Wednesday, October 16, 2024

Looking At Nu.1 Billion With Unabashed Skepticism

Tell me, how often does it happen that our government finds itself in an inviable situation of plentiful? From all accounts, our PDP government seems to have whole lot of dough that they hope to pass around – except that dispensing them does not seem to be as smooth sailing as they would like.

Take for instance the Nu.1 Billion that they supposedly earmarked for sending “deserving” students to study abroad. To their disappointment, it would appear that the announcement has been received with anything but unabashed skepticism.

Not impressed for all the right reasons!

I agree with Kuenga Gyeltshen – the general perception is that the program will end up supporting the influential and the well-connected – few, if any, believe that it will serve the intended purpose.

I have a suggestion, if I may: keep it simple and straightforward - allocate the fund to improve our School Feeding Program. It will benefit in three meaningful ways:

  • School authorities will finally be able to afford to provide safe, wholesome and nutritious meals to their students;
  • It will be a windfall for the struggling rural farmers who run from pillar to post in an effort to sell their farm produce. Injection of Nu.1.00 billion into the school feeding program will go to create a captive market so vast that the farmers will begin to look at farm work with renewed hope – it will be a game changer; and
  • In the agriculture sector, the PDP would have done something that no other government has done in our living memory!
In my capacity as the Club Secretary of the Rotary Club of Thimphu – in 2018, I began implementing PHASE-I of the 3-years, $1.00 million Safe Drinking Water to Schools project, funded by the Disaster Aid Australia. That is when I came face to face with the reality of the School Feeding Program implemented by the then SHND of the Ministry of Education.

It became apparent to me that school feeding program could be one huge market for our rural farmers. But everywhere I went I was faced with one perennial grievance: that Bhutanese farm produces were way too expensive for the school authorities to afford.

I started thinking about this weird situation: How can it be that farm produces grown within the country can be said to be more expensive than those that are imported from growers located few thousand KMs away?

It was not long before I realized what the real problem was: It was not that the Bhutanese farm produces where too expensive – the real problem was in the flawed thinking. It was not that our farm produce was unaffordable - but that the government's allocated stipend was pitifully inadequate!

The answer: increase the stipend to a respectable amount and see what happens.
  • Our school children will begin to get safe, nutritious and wholesome food;
  • A huge in-country market will open up for our rural farmers.
Recently, Sangay Thinley, Deputy Chief Economic Development & Marketing Officer, of the DAMC initiated the formation of an agriculture marketing network that he calls “Network of Farm Produce Aggregators”. As of now, they are active in few select Dzongkhags. It could be expanded to other Dzongkhags across the country.

The Ministry of Education and the school authorities could work with this Network to arrange uninterrupted supply of items of food to schools – home grown farm produces that are freshly harvested, less infested with chemicals, safe, and at prices that are within the bounds of their enhanced stipend. The network of cold storage facilities that was created by the past government can be used to store food - to be supplied during off seasons.

According to a Kuensel report published in January of 2024, numbers are quoted as follows:

  • As of end 2023, the number of students receiving free meals stood at 88,784.
  • Stipend to each of these students is reported at a miserly Nu.1,500.00 per month per student.


Do your mathematics - redirecting Nu.1.00 billion to supplement school feeding program will more than quadruple the stipend amount to benefit school children. In the process – school authorities will find that Bhutanese farmers’ produces are, after all, AFFORDABLE!

Even better, the PDP will be the first government who would have done something no other past governments have ever done in the agriculture sector – transcend the talk and chose to do something tangible on the ground!

Saturday, October 12, 2024

Finally, The Truth Is Out!

The Bhutanese people must offer thanks to Mr. Yoginder Sharma, former Technical Director at the Punatsangchu-I and Punatsangchu-II projects from 2010-2017, for finally having the guts to come out with the truth - that the project consultants to the two projects – Water and Power Consultancy Services (India) Limited (WAPCOS) and Central Water Commission (CWC) - are solely responsible for the disaster that remains an ongoing reality with our two largest failed hydro projects: P-I and P-II.


On Thursday, February 19, 2015 – that is one full decade back - in my article titled My New Year Wish, I wrote the following:

“Even if the two governments do not agree to scrap the Punatsangchu projects, they should accept that WAPCOS (consultants to all the hydropower projects in Bhutan) has proven to be anything but competent to undertake any further investigations in the case of these or future hydropower projects in Bhutan. Thus, while we must ensure that WAPCOS is barred from future involvement in our hydro power projects based on their terrible record so far, we should now look at engaging consultants from third countries to investigate if the geological make of the Punatsangchu areas is suitable for large hydro power projects. Through the engagement of better-qualified consultants, we should ascertain whether it is wise to continue with the projects - or scrap it, to prevent further losses”.


Two years later, on Thursday, June 22, 2017, I wrote another article on the matter related to WAPCOS resulting from a Seminar co-hosted by the Ugyen Wangchuck Institute for Conservation & Environment (UWICE), Bumthang, in collaboration with the New Delhi based International Rivers, USA.

Having been invited to participate in the said Seminar, I reported the following to the nation, through my blog titled: “Environmental Governance and Science of Hydropower Development in Bhutan and India":

“One of the speakers at the Seminar pointed out that he had seen a number of works done by the principal Consultants to the PHPA I & II – WAPCOS. They were so bad and shoddy that he had recommended that the WAPCOS be banned from undertaking any work in the hydro-power sector”.


Now that the truth is out in the open, is anybody listening?