Hello
on a lighter side-The subject is titled Janagraha but the topic discussed is USA , BUSH I am happy this group has members who can share their ideas on any- topic ,country ,organisation -VAST Knowledge pool can any body share the info on how much is te property tax is being collected so far Vidya dhar-good to see u in Kannada Channel regds Mukund ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] Date: Monday, March 2, 2009 11:06 am Subject: CAF3063 Re: Janagraha To: [email protected] > USA chose Bush! Not a particularly good choice. Mathew > Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel > > -----Original Message----- > From: TANIAPPA VIDYADHAR <[email protected]> > > Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 06:52:34 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF3060 Re: Janagraha > > > Every one knows that in USA as a democratic country, chooses the > best person for the job to run the Govt for the President after > the approval by the senate and house committees, not necessarily > from the elected bodies. I still stress that most democratically > elected folks have little knowledge on the ministry they head. In > Karnataka most are land developers, real estate and mining > dealers as Ministers and in power. Every one knows that CDP is > more influenced by the developers rather than those who have > vision of lung space, oxygen, environmet etc. Last night we > celebrated THoreau Foundation Annual day where Dasarathi was the > chief guest . He made a power point presentation on the need for > alternative ways of travel like bus, cycle and walk. It may look > impractical but the way the traffic is growing the visionaries > alone can visualise the impact. Hence experts should be there to > guide the Govt guys. > T.Vidyadhar > > --- On Sun, 1/3/09, Anil kumar <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Anil kumar <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF3055 Re: Janagraha > To: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, 1 March, 2009, 4:22 PM > > > > > > > > But where is the people's participation in these task forces? > > > --- On Sat, 2/28/09, K. S. Raman <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: K. S. Raman <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF3052 Re: Janagraha > To: [email protected] > Date: Saturday, February 28, 2009, 10:40 PM > > > > > > > Dear Col. Mathew, > > Your points are well articulated. > > Appointment of special task forces to address macro issues has > been practiced for quite some time in democratic countriess. In > Bangalore, BATF is one such. At the national level, appointment > of the Knowledge Commission under the leadership of Sam Petroda is > an example. Members of such task forces are usually people in the > news, "experts" in their domains, who also happen to be well- > connected.Naturally, this approach antagonizes several experts who > are excluded, as was the case with the Knowledge Commission. But, > this is the way the world works. > > Personally, I don't have any problems with this approach provided > the recommendations of the task forces is placed before the > elected bodies and approved/rejected. > > Raman > > > > --- On Tue, 24/2/09, Mathew Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Mathew Thomas <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF3022 Re: Janagraha > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, 24 February, 2009, 11:41 PM > > > Dear Mr. Raman, > > The issue is far more serious than the mere nuances of approach - > top-down [as consultants] or bottom up [as a citizens group]. The > question is, "What is the essence of democracy?" Would you or > anyone, like our country to be "ruled" by the diktats of a few > elite who have access to the CM or PM? > > I had tried to contrast this fundamental difference between > Janaagraha and CAF. I even used the word, "oligarchy" to describe > the setting up and functioning of ABIDe. This is what Janaagraha > stands for, since its founder is a member of ABIDe. > > I am not making this comparison since, as anyone could allege, > because I have some grudge against that NGO or any scores to > settle with it, but because I believe that CAF members need to > understand this difference. This is my personal view. I am quite > comfortable with anyone who has a contrary view. I would like such > people to express their views, with reasons > > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 <!-- > > _filtered #yiv861319259 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306_filtered #yiv861319259 {font- > family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 > #yiv861319259 p.MsoNormal, #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 > #yiv861319259 li.MsoNormal, #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 > #yiv861319259 div.MsoNormal > {margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin- > left:72.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;font- > size:11.0pt;}#yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 .MsoChpDefault > {} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 .MsoPapDefault > {margin-left:72.0pt;text-align:justify;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306_filtered #yiv861319259 {margin:72.0pt > 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 div.Section1 > {} > #yiv975714432 > justifying them. This is what rational discussion is all about. I > am saying this since, there have been mails in this group > indicating a view that there is nothing wrong with having > institutions, like ABIDe, being set up and functioning in the > manner, they do now. > > > > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 <!-- > > _filtered #yiv861319259 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306_filtered #yiv861319259 {font- > family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 > #yiv861319259 p.MsoNormal, #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 > #yiv861319259 li.MsoNormal, #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 > #yiv861319259 div.MsoNormal > {margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm;margin- > left:72.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;font- > size:11.0pt;}#yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 .MsoChpDefault > {} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 .MsoPapDefault > {margin-left:72.0pt;text-align:justify;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306_filtered #yiv861319259 {margin:72.0pt > 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;} > #yiv975714432 #yiv1306169306 #yiv861319259 div.Section1 > {} > #yiv975714432 > Equally, importantly, I mentioned that ABIDe and its members' idea > of people's participation in governance is different from, what > in my view, should be, CAF's take on this crucial aspect of > democracy. I also drew attention to the fact that many who > advocate "transparency", as a principle of democratic governance, > give the principle a go by, when they are beneficiaries > [recipients of office / decision-making privileges] of non- > transparent government functioning. > > Regarding property tax, unfortunately, the legal aspects have been > ignored by all State governments. Hyderabad is no exception. I do > hope to take up the legal aspects and would post the developments > in this group. We also have data on the practice in many > municipalities around the world. > > Regards, > > Mathew > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 7:26 AM, K.. S. Raman > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Col. Mathew, > > Thanks for clearly articulating your approach to public service. > You have chosen to work from the bottom up. As you have found out, > this approach is difficult. It seems that Janagraha has chosen > the top-down approach, which is used by consultants. > > Regardless of the approach, to me what is important is thorough > study and objective analysis of issues. The work done by CAF in > property tax is an example. I and many others I know have > benefited from this work. > > Having said this, I am of the view that CAF's arguments would be > strengthened if it can present information on property tax in > Hyderabad, which is similar to Bangalore in several respects. > Furthermore, efficient tax collection is important. > > I am a novice on the legal aspects of the present tax scheme. This > needs someone with good knowledge of the legal aspects of teh tax. > > Raman. > > > > > > > > --- On Sun, 22/2/09, Mathew Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Mathew Thomas <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF3016 Re: Janagraha > To: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, 22 February, 2009, 11:56 PM > > > > The onus of proof is certainly on the one who wishes to establish > any fact. That is the law of evidence. I know that many find > Janaagraha, an organization that states that they subscribe to > very lofty principles and are hence quite impressed. I worked > closely with them for about two years in another organization, > called PROOF... > > The Co-Founders of Janaagraha are very capable people and easily > impress many who come across them. They are rendering service to > the public, as per their view of public service. > > The reason why I thought it sensible to caution CAF members > against some not so palatable aspects of that organization's > functioning is that I believe that their idea of transparency or > people's participation in governance is different from mine. For > example, it is my view that members of institutions, like ABIDe > have been selected in a non-transparent manner. I find it strange > that people who advocate transparency do not mind non-transparency > when they are selected for such positions. > > Secondly, they also seem to have very different ideas of > participation. ABIDe did not hold any public hearings or > consultations before they came up with proposals that involve huge > expenditure of public monies. Their idea of "consultation" seems > to be putting up their proposals on a website and inviting > comments and then deciding whatever they fancy. I think CAF's view > of people's participation should be different. > > This does NOT mean that we need to exclude the kind of views that > organizations like, ABIDe or Janaagraha espouse. We [CAF] are > committed to the principle of "all-inclusivity". We need to > discuss this rationally, without getting into polemics that > borders on abuse. > > I also believe that institutions like ABIDe are both > unconstitutional and undemocratic. It is rule by elite or > oligarchy. I would NOT wish CAF to have any part in such > organisations, either as members or as invitees or in any other > manner. If our constitution makers felt that such organizations > served a purpose, they would have provided for it. If there is now > a need for such organizations, let the people vote for amending > the constitution. > > The Government is at liberty to consult anyone they wish. When > governments incur public expenditure, they could do so only > through legislative sanction. Keeping the CM as ABIDe Chairman and > ensuring that there is no opposition to proposals of ABIDe is > completely undemocratic. CM is Chairman of BMRDA. We all know how > effective that body is. > > > We elect representative to legislative bodies to fulfil the > election promises they make and to facilitate our views being > heard in legislatures. NOT one of our elected reps knows anything > about what ABIDe is proposing. If, as some would certainly feel, > our reps are criminals and know nothing, and we need bodies like, > ABIDe, then why have this pretence of democracy? Let us dispense > with legislative bodies and have only an elected CM and his chosen > advisers. This is like the presidential form of government. > > As long as our present constitution exists, we have no option but > to follow it. Hence, when a person, who advocates people's > participation, becomes a member of institutions like ABIDe, we > have to view such acts with great circumspection. When such > conduct is consistently seen, we need to be even more cautious of > such people and organisations. > > > > Now, coming to proof, all we need to ask ourselves, are a few > questions. Why did so many of the original civic leaders who were > once very active in Janaagraha leave that organization? > > > How is it that the founders of Janaagraha are also advisers to > Modi [Gujarat] (against whom the Supreme Court had some adverse > things to say and even transferred cases out of that State), > Vasundraraje [Rajasthan] (who lost the elections and is now > accused of serious improprieties), and also Chairman of TAG, JN- > NURM, all at the same time; and now ABIDe? This speaks volumes for > their ability. Unfortunately, with such illustrious associations, > I doubt whether they could really serve the aam aadmi! > > Regards, > > Mathew > > > On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 5:58 PM, K. S. Raman > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I am not a member of Janagrah. As I have said, I know many young > people who like their association with that organization. > > In such situations, who carries the onus of proof? The accuser or > the accused? > > Raman > > > --- On Sat, 21/2/09, raghavendra srinath > <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: raghavendra srinath <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF2999 Re: Janagraha > To: [email protected] > Date: Saturday, 21 February, 2009, 11:56 AM > > > > > > > > If you are member of Janagraha Mr. Raman perhaps you could throw > some light on this instead of brushing aside that the allegations > are hard to prove. > > Srinath > > --- On Fri, 2/20/09, K. S. Raman <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: K. S. Raman <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF2994 Re: Janagraha > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, February 20, 2009, 12:55 PM > > > > > > > Anyone who expected a response other than denial of all the > allegations would be naive. Furthermore, most of the allegations > are hard to prove. > > Raman > > --- On Mon, 16/2/09, Srinath <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Srinath <[email protected]> > Subject: CAF2967 Janagraha > To: "Citizens' Action Forum" <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, 16 February, 2009, 11:27 PM > > All these days I was going carefully about the issues raised by Col. > Mathew in response to the Ramesh Ramanathan's article in Mint. > > I am not a member of Janagraha. I don't know the working of > > Janagraha. But I can certainly say that the so called rejoinder by > > Ramesh Ramanthan never > addresses the issues raised by Col. Mathew. > > I look forward to a detailed rejoinder by any of Janagraha members. > > Even their website doesn't throw much light on the subject > issue. > > > Srinath > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click > here > > > > > > > Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click > here > > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to > http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/ > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Citizens' Action Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/citizens-action-forum?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
