Editor,
In “The 3 Tier ID Card: How does it work?” (ST NOV 28, 2012), Mr. Toki Blah has merely rehashed, with some new ideas borrowed from my article “Making sense of the ILP” (ST NOV 15, 2012), his earlier write-up – “The comprehensive 3-tier ID CARD is the mechanism for influx control”(ST SEP 11, 2012) to which I had responded with the write-up “The 3-tier ID CARD debate”(ST SEP 20, 2012) and no other person or NGO leader had responded; showing that only Mr. Blah and I are really concerned about the issue of influx. Others who pretend to be concerned have shied away from participating in the debate: that is the sad truth we faced today. The NGO leaders seem to have less spine than they pretend to have: they choose to take matters to the street but not to an intellectually serious debating forum provided by the media. They choose to display physical brawn instead of sagacious intellect. So, it looks like a debate only between two friends battling to press for acceptance of their disparate view points on a mechanism to control and dry up the menacing of influx of opportunistic migrant land grabbers. As of now, it seems, no one perceives migrants as land grabbers. I hope, now, others sit up and take notice to think and ponder.
As usual, Mr. Blah’s write-up is verbose but I feel called upon to point out first to the inaccuracy in his statement that “The High Powered (?) Committee…had decided to recommend two models of influx control mechanisms”. It shows that he prefers listening to the din of his own voice rather than to that of others. Else he would have got the correct picture by reading my letter under the caption “ILP or 3-tier ID Card: who decide(s)?”(ST NOV 20,2012), or, after having read it, he could have rebutted my statements by a riposte or counterpoint. He ought to have done so before writing this write-up especially because he was not present and participating at the 3rd meeting of the HLC on 15 Oct., 2012. Also, instead of harping endlessly and verbosely on what had been stated before on the menace of unwanted influx into our state and the pros and cons of other mechanisms, existing or imagined, he could have offered well reasoned views on the expected impact of his pet 3-tier ID Card. His statement that “The experience of other countries…expose ‘unauthorized’ settlers”, needs corroboration with examples, if we are expected to buy his view. It should be emphasized that there should be no room for non-indigenous settlers to become any class – A, B or C – of citizens in any state in the Country. So, there is no sense in talking about “unauthorized” settlers when we do not have space for any “authorized” settlers; but Mr. Blah seems to suggest that we should have.
Yours etc.,
Morning Star Sumer,
Shillong – 2
Reviewing State Industrial Policy
Editor,
The government is talking of reviewing our State Industrial Policy keeping in mind the sensitivity of the local community. Ampareen Lyngdoh says that we need to have a form of development that is not secluded or isolated but open to allow growth. While she may be right to a certain extent, let us analyse what have been the real benefits of allowing industries into our State? The majority are found violating environmental norms brazenly from polluting factories in Ri-Bhoi areas to cement companies who buy people’s opinion to destroy forest cover and encroach upon agricultural land. I do not see any reason why tax payers money should be given as a rebate or even subsidies to industries who are here to loot and scoot. Some like JUD cements, Adhunik, Green Valley, Star Cement etc…have no contribution at all towards the social well being of the villages and least of all to the environment. So it would be worthwhile for the Minister to reflect on her statement and evaluate the impact of the Industrial Policy and to see if it is worth giving out freebies to the wealthy.
Yours etc.,
Dominic S. Wankhar
Shillong-3