Editor,
Normally I never react to rejoinders to my articles but in the case of Mr KL Tariang’s rejoinder to my write-up, ‘Oh Shillong My Shillong’ ST 21st Jan, an exception has been made namely for the following reasons. Firstly both of us have a passionate love for this city which I believe is also shared by many others like us. For this reason any debate on Shillong and its wellbeing is most welcome. Secondly, Tariang’s arguments are rationally objective, not personal and are devoid of sentimental nonsense, a base for a healthy debate on any subject, more so on the restoration of ‘The Scotland of the East’. Thirdly, I strongly believe that stakeholder ownership of Shillong, a crucial precursor to its refurbishment, can only spring from such public discussions.
I do a lot of walking and in the process am familiar with many localities as I traverse their footpaths and by-lanes. I readily accept that many of these localities are physically clean and their respective Dorbars are to be appreciated. What puzzles therefore is that pervading and nauseating stench of overflowing septic tanks that somehow tend to defy Dorbar diktats. We have tall RCC structures, some with 30 or more occupants per building but with no compounds. Toilets are discharged into small septic tanks which need to be cleaned every week. The cleaning is done by emptying into the nearest drain! Its unhealthy, it’s a foul practice, it’s not the way to dispose off night soil and it simply demonstrates Shillong’s inability to cope with urban waste disposal. This is one of Shillong’s biggest flaw that demands an immediate, viable solution.
Next there is the issue of solid waste management. Localities are clean because they must have disposed off their solid waste somewhere. Question is where and how? Drains are the first choice and the waste (plastic, other pollutants and the toilet waste mentioned above) then end up in the Wah Umkhrah or the Um Shyrpi. Marten is the next choice but it has reached saturation point. Shillong needs to come up with better waste management options. Dorbars are excellent Traditional Institutions for locality governance (Synshar shnong). Fact however remains that we don’t have any traditional concept of synshar sor ( Urban management and governance). We reject the idea of municipality representation because as correctly stated by Tariang (a) we are deeply suspicious of self seeking public representatives (b) unsure under the present Municipal Act, of getting quality representation in the Municipality. Does this however mean that we cannot find an answer to our urban woes?
The Dorbar system works and is acceptable because local people are in charge of the system. The Dorbar and its elected representatives are owned by the people. Why can’t the same principle be adapted for Urban City Management? Is this possible? Yes, why not! We need to think out of the box. We need to make Ward Commissioners real servants of the people. The Dorbar should take charge, control and manage the Municipality or the Town Committees under the 6th Schedule. Urban management should be based on a participative stakeholder approach that is empathic, sensitive to and in tune with our indigenous character. Such a paradigm is available and was once presented before NGOs and Rangbah Shnong. It was found acceptable. That it was not accepted by Government is a mystery. Point is why can’t be have a workable, acceptable urban management system of our own? Why not indeed!
Yours etc.,
Toki Blah,
Vie email
Corruption in MPSC
Editor,
Apropos the article “MPSC rudderless” (Shillong Times Dated 16th January) I would like to thank you for raising an important issue regarding MPSC. I had appeared for an MPSC interview for Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Officers along with my friends where we believed that we had performed well and would secure a good rank. Surprisingly when the results came out my name did not appear and more surprisingly the top scoring graduate was put in the last rank. Another equally brilliant graduate was not even included in the list. The MPSC exam was conducted for two days of one group at a time. Astonishingly almost all the persons who cleared the MPSC in good rank were those who gave their examinations on the second day. Some of us who wrote our exams on the other day didn’t even get through. Was that coincidence or a clear sign of unfair dealings in the Commission? Things such as these disillusion young upcoming citizens like me who want to be fair in whatever we do. Its time Meghalaya has a clean recruitment process without political interference and corruption by some of the members. Perhaps its time we also put our legs into politics because it seems without political backup nothing ever works in our God blessed Meghalaya. Can’t blame militants for illegal activities when its being done by some so called respected citizens, most being politicians.
Yours etc.,
S Chambugong,
Via email