Editorial
No reason why BGMEA Bhaban should
not be pulled down
THE Awami League-led government has indeed made a commendable move by seeking $5 billion in compensation from the developed countries whose environmentally-hostile development activities over the years have resulted in global warming-induced climate change, of which Bangladesh looks set to be one of the worst victims. Indeed, as the state minister for environment and forest told a high-profile meeting of the United Nations on environmental affairs at the UN headquarters on Wednesday, according to a report despatched by the private news agency United News of Bangladesh, Bangladesh is ‘not responsible anyway for the worldwide environmental problems whereas it is in the most vulnerable position’. Ironically, while on a global stage the government has presented itself as environmentally conscious, its actions on the domestic front hardly reflect such consciousness, as did its predecessors at the helm of the state. One glaring example of the successive governments’ sustained indifference to, if not indulgence in, anti-environment actions by influential quarters is the BGMEA Bhaban, the headquarters of the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters’ Association, the apex organisation of the country’s readymade garment factory owners.
The BGMEA Bhaban, which stands on a piece of land reclaimed from Hatirjheel, marked in both the Dhaka Master Plan and the draft Detailed Area Plan of the city development authority Rajdhani Unnayan Kartripakkha as a water retention zone, is an encapsulation of whatever violation of laws and regulations that one can possibly think of. The 15-storey building, which was constructed in 2006 within the Hatirjheel-Begunbari Lake Development Project, does not have approval from Rajuk, according to the Rajuk chairman, as quoted in a report front-paged in New Age on Friday. Not only did the association begin construction of the building without Rajuk approval but it also defied a Rajuk directive issued on September 22, 2004 for its suspension. Regrettably, the BGMEA’s defiance stemmed from the blessings it had from none other than the two top political leaders of the country – Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia, currently the prime minister and the leader of the opposition in parliament respectively. While Hasina, then the prime minister, laid the foundation stone of the building in 1998, her successor Khaleda inaugurated its construction in 2004. Little wonder then that the first vice-president of the BGMEA claimed, as reported in New Age, that ‘we [the BGMEA] do not need any more formal approval as two prime ministers, Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia, have already approved the building.’
Here, it is pertinent to point out that the prime minister of the country is not above and beyond the law of the land. Hence, even if one prime minister has laid down its foundation of the building and another inaugurated its construction does not legitimise the BGMEA Bhaban in any way. What it does, however, highlight is the duplicity of the two political leaders with regard to protection of the environment. That said, we believe there is still time to right the past wrong. As there is clear evidence of the BGMEA Bhaban being unauthorised, the government needs to take steps to pull it down. If an unelected, apolitical government can order and implement demolition of the illegal Rangs Bhaban, there is no reason why an elected, political government should not act similarly in case of the unauthorised BGMEA Bhaban.
Outbreak of dengue
AFTER the swine flu scare (which was not just a scare, as at least three patients succumbed and some 200 were afflicted) the renewed spread of dengue fever in the city is a fresh challenge before the overburdened, overstretched health service. Dengue is spreading and even if no fatality has so far been reported the hospitals are busy admitting new patients. According to figures cited in a report in New Age on Friday, a total of 27 dengue patients have been admitted to three hospitals over the last few days. Till September 15, the report further says, 245 dengue patients were admitted to various hospitals of the city. Physicians have been quoted as saying that the disease is spreading.
This spread has to be arrested before it overwhelms the health service. Although the fresh outbreaks are all from within the Dhaka city, there is no reason to assume that the other regions will remain unaffected. The tally is based on admission records of hospitals in Dhaka and so the actual number of those afflicted may be higher. The hospitals need to remain fully prepared for any eventuality. The preparation must include timely supply of blood as in the case of the severer variety of dengue called haemorrhagic dengue, blood transfusion becomes necessary. At the same time, awareness of the people should be raised so that they may be able to distinguish dengue from ordinary fevers and remain alert to any sign of the more virulent haemorrhagic dengue.
Dengue was almost unknown in this country till the year 2000 when a large-scale outbreak occurred. Although our medical personnel had no background of handling the disease they were able to adapt their skill to the new needs. Since then they have kept the fatalities limited, for which a word of appreciation is due. But unfortunately the efficiency of our municipal service falls considerably behind. Dengue, like malaria, is a mosquito-carried disease and so the answer to the outbreak lies in destruction of mosquitoes. When the cause of a disease is known and that cause is also localised, its eradication becomes easier, only if the civic bodies act with vigour. The Dhaka City Corporation may say that they may clean the drains but the dengue carrying Aedes mosquitoes breed within homes, in clean water stored over a certain period. True, but to actuate the households to destroy the habitats of Aedes through the local ward commissioners is also the job of the city corporation. There is no evidence that the ward commissioners have gone about their business and conferred with the households or taken any local initiative.
Health reforms battle in US:
a supreme paradox
Yet, by a supreme paradox, the US legislators on both sides of the aisle (Republicans and Democrats) are engaged in a combat to defeat the president’s health reform bill. Many town hall meetings are spreading misinformation, even outright falsehoods, and rumours provoking fear and doubts in the minds of the public, writes Dr Zakir Husain
AMERICA as the most powerful democracy and the world’s lone superpower is unable to deliver health care to all its citizens. American healthcare system remains a puzzling paradox: poverty in the land of plenty. America spends the highest per capita (more than any other rich European country or Japan) on health; America claims to deliver the best medical care in the world. Yet, about 50 million Americans have no health insurance or access to care when needed. Millions are ‘one illness away’ from a dire financial catastrophe.
Health is accepted as a basic human right. Yet far too many are denied that elemental security. If proof is needed, American health system proves that how much money spent is no measure of the health outcome or quality. Britons, Canadians or the West Europeans spend less, yet are better covered and also get a superior deal.
Millions are left precariously without minimum of health security. Many families cannot afford the high and rising insurance payments. Companies saddled with high overhead costs are cutting down coverage of services but raising insurance premium.
The paradox does not end here. President Barack Obama knows it. His illustrious predecessors failed to reform and make the system universal by lowering costs and expanding coverage. They failed.
The US Congress and the American people by and large feel something has to be done. This dark blot on the rich and powerful democracy America claims to be has to be erased.
Yet, by a supreme paradox, the US legislators on both sides of the aisle (Republicans and Democrats) are engaged in a combat to defeat the president’s health reform bill. Many town hall meetings are spreading misinformation, even outright falsehoods, and rumours, provoking fear and doubts in the minds of the public.
What these groups are doing is to serve the interest of very rich and powerful health insurance and its related industries. They are so determined and so powerful they threaten public interests with callous disregard to public good. Strange but true that American public sees a devil in the remotest reference to ‘socialism’ or anything the government does with something as private and personal as health care. The Cold War has ended; the Communist Soviet Union and the Communist China are no ideological or military threats anymore. The United States as the champion of world capitalist system has only this year made a huge bailout of failing or bankrupt private firms – something totally against free market. But not a ripple of protest came from the die-hard free market buccaneers who now shout so loud against Obama’s very modest public health insurance option.
Obama promised deep reforms in health care as a major domestic agenda. He is having a tough time to get wide strong consensus. His best efforts to persuade the Congress might not be enough. He might now take his case directly to the American public and stake his power of rhetoric in a bid to get a robust health reform bill forced through the Congress. We shall wait and see.
Those who oppose reforms are many across the party divide. Conservatives and neo-liberals joined together spreading doubts and fear in public mind.
Fiscally conservative members warn the Congress that Obama’s pubic option could add to deficits already huge. Which is why Obama felt obliged to assure he would not ‘add a dime’ to the already existing deficit.
What a fuss if not a farce is this!
We recall the same Congress applauded and approved several trillion dollars to fight foreign war of ‘choice’ in Iraq. And the US is sinking hundreds of millions a year in Afghanistan. Why? Apparently to destroy villages and kill some Al-Qaeda fugitives (but actually killed thousands of Afghan civilians). How this improves security of American homeland remains unexplained.
America is a modern and mature democracy. But the elected public representatives (in the House and the Senate) hesitate to rise and applaud healthcare reforms – long delayed reforms to bring relief to over 50 million of its citizens.
This president is in a fight to save the heath reforms bill just as his predecessors had to fight and lose. Those stalwarts include Harry Truman and Bill Clinton. Senator Edward Kennedy is no more. Is he turning in his grave at the quality or mischief of the present debate?
If the most powerful democracy headed by the most powerful president falters and fails what message does it deliver to the growing and developing democracies? Does it confirm that as democracy grows and ages it moves away from the people (electorate to be specific) and wears the mantle of the powerful and influential of the society who finances the candidates for election in the first place?
Is that a very uncharitable proposition?
Would it be too absurd or politically incorrect to suggest that it does matter little whether a society is governed by democratically elected lawmakers or by indirectly selected members of a council of advisers/experts/nobles? Perish such unwholesome thoughts! But the thought lingers and lurks again and again.
Indeed, health is a human right. But in reality many such acclaimed universal rights are respected more by breach than by compliance. Human rights are often routinely violated in democracies and dictatorial regimes alike.
Ironically, in mature and wealthy democracies too, the legislators elected to protect the people’s rights often fail; they are seen to serve the special interest groups who contribute money to get them elected. The case in autocratic regimes is more straightforward since those who wield power are not elected by, and thus not accountable to, the people.
My observation of the current healthcare reform debate in America provokes me to illustrate what I consider crude hypocrisy and spread of coarse falsehood – not just by the opposition party stalwarts but also by powerful Washington lobbyists paid for by vested interest groups such as the health insurance and hospital industry. Barack Obama championed universal health care for all Americans. When it came to delivering on his election pledge he came under merciless attack by opponents deeply entrenched and the deeply prejudiced some of whom made even racist attack.
For the first time Americans elected a black president. He inspired millions by his bold fresh rhetoric on the future vision of a changed America. For many millions this is a historic opportunity for a president of the most powerful country to make a huge contribution to the American democracy. What is wealth or power of a nation if it fails to give dignity and prosperity to all and not only some of its people?
MAIN PAGE | TOP
|
|
