic clout and political influence, the Coalition states of Western Australia, Victoria and NSW dwarf the Labor states of Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania. The Gillard government's ability to broker national reforms through COAG will be severely dented, but that might be the least of the Prime Minister's worries.

Arguments that the NSW poll was simply the rejection of a mutant Labor government with a Coalition takeover by default and no wider implications, do not withstand scrutiny. Opportunities abounded for protest votes to flow to the Greens, independents and other minor parties, yet these groups were the other losers. Voters deliberately chose to switch their allegiance from Labor and independent MPs to the Coalition. The conservatives have held their base, consolidated aspirational suburbia and won solid endorsement from working families in the traditional Labor regions of the Hunter and Illawarra.

With blue-collar, coalmining areas dumping Labor for the Coalition, this was a shift of historic proportions. Along with resentment at being taken for granted by state Labor, part of this must be attributed to deep concern about the impact of federal Labor's carbon tax. One of the largest anti-Labor swings occurred in Bathurst, the birthplace of the train-driver turned prime minister Ben Chifley, who gave Labor its "light on the hill". This is a sign that once welded on ALP supporters have rusted off.

Premier-elect Barry O'Farrell deserves enormous credit for uniting what was often a fractious party, creating a sense of purpose where once was drift, sticking doggedly to a plan when others called for drama, and building a closely bonded Coalition with Nationals leader Andrew Stoner. Mr O'Farrell has been an obstinately moderate leader during a time of political polarisation. It is instructive for his federal counterparts that this style of inclusive and unabrasive conservatism has been warmly embraced by voters. The Australian particularly welcomes his rejection of the "little Australia" mantra embraced by both Ms Gillard and Tony Abbott in the depths of the federal campaign. Mr O'Farrell sensibly argues for NSW to develop its regions so that population growth can be encouraged but distributed more widely. He clearly understands he will need to govern for Bathurst as much as Bondi, for Maitland as much as Mosman, and he'll be able to do this with members on the ground in all corners of the state. He will need to be diligent about delivering projects because voters are heartily sick of governments talking about what they'll do, instead of doing it. NSW does not lack challenges, with the transport infrastructure deficit looming large. Mr O'Farrell is right to demand that Canberra reallocates funding from the Paramatta-to-Epping project to his preferred North West rail link. Federal Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese needs to recognise the failures of his state colleagues and ensure that projects in the nation's largest metropolis are allocated a fair share of federal funds.

Mr O'Farrell also needs to enliven business in his state, tackle entrenched union power and commit to shrinking the relative size of the public sector if he is to contain costs and encourage economic growth. He inherits a budget apparently in surplus, although there is no doubt he will want his incoming treasurer Mike Baird to closely assess the books. Highly credentialled, Mr Baird will need to tackle the critical economic reforms to buttress the O'Farrell government, and Gladys Berejiklian will also be pivotal in transport. This trio, and their colleagues, will need to be bold, and while they might find they are short on cash, they are not short on political capital, given their massive mandate.

After flexing their muscles in Canberra, the Greens will be disappointed with their NSW showing. It demonstrates they remain a long way from the mainstream of Australian politics. Their extreme agenda quickly loses popularity when you move away from the inner city into areas where people are reliant on cars, aspire to personal improvement and often hold socially conservative values. Voters delivered a well-deserved rebuke to Marrickville Greens candidate Fiona Byrne who not only promoted an offensive anti-Israel push but also was dishonest about it. Her failure, along with Pauline Hanson's, is a reminder that voters value integrity and find extremism unsettling.

Ms Byrne's failure was about the only bright light for Labor because it enables the capable former minister Carmel Tebbutt to remain in parliament. The rest of the news for Labor is abysmal. As we have noted before, outgoing premier Kristina Keneally deserves credit for her pluck but she was rightly punished for failing to reform her party or confront the union and factional bosses who installed her. She was right to point out that the people of NSW had not left Labor but that Labor had left them. Perhaps if she had recognised this earlier and done something in office to repair the situation we would have more sympathy. Labor must now work to democratise itself and reconnect with its base. A shift to the Left cannot be the answer because the ALP was deserted by socially conservative voters in middle Australia. History shows the middle ground is where politics must always be contested in our nation. Labor must again become a party for mainstream Australians who strive for the "light on the hill" rather than a vehicle of the radical elite who want to lecture the population on issues from carbon taxes to border protection.

If Labor installs former Unions NSW boss John Robertson as opposition leader it will demonstrate it has learned nothing. Mr Robertson led the charge against former premier Morris Iemma's plan to privatise the state's electricity assets. Aided, it must be said, by the political opportunism of Mr O'Farrell at the time, Mr Robertson used the power of the unions and factions to vandalise the policy of an elected government, doing lasting economic damage and accelerating Labor's decline. For him now to be rewarded with the spoils of a humiliating loss, and charged with rebuilding the Labor movement, would be high farce. Former prime minister Paul Keating wrote a scarifying letter to Mr Robertson when he was sworn in to parliament in 2008, predicting that if Labor lost government, Mr Robertson would share much of the blame. Accusing him of "opportunism" and "reckless indifference" to the government, Mr Keating said he was ashamed to be a member of the same party. "Let me tell you," wrote the former prime minister, "if the Labor Party's stocks ever get so low as to require your services in its parliamentary leadership, it will itself have no future." Well, it seem Labor's stocks are now that low and with such matters of substance and personal animosity to be played out over coming months, the repercussions of Labor's electoral destruction in what has been its strongest state are immense.

Ms Gillard must ruminate on the implications carefully. There can be no doubt about the impact of cost of living issues in this campaign, exacerbated by her carbon tax, which will impact especially on commuters and people in mining areas. The electorate's shunning of the Greens is a warning about her cosy arrangement with them. Of most pressing concern, however, is the strong showing of the Nationals in the state's north where they defeated independents in Tamworth and Port Macquarie who were strongly aligned with federal independents Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott, upon whom Ms Gillard relies for power. This is a clear indictment of the independents' decision to support the Gillard government and its carbon tax. The message about their own political mortality at the next federal poll is clear. Labor is left to ponder whether it will change their behaviour or cause them to reconsider their allegiances.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY USA TODAY, USA

Our view: Leave public financing in elections

Political corruption in Arizona in the 1990s was so bad that a sting operation swept up almost 10% of the Legislature in a scheme to open a casino in the state. In one notorious episode, the chairman of the judiciary committee brought a gym bag to a meeting to carry away his $55,000 bribe. 

OPPOSING VIEW: Law chills candidates' speech"CLEAN ELECTIONS": The states and localities providing public financing 

Arizonans got so fed up with politicians on the take that they voted in 1998 to set up a "clean elections" system to try to limit the corrupting influence of money in politics. Like the public financing systems in other states, Arizona's doesn't force anyone to participate. It gives public campaign money to candidates who voluntarily agree to limit private contributions.
The system has been popular with candidates, and it seems to be working. After Gov. Janet Napolitano (now secretary of Homeland Security) won office in 2003 under the system, she was able to quickly enact a prescription discount plan over drug company opposition because, she said, "special interests had nothing to hold over me."
Not surprisingly, Arizona's system has been under attack from the beginning, and now its enemies appear on the verge of badly damaging it. The Supreme Court hears arguments today over a provision that tries to level the playing field by triggering matching funds for publicly financed candidates when their privately financed opponents spend more.

The privately financed candidates and interest groups challenging the provision complain that it restricts their free speech rights by discouraging them from spending — because that only leads to more money for their opponents. This might have been a convincing argument if there were evidence it was happening. But the challengers' evidence at trial was weak, and a study of Arizona elections by political scientists from Fordham, Harvard and Yale showed "no evidence that spending has been chilled."
Moreover, the contention that candidates are intimidated by publicly financed opponents is mystifying. Isn't it a long-held American principle that the cure for speech you disagree with is more speech of your own? Nothing in Arizona's law bars privately funded candidates from raising and spending as much as they can and, at a certain point, the public financing system stops matching private money.
In that sense, it is very different from last year's controversial Supreme Court decision that opened the floodgates for wealthy contributors seeking to influence the political system. That ruling gave corporations and labor unions an unlimited right to spend in elections on the grounds that such spending is a form of free speech and cannot be limited. The Arizona law does no such thing. Instead, it provides a way for willing candidates to succeed without selling their votes.
But the justices might have already made up their minds. They seemed to tip their hand last year, when they halted Arizona's matching funds system while the case was appealed. The court's intrusion changed the rules in the middle of the election process, at the expense of candidates who had already agreed to be bound by the public financing limits.
Elections provisions such as Arizona's are a vital attempt to clean up a system that is a form of legalized bribery. Too often, candidates get to office thanks to money that comes with strings attached, then spend much of their energy raising funds for re-election. Arizona citizens did something about that. It would be a shame if the Supreme Court unraveled their effort.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY YOMIURI, JAPAN

Steady efforts needed to restore schools

The Yomiuri Shimbun

For children who have suffered mental trauma as a result of the recent earthquake and tsunami, school can be a valuable forum in which to talk to friends and teachers and encourage each other.
The situation remains severe in devastated areas, with no clear prospects for reconstruction, but we hope initial steps will be taken to put school life back in order.
The March 11 disaster left enormous scars on education on the Pacific coast of the Tohoku and Kanto regions.
More than 1,000 children have died or gone missing. Municipally run Okawa Primary School in Ishinomaki, Miyagi Prefecture, was swallowed entirely by tsunami, and of its 108 pupils, only 30 percent have been confirmed safe. Also, many children in stricken areas have lost their parents.
About 670,000 textbooks for the new academic year, starting in April, were lost or damaged and cannot be used.
School buildings and gymnasiums that survived the earthquake and tsunami are being used as evacuation centers. Evacuees likely will have to endure the inconvenience of life in such shelters for an extended period, as it will take some time to build temporary housing units.
===
Daunting job ahead
Securing places of learning ahead of the new school term starting in April will be no easy task. Temporary buildings will have to be erected on school grounds or classrooms used at other schools. Another possibility would be to use school buildings left idle due to the abolition and integration of schools.
Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures are calling for an increase in the number of teachers and for the dispatch of counselors. It is important now to provide sensitive, attentive care for each child.
The education ministry should set aside sufficient funds for the allocation of necessary teachers and distribution of school textbooks.
An increasing number of disaster victims have been moving from evacuation centers in damaged areas to locations in other prefectures, as radiation leakage from malfunctioning nuclear reactors added to the magnitude of the disaster. Local governments that have accepted evacuees will begin taking applications for entry into schools under their administration.
===
Emotional care vital
Children evacuated from their hometowns often feel uneasy about life in strange places, and it may take some time to grow accustomed to a new environment. Schools that accept such children must take extra care to prevent them from feeling isolated.
The Hiroshima prefectural Board of Education has announced a plan to accept about 160 primary students and their teachers as a group, and also to provide living facilities. Local governments also should investigate ways to help.
The emotional care of children must be undertaken from a medium- and long-term perspective, as post-traumatic stress disorder tends to emerge over time.
After the 1995 Great Hanshin Earthquake, a total of about 1,700 teachers in charge of emotional care were assigned to primary and middle schools in damaged areas over a period of 15 years. They visited children's homes repeatedly and listened to their worries.
We should take advantage of what we learned through this experience.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY MIRROR, SRILANKA

Absolute power

Kudos to President who made the country’s ‘coal power plant dream’ come true.  The President has also said that the country would get uninterrupted power soon. Good signs.

The Norachcholai plant is 20 years overdue, still, it looks like if not for the President the plant would not have planted itself at one place firmly.

The project had been touring all around the country before finally settling at Norachcholai in 2006. The project had been a political hot potato, with successive governments shelving and shifting the project due to political pressure over the ‘best site.’

Some say the diesel mafia was behind the non-implementation of a mega power project for so long. The Norachcholai project is about two decades overdue, stalled repeatedly by political opposition to the project and environmentalist groups.

The power plant will give the country’s strained power grid a boost, with a critical need for a large base-load power plant to meet growing electricity needs.

Also we need to remember that Sri Lanka has the highest energy costs in the region. And there are many girls in the beach too they say, when it comes to development activities and foreign direct investments.

The country’s daily electricity demand is estimated at 25 million units and grows at eight per cent each year, according to a CEB report published earlier. The country however needs three 300MW plants over 15 years to keep up with projected electricity demand, according to CEB’s Generation Planning Report.

Heavy dependence on thermal power has taken costs of production to over Rs. 10 a unit. The government claims the coal plant would reduce electricity charges by as much as 13 per cent.

However, the project had other problems in addition to its ‘touring’ nature.

In addition to the Talawila shrine and cultivation in the Kalpitiya area as well as prawn farming and the salterns at Palavi, heavy South-West monsoon winds are feared capable of carrying the unrecovered ‘fly-ash’ as far as Anuradhapura and Trincomalee according to some.

The coal plant would need to burn 2,640 tons of coal and would produce over 175 tons of ‘fly-ash’ every day. Even if 99 per cent of the fly ash is recovered, around two tons of it will be blown inland continuously and would be carried as far as Anuradhapura and Trincomalee, environmentalists claim.

Meanwhile the families, who gave up their lands for the coal power plant project, had complained the authorities had deceived them by providing them with badly built alternative houses.  The government took over 300 acres at Narakkaliya and Paniadiya areas and 68 families who lived there had been given houses in the Daluwa Manpuriya Nirmalapura housing scheme.

Problems apart, the fact is, the benefits of the new plant outweigh the perceived damages as claimed by environmentalists, given the context.

Environmentalists could be correct but we have to make difficult choices. And we have to wait and see how many of the claims come true.

The 300 megawatt plant as well as supporting infrastructure is entirely funded by the Chinese government. Supporting infrastructure will include cargo and coal handling facilities as well as a 115 kilometre transmission line.  The delay of the power plant shows a fundamental problem in a democracy…the need for a strong and stable leadership.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY HINDU, INDIA

Green reform

Minister for Environment and Forests Jairam Ramesh must be commended for his frank comments on the state of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) process. Many well-regarded scientists have been making the point that the EIA, a mechanism instituted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests in the early phase of India's economic liberalisation and amended in later years, has been turned into a joke because it is left to the project proponent to arrange for the EIA report. This dyfunctional system has produced only a thriving industry of consultants. Many of them without the requisite qualifications; some are nothing more than paid pipers. It is no surprise that several reports submitted by these consultants have been exposed as plain cut-and-paste reproductions of other publications. Among the prominent examples of ill-advised shortcuts leading to flawed conclusions is the Kudremukh iron ore mining project in Karnataka, which was eventually ordered closed. In that case, only rigorous assessment by the Indian Institute of Science and other agencies produced evidence of harm to fragile ecology; comprehensive study by the Centre for Wildlife Studies documented environmental damage on account of the sediment load in the Bhadra river. Evidently, the earlier EIA reports based on rapid assessments provided little insight. This experience is not unique and there is a strong case to introduce stringent checks now. Reform should begin with the choice of agency to conduct the impact assessment, and include the setting of wide terms of reference.

The task of reforming the EIA process is a challenging one for Mr. Ramesh, who has initiated welcome steps to introduce transparency in his Ministry. State-level authorities must also be made partners in the effort because some categories of environmental clearances come within their ambit. Independent studies of the working of expert appraisal committees formed under the EIA Notification of 2006 show that the rejection rate for projects in sensitive sectors such as construction, industry, thermal power plants, and mining is suspiciously low. The Union Ministry's discovery that some consultants submitted wrong reports, resulting in penal action, is proof positive of systemic rot. The cure lies in genuine, science-based EIA. All this is not to say that fresh barriers must be erected to development. What needs to be emphasised is the importance of assessing externalities associated with individual projects and consider them in perspective. The loss of ecology has irreversible, inter-generational consequences. The protection of air, water, soil health, and biodiversity should be primary environmental imperatives. 

Open-ended war

The announcement by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) that it is to enforce the United Nations no-fly zone over Libya confirms the extent of confusion over western policy on Libya. The alliance's Secretary-General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, says it will command only the no-fly zone, and admits that there will be two operations, one run by NATO and the other, comprising the arms embargo and air strikes — which Turkey says go beyond the United Nations resolution on intervention — by a “coalition.” There may be yet more squabbling to come, not least because the decision on the transfer of command was preceded by a week of angry disputes among NATO's 28 members. Turkey, in particular, objects strongly to what it sees as French plans to control the scope and nature of the current U.N.-backed action. It has also accused President Nicolas Sarkozy of using the confrontation with Tripoli as a launching pad for his own re-election campaign.

Such issues, however, only form a subset of wider problems. One of those is domestic public support. In the United Kingdom, backing — usually high at the start of such military adventurism — is 45 per cent, with 35 per cent against; that is even worse than the 53-39 per cent reported when the illegal 2003 Iraq invasion began. In the United States, 74 per cent favour multilateral action to protect Libyans against their current dictatorship; but 79 per cent express concern over the continuing violence in Libya. In North Africa and West Asia, public feeling against the intervention is hardening rapidly, not least because of French Interior Minister Claude Guéant's foolish comment that his country was leading a “crusade” to stop President Muammar Qadhafi killing fellow-Libyans. Secondly, President Obama, whose administration refuses to call the Libya mission a war, is under pressure to explain the policy and to specify an exit strategy. His attempt to transfer command to NATO and his European allies will achieve neither; the U.S. will remain the major participant, but involving NATO will reduce the accountability of the warmongers to their electorates. The absence of clear aims, furthermore, heightens the risk of an open-ended conflict, into which the foreign participants will almost certainly be drawn more and more deeply — with the additional risk that the main aim becomes regime change and not civilian protection. In view of the vagueness of the U.N. Security Council resolution on the no-fly zone, it is regrettable that Russia and China abstained instead of vetoing the resolution that has enabled this military aggression and expanding war in an already tormented region. 

 

 

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY DAWN, PAKISTAN

HEC devolution

REPORTS that the government plans to devolve higher education to the provinces have left many in the world of academia — as well as others concerned with the state of education in Pakistan — unsettled. In particular, the fact that parliament’s implementation commission on the 18th Amendment is considering splitting the Higher Education Commission into smaller units has raised eyebrows. The HEC, an autonomous body, is currently mandated with regulating the higher education sector in Pakistan. That may change if the parliamentary committee has its way. However, there seems to be a consensus in acade-mic circles that devolving higher education is a bad idea. Experts feel that higher education should remain with the federal government to maintain uniformity and to ensure that students don’t suffer. Former HEC chairman Prof Atta-ur-Rahman says the commission already has representation from the provinces.

There are claims and counter-claims about how the HEC has performed over the last decade or so. The commission’s defen-ders say that ever since the University Grants Commission was restructured into the HEC, it has had a positive impact on Pakistan’s higher education sector. They cite an increase in the number of academic publications, the fact that some Pakistani universities have improved their global rankings, increased university enrolment and a greater number of PhDs as proof of success. Others, however, pose some very valid questions regarding the HEC’s performance. They say the commission has concentrated on quantity as opposed to quality; a greater number of universities or PhDs has not exactly translated into better institutions or more capable scholars. Yet despite its weaknesses, it is fair to say the HEC has indeed brought about a positive change in higher education.

Devolving higher education can perhaps be re-visited at a later stage. However, we feel that right now, the timing for such a move is not right and the risks of experimenting with higher education are far too high. Education in Pakistan is already in the doldrums; devolving higher education may make a bad situation worse. Observers point out that the provinces lack the capacity as well as infrastructure to manage higher education. They say the move may lead to greater politicisation of education. Some academics have said that a central body is essential to oversee the universities’ financial affairs, provide a road map for the future and maintain monitoring capability. It is said that other states in the region — India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka — all have central authorities that regulate higher education. Reform of the HEC should definitely be considered to plug the loopholes. But the government should not throw out the baby with the bathwater for the sake of expediency.

Arab turmoil

REGIMES considered invincible have fallen or been shaken by the popular uprising that has rocked the Arab world from the Gulf to the Atlantic since the beginning of the year. While Muammar Qadhafi tries desperately to cling on to power, and people die and homes burn, the situation in Syria and Jordan too indicates a higher level of protests. While at least one demonstrator has died in Jordan, the number of casualties and conditions in Bashar al-Assad’s fiefdom are difficult to assess because of the restrictions on local and foreign media, although according to Amnesty International 55 people have been killed. Violence previously confined to Deraa has spread to several cities, including Hama, Latakia and Damascus, where the demonstrators started a fire under the statue of the late Hafez al-Assad, the president’s father, and pro- and anti-regime partisans have clashed.

The issue in Syria and Jordan is, again, freedom and the people’s rage against the continuation of decades-old authoritarian regimes which lack legitimacy. According to the foreign media, the Syrian president is a popular figure. He has promised to concede some ground, including a possible end to the emergency imposed in 1963. However, to quote a cliché, this is too little, too late. Thanks to the electronic media, the wave of freedom ignited in the Maghreb has spread like wildfire throughout the Middle East, presenting the rulers, whether monarchs or civilian despots, with a stark choice: either give freedom to the people or go the way of Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak. The Arab masses have reason to be angry. The humiliations which they have suffered — Palestine and Iraq come to mind immediately — stem directly from their rulers’ failure to give franchise to their people, industrialise their countries, acquire science and technology, create modern, egalitarian societies through economic equality, establish a wider social base that could give a stake to their people in the running of their states and take the Middle East into the 21st century. Repression is counterproductive. It may give a breather to dictatorial regimes, but in the end it is the people’s will that triumphs.

Domestic violence bill

MUCH that is amiss in Pakistan could be solved if the administration displayed the ability to follow through. One finds many instances in which, after having taken the first step in the right direction, the government seems to lose its bearings and change direction, thus leaving the task unfulfilled. Consider the fate of the Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Bill. It was passed unanimously by the National Assembly in August 2009, but lapsed after the Senate failed to pass it within the three months stipulated by the constitution. Since then, little effort has been made to re-table and pass it. The proposed law had widespread support, even though it was opposed by some conservative elements. It was hailed by human rights and women’s rights bodies as an impressive step towards protecting women, children and others including the aged and infirm, who are vulnerable to a form of abuse that while pervasive remains largely invisible to society.

Now, it appears that there may be movement on the issue. The governor of Punjab, Mohammad Latif Khan Khosa, said in Dera Ghazi Khan on Friday that his government will soon adopt the law. It is to be hoped that this is not mere rhetoric. Were they to pass into law, the bill’s provisions may prove to be of great value in upholding women and children’s rights and protecting citizens who are vulnerable to abuse. As matters stand, victims of domestic violence face double injustice: abuse and then a lack of protection extended by the government. As a party that claims to champion women’s rights and was led by a woman, the PPP needs to be reminded of its commitments. While the state dillydallies over the bill, the rights of countless domestic abuse victims continue to be violated, and the law continues to offer them no recourse.

 

 

 

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY MAIL, UK

Mr Brown and some cattle class manners

We have pretty much put an end to privilege. The good things in life are obtained through hard work and effort, not through rank and status.

If you want a more comfortable seat on a plane, then usually you have to hand over a bigger fare in return.

Most people do not bother to do so. The price is high. No normal, healthy person can come to much harm from sitting in economy class for a few hours.

But those who do decide to spend the extra money would seem to have an indisputable claim on the greater leg room and comfort they have bought with hard-earned cash, or which their employers have decided they deserve.

Why should British Airways override this simple commercial arrangement for an
ex-Prime Minister, returning from a long-planned and well-paid engagement, and provide seats for him and his party at the cost of upset and inconvenience to others?

Why does an ex-Premier need an entourage anyway? He is a private citizen. If he is so keen on occupying seats, why doesn’t he take his place in the Commons rather more often? 

And why should an airline, which sells specified seats on specified flights to specified people, think it justified or reasonable to tell paying passengers that their contracts have been voided without notice?

No doubt British Airways has the legal right to behave in this way. No doubt the name of an ex-Premier carries weight in whatever office decides these matters. But in both cases common sense should have advised against it, especially when one of the victims of this officious idiocy was a heavily pregnant woman.

In a contest for a comfortable seat, between a woman a few weeks from giving birth and a man whose undistinguished period in office is already being happily forgotten, most people would know instantly which side to take.

But BA, and Gordon Brown’s aggressive and charmless aide, seem not to have realised this. In fact, a little diplomacy and good manners by the airline and Mr Brown’s assistant might well have resolved the problem.

It is only because the British political class has recently become so insulated from real life, cosseted behind so-called ‘security’, that it never occurred to those involved to treat their fellow passengers as equals rather than ciphers.

Equality is a slogan Mr Brown uses plentifully. But it seems he prefers the theory to the practice.

Tarnishing the Crown

Foolish: You might have thought that Prince Charles would rather serve his guests pale ale and supermarket sausages than risk allowing his name to be used in slick publicity for a Spanish tiling firm

You might have thought that Prince Charles would rather serve his guests pale ale and supermarket sausages than risk allowing his name to be used in slick
publicity for a Spanish tiling firm.

Alas, it is not so. The heir to the throne has foolishly allowed the enterprising owners of Porcelanosa to help pay for a series of costly celebrity dinners and
parties on Royal premises.

The company has publicised the events in puffs in celebrity magazines and on its own website. On one occasion it announced: ‘Buckingham Palace dresses up in its
finery to honour Porcelanosa.’

 Such commercialised gush may sell more tiles in Spain, but it also diminishes the dignity and independence of the Crown.

Ineptitude, combined with a lingering desire to live more lavishly than the modern Monarchy can afford, are the real culprits here.

It should not have happened. It must not happen again.

Dangers of the Left's dishonesty over cuts

Sadly, Britain has become wearily accustomed to masked yobs fighting with the police and smashing windows.

Such shameful scenes scarred the tuition fees demonstrations – and, predictably, they were again in evidence on the fringes of Saturday’s Trades Union Congress march against spending cuts. 

But, while the protest was predominantly peaceful, union leaders cannot shirk all responsibility for the violence.

Shameful: The scenes which marred the cuts march on Saturday were stoked up by union leaders who demanded a fight against 'class war' austerity measures

Unite’s Len McCluskey demanded a fight against the Government’s ‘class war austerity’ measures. It is rather difficult to see how these words didn’t lend encouragement to the rump of people who, while proclaiming themselves Left-wing activists, actually believe only in their right to perpetrate destruction. 

It is deeply worrying that police fear the royal wedding will be their next target.

Equally predictable, of course, was the biased coverage given to the march by the anti-cuts BBC – which was desperate to present the event as an entirely happy, family occasion, regardless of the facts.

Disgracefully, a torrent of propaganda about how ‘Con-Dem’ cuts would ‘destroy’ the public sector spilled out of the corporation during the event. Ministers received only perfunctory right of reply.

There was also no surprise in the failure by both the unions and Labour leader Ed Miliband – who was perhaps unwise to have attended the march, given the rioting that followed – to explain any realistic alternative to cuts necessary because  Britain ran out of money on his predecessor’s watch.

 

 

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY STAR, BANGLADESH

Contractual appointments

Selectivity essential

Contractual appointments are not unique to any administration, but when these become a pervasive phenomenon they cause more harm than good to the very system that the appointments are supposed to invigorate. In the case of our administration the latter is more likely to be the case if the number of public servants reemployed after retirement or have had their service tenure extended, continues to be at the current level. One wonders what the compulsions are for the government to fill up more than 200 administrative posts with retirees and even outsiders, as reported in this newspaper recently.

Admittedly, employing people on contract is needed sometimes to fill up a technical post, or the job sensitivity requires continuity that might be snapped if the incumbent goes on retirement. But this obligation should occur rarely and the option should be exercised carefully and indeed very selectively. It is regrettable that in most cases these appointments have been motivated by partisan consideration rather than that of benefit to the state. Looking at the list of the appointees the criticism in large part appears valid.

Apart from the tag of partisanship that the government has to wear because of this, the impression such appointments give is that there are not enough qualified persons to step into the shoes of those that are going on retirement. And this impression is even more reinforced when one finds that most of the top appointments at present are being held by retirees, including that of the cabinet secretary.

And when the situation is juxtaposed with the number of senior officers that are OSD, the matter assumes a critical proportion. Can we endure a situation where in the administration there are several hundred public servants on so-called special duty, and getting paid for doing nothing, while at the same time several are being retained after retirement or inducted from outside.

The arrangement is counterproductive for many reasons, not least of all for the fact that it saps the morale of the incumbents since it stunts the prospect of promotion and vertical rise of the serving cadres. We urge the government to be very selective in this regard if not do away with it altogether.

Bangladeshi nurses in Libya

They must be free to leave

Reports of Bangladeshi medical staff, especially nurses, not being allowed to leave embattled Libya are worrying. As our correspondent now in Choucha on the Tunisia-Libya frontier notes, a number of Bangladeshis fleeing Libya have spoken of many nurses being compelled to work in hospitals, tending to those wounded in the armed clashes between government and rebel forces. It is also quite natural to suppose that many of the wounded are individuals caught in the air raids over Libya by western forces. While it is perfectly understandable that those wounded in the war as also others will be in need of treatment, it is inconceivable that foreigners working in these hospitals will be detained against their will.

Libya is now in a state of increasing devastation as a result of the military clashes between Col. Gaddafi's forces and the opposition. Add to that the attacks launched on his forces by the West. In such conditions, with uncertainty surrounding the state of things, tens of thousands of foreign migrant workers have chosen to make their way out of the country. Bangladeshis working in Libya happen to include a diversity of professional groups --- doctors, nurses, teachers, factory workers and others --- all of whom are now in a quandary as to how to save themselves by fleeing. Many have already returned home, albeit empty-handed. But with the Libyan forces reportedly not allowing some women nurses from Bangladesh by having them get off a vehicle taking them to the border, the situation can only be imagined.

We think the Libyan authorities, for all the desperate straits they are in, should be approached by the Bangladesh mission in Tripoli regarding an uninterrupted departure of our nurses from that country. Obviously the Libyans cannot guarantee their safety of life. And compelling the nurses to stay back amounts to treating them as hostages. That is unacceptable.