Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 01:19:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Carvalho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So I'm glad you've come out and said these things. Afterall, it is at times like this that one must have the courage of one's conviction. > Mario observes: > Whoever has followed this discussion would know that Selma initially said she had little knowledge of the local situation or that there was anything that an expatriate like her could add that could make any difference. Then she started supporting the status quo and hurling wild insults and accusations of corruption at anyone who suggested more local involvement in approving local projects, which is how development is controlled throughout the developed western world. Finally, prodded by me with observations that she had nothing constructive to say, she came up with some suggestions that could at least be debated. > If everyone at the local level who can have any involvement in approving these projects is corrupt, except Selma and Floriano, then we might as well forget any rational solutions and get behind Rajan and Gadgil in simply stopping these projects to avoid further blight in Goa. > Selma wrote: > The average village Panchayat election runs into lakhs of rupees. Somehow these lakhs have to be recouped. How else to do that but sanction as many irregularities as possible. Devolution of power to Panchayats is a no-win situation. There is no check on governance at this level. > Mario responds: > Once again we see unsubstantiated insinuations and insults for those elected by the local villagers for local administration. Is it not true that local Panchayats are more accessible to local sentiment than state government officials? Doesn't the current mess prove that? How could the local villagers have anything to complain about if they allow their local representatives to be corrupt without protesting? > Gadgil has reported numerous cases where Panchayats and Gram Sabhas have rejected projects in response to local sentiments. > Wendell has spoken about how accessible his local Panchayat has been and responsive to concerns he has expressed to them. > One is left to wonder how an expatriate Goan like Selma, who has no personal knowledge of what is happening at the local level in Goa, as she has admitted in a previous post, now has the chutzpah or credibility to insult these local representatives with wild accusations of wanton corruption. > What would prevent Selma's central Planning Office from the same corruption Selma is accusing everyone else of? > If Digambar Kamath will not agree to let the local villagers have any say in the approval process they then have to live with, what makes Selma think her Planning Office will be allowed autonomy from the state government? >
