All I Write is Not Necessarily BLOGGED

I am not sure if what I wrote made any difference but in posting this blog, I want to prove to a friend that I do not have to write about every important issue on my Blog – I can, and do, outside of it. A few days back, a friend accused me of going on and on and on about “Ladoog” - while, according to him, I could channel my energies towards highlighting some important issues that remain neglected. It is my hope that with this blog post, the next time the friend sees me, he will look at me with downcast eyes - in meek subservience.

On 19th June, 2020 I wrote to the Royal Government of Bhutan (RGoB), as a concerned citizen, pointing out two important issues that could have long term implications if not averted - but those that had every indication that they were gaining primacy among people in the decision making process. One concerned the very important tourism sector, and the other, the watchdog organization responsible for the health of the country’s environment.

The following is what I wrote – quoted here verbatim:

ISSUE A: Waste Management & Stray Dogs Population Control Flagship Program under the NEC

This is a direct conflict of interest. A regulatory authority such as the NEC cannot be the implementing agency for waste management. There is every chance that this project might fail because the NEC as the implementing agency is bound to cut corners in its stewardship and oversight responsibilities. Simple reason: officials who are supposed to regulate and monitor are the same ones who are implementing the project.

The government might wish to consider delinking the Waste Management & Stray Dogs Population Control Flagship Program PMU from the NEC and an independent body set up – sans the officials of the NEC in the PMU. This way we can expect better monitoring, regulation and stewardship from the NEC – and ensure that activities of the Waste Management & Stray Dogs Population Control Flagship Program PMU are in line with the provisions of the law.

Charging the NEC with the responsibility to implement waste management projects is akin to asking the Drug Regulatory Authority to set up medical supplies shops.

ISSUE B: The possibility of hoteliers being allowed to book tours 

There is a sense in the market that the tourist class hotels are likely to be allowed by the Tourism Council of Bhutan (TCB) to book tours in the regional tourists segment. There are a number of problems in this:

aaa.  The standing rule of the RGoB is that each business activity is separately licensed. Thus the rule does not permit hoteliers to venture into tour operation activities. Operation and conduct of tours is separately licensed, under the category of “Tour Operator”. Thus if a hotelier is desirous of entering the tour operation business, the law requires that they obtain a tour operator’s license – which is simple and without hurdles.

bbb.  The TCB is not vested with the authority to determine which business entity can conduct what business – that is within the purview of the Ministry of Economic Affairs (MoEA). Thus the TCB determining that hoteliers can engage in tour operators’ business is overstepping their mandate – it should be in the domain of the MoEA.

ccc.  It is most likely to cause unnecessary and avoidable rift between the hoteliers and the tour operators because of a number of impracticalities of a joint operation - the most serious among them being fixing accountability in the event of problems and failures.

ENDNOTE:

The Logo of NEC looks sharp and clear because I digitized it - GRATIS - when I was contracted to Edit the book "WATER Securing Bhutan's Future" for the ADB/NEC.