Editor,
This is in response to the Letter to the Editor written by Francis Khonglah, Ex-IRS Officer, published in your newspaper on April 26, 2023. The concerned has expressed his disagreement on the engagement of a private primary healthcare provider, questioning the credibility of the private healthcare company, Gramin Healthcare, and the intention of the Government to bring in such an initiative into the State.
Across the country, private healthcare is available in big cities only. Due to lack of primary healthcare delivery in rural areas, the common people from rural villages are forced to travel to the cities when in need of health services, thus wasting their day’s wages and bearing extra travel costs. Hence, the Government of Meghalaya is taking proactive steps for strengthening public health facilities by creating several new health facilities in remote areas across the State. In addition to these efforts, the Government also brought this last mile healthcare solution using innovative models through private primary healthcare providers to the rural and remote areas, where villagers can easily have access to a doctor, basic diagnostic services and a pharmacy – all in one place and at a reasonable cost.
The idea is to provide more options for rural communities with a mix of both public health centres and private clinics, with the intention of making healthcare accessible and affordable for all. However, this does not mean that it has stopped improving facilities at the public health centres.
Currently, there are 20 villages across the State where Gramin Healthcare Clinics are present and are providing the comfort of a consultation with a doctor and being checked by a nurse. Sometimes patients have their first eye test at these clinics. Close to about 4000 patients from the clinic locations as well as surrounding villages have accessed standard health services from these clinics. The contentment and general appreciation of people with the services provided at these clinics is already testified in the article published.
It is also none but the nurses, pharmacists, centre managers from the State who provide services at these clinics. Close to 100 youths from the State have gained employment from Gramin Healthcare since the clinics were scaled up across the State in August 2022. The false narrative of bringing consultants, etc., is not just unnecessary but misleading and incorrect.
Enabled by the Government, Gramin started its first pilot clinic at Sohrarim in April 2020 after it showed interest in serving in the rural areas. All expenditures for the pilot were borne by the company itself. Good response from the community prompted the Government to scale up this model across the State. Gramin was selected via an RFP that was floated by the Government on December 16, 2021, details of which are available on the public domain (https://mbda.gov.in/rfp-selection-agency-setting-and-running-healthcare-centers-20-locations-across-state-meghalaya).
A good healthcare delivery system requires both private and public intervention for quick and increased coverage. False accusations such as those made by Mr. Khonglah would not only impede the objectives of the Government but also mislead people. It is also suggested that media houses should verify the facts with the concerned department or study the matter on the ground before publishing such responses to news reports.
Yours etc.,
TG Momin,
Joint Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya,
Health & Family Welfare Department
Timely article and an eye opener
Editor,
It was encouraging as well as a huge relief to read Avner Pariat’s article “No more meetings on garbage, please.” (ST April 28, 2023). What a sober and intelligent assessment of a problem that like so many others has been allowed to grow into an indomitable challenge. In addressing this ghastly monstrosity that daily assails our senses, he has taken the bull by the horns and exposed the bull…’manure’. But there is hope and as the article points out we can start with simple steps like banning small plastic bottles and packets, using natural alternatives and most of all encouraging sincere local environmental activists. Why not pay them instead of fat cat consultants whose advice is never carried out anyway and are only hired to make it look as if the government of the time is seen to be doing something ‘important?’
I grew up at a time when, among other things. we used the beloved cloth ‘pla iew’, paper packaging, jute sacks, cane ties and the same bottle to replenish cooking oil. Today however convenience and appearance matter more and we have our single-use neat sanitised plastic bottles and jars, plastic bags of all sizes which once discarded poison the environment.
Pariat’s article therefore rightly reminds us of the ills of thoughtless consumerism fuelled by the need to always have what ‘they’ have. Yet we cannot ignore science. Nearly all knowledge continues to evolve and my sense of self-righteousness with regard to recycling was easily punctured when I read this article: ‘Glass or plastic: which is better for the environment? (https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230427-glass-or-plastic-which-is-better-for-the-environment) Not much to choose between the two, it seems and that makes for uneasy reading.
It is time for those in power to move with the times otherwise what they will be remembered for is their role in hastening the destruction of our beloved homeland.
Yours etc.,
Janet Hujon,
Via email
Is the interview for LDA in EJH Court a mere formality?
Editor,
Last time I flagged about the notorious LDA examination conducted by District Court Khliehriat and as expected I cleared the written exam and was therefore called for the interview. But sadly, they gave us just about 8 days to prepare for the interview. I was sceptical and also pessimistic about appearing for the interview, given the situation that was created during the written exam. I always thought that at least, recruitments to courts would be fair and without bias unlike recruitments undertaken by the government. It is with this optimism and hope that I presented myself before the interview board for the LDA post. But to my surprise, I was asked by the panel of interviewers whether I had prior working experience, to which I replied in the negative. Then another panel member commented, “We want people with prior experience.” I recall that in the advertisement, nothing was said about prior working experience being a criterion.
When I got out of the interview, I asked myself whether they would prefer the temporary staff (who also qualified for the interview) for regular appointments instead of the rest of us. If yes, why at all call the rest for an interview and exam. Around the corridors also, it was heard that possibly they would prefer the temporary staff who already are in the court office. I was further disheartened. My friends who appeared for the interview with me also have the same apprehensions as I. I hope this thought is not true. However judging from the appointees for the driver’s post where the majority of those appointed are already working in the office it would seem to be the criterion adopted.
This is not to discredit the ones who passed on their own merit but the factors are such that familiarity seems to weigh heavily in the minds of the interviewers because a prior relationship has been established.
I hope that these thoughts I harbour are not true so that people will not lose faith and trust in the judicial system. Hope the results are based on fairness and merit and that someone is not appointed merely because they have already been temporary staff. The reality is that all of us are qualified and can also learn to work in the office of the court. However, I will not be surprised if all the posts are allotted to the temporary staff. The results will show the true colours of the recruitment process.
Yours etc.,
Mr. R. Lamin
Khliehriat