Save our life, change our lot, please
Sunday, 21 December 2008
Maswood Alam Khan
SHEIKH Hasina during her tenure as prime minister was instrumental in achieving huge success in increasing our food production and improving our bilateral relations with many countries. The signing of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord in December 1997 during her premiership is a glorious milestone in the history of Bangladesh. As leader of Awami League (AL), the most organised and grass-rooted political party, she would always play a pivotal role in the development of Bangladesh. She introduced stipends for the elderly, and the Disabled Welfare Act was passed in 2000 during her tenure -- two examples, among many others, of welfare revolution for the hapless. She is perhaps the only prime minister of Bangladesh who got a number of honorary degrees from various universities for her significant contributions as a public leader.
Khaleda Zia perhaps did not get as many honorary degrees as Sheikh Hasina got. But, achievements during the tenures of Khaleda Zia are simply glorious in the field of education. She is the first head of Bangladesh government who introduced free and compulsory primary education, tuition-free education for girls up to class twelve, stipend for female students and the food for education program. It was during her tenure when adopting unfair means in examinations was almost totally absent. And a revolution only she can claim to have started during her tenure was an unprecedented nationwide social movement in tree plantation. As leader of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) which sent her for a record three times to the chair of the country's prime minister she will always be remembered in history with honour and grace for her contribution in female education in Bangladesh.
There are hundreds of examples that both the leaders have set towards welfare of our nation. Both of them can claim their own and their families' contributions in our liberation war.
Any of the two honourable ladies of illustrious backgrounds is now poised to be the next prime minister of our country for a term of five years. The whole nation is looking at them with a high degree of expectation---and also with a little bit of trepidation. 2009 will see one of them as the chief of the opposition bench and the other as the chief of the treasury bench in our parliament.
The chief of the opposition is much more important than the chief of the treasury in the parliament as the leader of our last resort when the government in power becomes deaf, dumb, numb and insensitive in empathising with our pains and perils.
BNP Chairperson's new campaign slogan 'Save the country, Save the People' and Awami League chairperson's campaign slogan 'Change' have struck emotional chords with the audience. Those who have set their minds to see Bangladesh run once again under the premiership of Sheikh Hasina or Khaleda Zia may glean quite a number of strong and interesting points from the election manifestos of their parties to convince people in their election campaign that their choice is the best.
Making public the wealth statements of parliamentary members 30 days after the national election and selecting deputy speaker from the opposition party are two of many salient points of the BNP's election manifesto that have been highly applauded by political observers as has been highly commended the Awami League's election manifesto for upholding freedom fighters, banning communal politics, and ensuring many development and poverty alleviation programs with a long vision up to 2021.
Both manifestos of these two major political parties are ostensibly harbingers of peace, happiness, and development of Bangladesh in the next five years though both the manifestos are quite vague in expression. Both manifestos are full of verbose statements with phrases like 'measures will be taken' and are pathetically devoid of timeframe and specific ways of how to fulfill their tall lists of promises. The manifesto of Awami League compared to that of BNP is better structured in terms of macro visions while the manifesto of BNP compared to that of Awami League seems more appealing to the general masses in terms of number of promises.
General people while listening to a long and boring budget speech unwillingly hear the complex words of economic matrices that go in one ear and out the other as they eagerly await only the words like taxes, to be imposed or withdrawn, that affect them directly while scholars minutely listen to the budget speech to dissect its technical aspects that have bearings on the economy in the short and in the long terms.
An election manifesto is published primarily to curry votes; it is not a proposed performance budget of a nation. General masses are more important than scholars as the target groups for the election manifestos to reach. So, political parties, especially in our country, announce their election manifestos not as a perspective plan for five years with detailed breakups of earning and spending of revenues. Rather they present in their manifestos a rosy list of future programs without mentioning how they would ultimately manage funds to fulfill those ambitions. Because it would be suicidal if a political party, for instance, declares in their manifesto that Taka 9000 million, to be raised by raising the existing taxes, would be necessary to fight greenhouse effect or to feed the poor for free as a part of their manifesto promises.
However, achievements made in the past in the development sectors during tenures of our two leaders as prime ministers will reinforce assurance in the minds of the public about the respective leader's ability to deliver on their committed promises.
Who will win is still a question? Any premature forecast in one party's favour rather makes the supporters complacent and laidback and helps the supporters of the opposition camps to be more determined. There is also a mass psyche found among people to support the underdogs who are always underestimated, criticised and looked down. Any caustic or sarcastic remark against any party or their alliance may boomerang as was evidenced in the past elections in Bangladesh and also in the latest US presidential election if the remark is solely meant to defame the opposition only to defeat the contestants in the election.
Fate of an election is decided by the silent majority who don't come out to streets to chant slogans or frequent a tea stall to indulge in political debates. They listen and watch what the leaders say and how the leaders behave. The media, if they remain neutral, can positively influence those silent voters. If people somehow sense that the media are one-eyed they may choose just the reverse course to what the media would be propagating!
It would be unwise to predict the election result though it has been observed in Bangladesh that a party achieves more votes compared to their past scores if they were in the opposition bench in the immediate past parliament.
There is a good probability that more than 80 per cent registered voters may turn up this time to cast their votes to break all the previous records. Behind such probable record turn-ups is a reason that this would be the first time voters will carry a laminated card known as National ID Card. If not for casting votes for the sake of a golden future of Bangladesh, at least to relish the pleasure of using the card, quite queer to them, many illiterate, old, introvert, highly homebound, religious, and young people will turn up to the polling centers to cast their votes brandishing their colourful ID cards bearing their pictures. So, political parties have to be extra cautious in calibrating their statements addressed to those voters casting their votes for the first time in their life!
How many more votes or seats in the parliament are needed for the immediate past party in opposition to defeat the immediate past party in government is a difficult calculus. Awami League will have to win much more than 62 seats they got in the previous election---a tough job to attain if the strength of their alliance cannot overpower overwhelmingly the strength of the alliance of BNP which alone got a whopping score of 193 seats in the last 2001 election.
The immediate past democratically elected government formed by BNP made a breakthrough in the fight against terrorism no doubt, but their crusade against corruption was not at all commendable. It is up to the people to determine, before casting their votes, who among these two leaders always tried to keep their words and would in future be capable in fighting corruption---our social malaise number one and also the number one battle both Awami League and BNP have promised to fight.
All said the nation is frustrated with both the leaders about the uneasy silence they maintained in their attitudes reflected in their election manifestos on what they would be doing if the nation sends one of them as the leader of the opposition.
Will we see once again those cataclysmic days of HARTAL? Can't we expect that BNP will 'save our country and save our people' and that Awami League will 'change our lot' by declaring unanimously before the election that they both would be shunning the destructive paths of HARTAL that drags our nation back? With folded palms we appeal to our guardians, Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina: "Please salvage our nation from ruination by kicking "HARTAL" into the political dustbin!"
(Maswood Alam Khan is a banker. He may be reached at maswood@hotmail.com)
SHEIKH Hasina during her tenure as prime minister was instrumental in achieving huge success in increasing our food production and improving our bilateral relations with many countries. The signing of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord in December 1997 during her premiership is a glorious milestone in the history of Bangladesh. As leader of Awami League (AL), the most organised and grass-rooted political party, she would always play a pivotal role in the development of Bangladesh. She introduced stipends for the elderly, and the Disabled Welfare Act was passed in 2000 during her tenure -- two examples, among many others, of welfare revolution for the hapless. She is perhaps the only prime minister of Bangladesh who got a number of honorary degrees from various universities for her significant contributions as a public leader.
Khaleda Zia perhaps did not get as many honorary degrees as Sheikh Hasina got. But, achievements during the tenures of Khaleda Zia are simply glorious in the field of education. She is the first head of Bangladesh government who introduced free and compulsory primary education, tuition-free education for girls up to class twelve, stipend for female students and the food for education program. It was during her tenure when adopting unfair means in examinations was almost totally absent. And a revolution only she can claim to have started during her tenure was an unprecedented nationwide social movement in tree plantation. As leader of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) which sent her for a record three times to the chair of the country's prime minister she will always be remembered in history with honour and grace for her contribution in female education in Bangladesh.
There are hundreds of examples that both the leaders have set towards welfare of our nation. Both of them can claim their own and their families' contributions in our liberation war.
Any of the two honourable ladies of illustrious backgrounds is now poised to be the next prime minister of our country for a term of five years. The whole nation is looking at them with a high degree of expectation---and also with a little bit of trepidation. 2009 will see one of them as the chief of the opposition bench and the other as the chief of the treasury bench in our parliament.
The chief of the opposition is much more important than the chief of the treasury in the parliament as the leader of our last resort when the government in power becomes deaf, dumb, numb and insensitive in empathising with our pains and perils.
BNP Chairperson's new campaign slogan 'Save the country, Save the People' and Awami League chairperson's campaign slogan 'Change' have struck emotional chords with the audience. Those who have set their minds to see Bangladesh run once again under the premiership of Sheikh Hasina or Khaleda Zia may glean quite a number of strong and interesting points from the election manifestos of their parties to convince people in their election campaign that their choice is the best.
Making public the wealth statements of parliamentary members 30 days after the national election and selecting deputy speaker from the opposition party are two of many salient points of the BNP's election manifesto that have been highly applauded by political observers as has been highly commended the Awami League's election manifesto for upholding freedom fighters, banning communal politics, and ensuring many development and poverty alleviation programs with a long vision up to 2021.
Both manifestos of these two major political parties are ostensibly harbingers of peace, happiness, and development of Bangladesh in the next five years though both the manifestos are quite vague in expression. Both manifestos are full of verbose statements with phrases like 'measures will be taken' and are pathetically devoid of timeframe and specific ways of how to fulfill their tall lists of promises. The manifesto of Awami League compared to that of BNP is better structured in terms of macro visions while the manifesto of BNP compared to that of Awami League seems more appealing to the general masses in terms of number of promises.
General people while listening to a long and boring budget speech unwillingly hear the complex words of economic matrices that go in one ear and out the other as they eagerly await only the words like taxes, to be imposed or withdrawn, that affect them directly while scholars minutely listen to the budget speech to dissect its technical aspects that have bearings on the economy in the short and in the long terms.
An election manifesto is published primarily to curry votes; it is not a proposed performance budget of a nation. General masses are more important than scholars as the target groups for the election manifestos to reach. So, political parties, especially in our country, announce their election manifestos not as a perspective plan for five years with detailed breakups of earning and spending of revenues. Rather they present in their manifestos a rosy list of future programs without mentioning how they would ultimately manage funds to fulfill those ambitions. Because it would be suicidal if a political party, for instance, declares in their manifesto that Taka 9000 million, to be raised by raising the existing taxes, would be necessary to fight greenhouse effect or to feed the poor for free as a part of their manifesto promises.
However, achievements made in the past in the development sectors during tenures of our two leaders as prime ministers will reinforce assurance in the minds of the public about the respective leader's ability to deliver on their committed promises.
Who will win is still a question? Any premature forecast in one party's favour rather makes the supporters complacent and laidback and helps the supporters of the opposition camps to be more determined. There is also a mass psyche found among people to support the underdogs who are always underestimated, criticised and looked down. Any caustic or sarcastic remark against any party or their alliance may boomerang as was evidenced in the past elections in Bangladesh and also in the latest US presidential election if the remark is solely meant to defame the opposition only to defeat the contestants in the election.
Fate of an election is decided by the silent majority who don't come out to streets to chant slogans or frequent a tea stall to indulge in political debates. They listen and watch what the leaders say and how the leaders behave. The media, if they remain neutral, can positively influence those silent voters. If people somehow sense that the media are one-eyed they may choose just the reverse course to what the media would be propagating!
It would be unwise to predict the election result though it has been observed in Bangladesh that a party achieves more votes compared to their past scores if they were in the opposition bench in the immediate past parliament.
There is a good probability that more than 80 per cent registered voters may turn up this time to cast their votes to break all the previous records. Behind such probable record turn-ups is a reason that this would be the first time voters will carry a laminated card known as National ID Card. If not for casting votes for the sake of a golden future of Bangladesh, at least to relish the pleasure of using the card, quite queer to them, many illiterate, old, introvert, highly homebound, religious, and young people will turn up to the polling centers to cast their votes brandishing their colourful ID cards bearing their pictures. So, political parties have to be extra cautious in calibrating their statements addressed to those voters casting their votes for the first time in their life!
How many more votes or seats in the parliament are needed for the immediate past party in opposition to defeat the immediate past party in government is a difficult calculus. Awami League will have to win much more than 62 seats they got in the previous election---a tough job to attain if the strength of their alliance cannot overpower overwhelmingly the strength of the alliance of BNP which alone got a whopping score of 193 seats in the last 2001 election.
The immediate past democratically elected government formed by BNP made a breakthrough in the fight against terrorism no doubt, but their crusade against corruption was not at all commendable. It is up to the people to determine, before casting their votes, who among these two leaders always tried to keep their words and would in future be capable in fighting corruption---our social malaise number one and also the number one battle both Awami League and BNP have promised to fight.
All said the nation is frustrated with both the leaders about the uneasy silence they maintained in their attitudes reflected in their election manifestos on what they would be doing if the nation sends one of them as the leader of the opposition.
Will we see once again those cataclysmic days of HARTAL? Can't we expect that BNP will 'save our country and save our people' and that Awami League will 'change our lot' by declaring unanimously before the election that they both would be shunning the destructive paths of HARTAL that drags our nation back? With folded palms we appeal to our guardians, Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina: "Please salvage our nation from ruination by kicking "HARTAL" into the political dustbin!"
(Maswood Alam Khan is a banker. He may be reached at maswood@hotmail.com)