Editor,
There has been a lot of hue and cry about a Central Government notification that many allege bans the sale of beef. Nothing could be further from the truth. The notification in question was issued on May 26, 2017 by the Environment Ministry, and is titled “Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock Markets) Rules, 2017 – under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.”
For those who have actually read the notification, and have not been led by lies purported by a very desperate opposition, will know that the word ‘beef’ does not figure in the notification even once. In fact what the notification speaks about is the treatment of animals ‘meant for slaughter’ which in itself implies that slaughter is allowed. It lays down rules like – if cattle are being taken to the market for sale, and if the market is farther than a certain distance, you will have to arrange for a vehicle to carry the animals in, and that you cannot make them walk long distances. The rules state that if cattle are made to wait in the market before they are sold, food and water must be provided to them. These and similar rules only guide us humans to be more humane in our treatment of animals. I leave it to the readers to decide if humanity is too much to ask for. The notification does not advice us not to eat meat, but only exhorts us to be humane to animals while they are still alive.
Imagine that you were walking on the road and notice a man hitting a dog mercilessly with a stick. Would you cheer the man and enjoy the pain of the speechless and helpless poor animal or would you ask the man to let the poor dog go? The humanity in us will cause us to do the latter, and hence the rules under discussion.
However, one may argue that the rules are too strict to allow any livestock trade. Now, this is an argument that I would patiently listen to. But the fact is, before the notification received the official assent, it was placed ins the public domain for a satisfactorily long time. All state governments, different social organisations, and the public were asked and allowed to make suggestions on the draft rules. Would you not agree that it was the duty of the state governments (and especially the governments of states like Meghalaya, Mizoram, Kerala, where consumption of beef is common practice) to make suggestions about the draft that would make it less strict and more convenient? But these governments, for reasons best known to them (or perhaps because they foresaw a topic for future propaganda), did not respond to the call for suggestions. The only suggestions that came were from animal’s rights groups, and other social organisations and persons who work for animal safety. As such, it is not surprising if the rules are stringent. The onus of moderating it lay with the state governments and they squandered their chance. However, the Central Government has agreed to review the rules even after it was notified. For this, we should applaud the Government. After all, the willingness to change and adapt is the only route to growth and development.
Yours etc.,
Haka Lyngdoh
Shillong – 14
Good traffic regulation
Editor,
Through your esteemed daily we would like to express our appreciation for the new traffic arrangement made by the Police in and around Polo Bazar Area. After the introduction of the new system, traffic problems have eased considerably and the movement of vehicles is more orderly. Although it is learnt that the new arrangement is on a trial basis, we think this could continue for some more time. Our only suggestion is to keep some police personnel in front of Matri Mandir so that parking of local taxis can be restricted for smooth running of vehicles.
I once again thank and congratulate the traffic police for this arrangement.
Yours etc.,
- Dey & Others,
Shillong-1
True professionalism!
Editor,
Whenever I hear the word professionalism, the face of a young man comes to my mind. He is not a doctor or a lawyer but a tea vendor who sells tea from table to table at a workplace. He is very particular about his work, always maintains exact timings of his rounds and has a tremendous memory. “Are you a computer?” ~ is the question he has often been asked. After a full day’s work, he collects money from his customers. So, he has to keep it in his mind how many cups a person has consumed on a particular day and also how many of those are big cups and how many small ones and also if there were any arrears of previous days.
Whenever anyone’s body language has thrown a doubt, he emphatically starts narrating the details of his having tea associating with other things like who he has taken the first tea with, the exact location of his having the second one and what he said to him at the time of receiving the third one! It is a real magic. But never has he overcharged anyone. Also, he never let anyone hurt his dignity of labour. He does not answer to anything that has been asked with an intention to make even friendly fun of him. He is indeed an embodiment of what professionalism really is.
Unfortunately, sometimes we brand those people as professionals who are like money making machines. A teacher who does not help his/ her students in the classroom but gives his/ her best as a private tutor, has generally got the label “a very professional teacher”! But how can a person be called professional when she/ he is actually neglecting her/ his profession?
It is a common error to link professionalism only with money. Professionalism is actually the high standard that we expect from a person who is well trained in a particular job. It is all about skill, honesty and integrity. It comes after following the high standards of 3D ~ dedication, determination and discipline that create and enhance the brand value of a person or a product or a company.
Indeed, the tea vendor is a shining example of professionalism.
Yours etc.,
Sujit De,
Kolkata