Re: [AI] Protest against promissed ordinance to clear RPWD bill at AICC Ofice
I wonder why some people habitually think, speak and write in bad taste; and, use expressions/remarks which smack of utter arrogance. Just look at the taunting expressions/remarks ... great Mr. Rungta, and ... Mr. advocate This unseemly blame-game, this ominous posturing, and this credit-hunt (more particularly, where no credit is due) will only serve to accentuate and deepen bitterness thereby widening the existing cleavage. Be that as it may, those who have suddenly began to see so much merit in the RPD Bill currently pending with Rajya Sabha owe an explanation as to how the said Bill concedes more in favour of persons with disabilities than its two predecessors, namely, the 2011 and 2012 drafts respectively which they had roundly condemned, among other things, by saying that those drafts were not even worth the paper they were written on. The fact of the matter is that this Bill not only concedes much less but also seeks to take away some existing advantages and also seeks to legitimise discrimination against persons with disabilities. Now, unfortunately, the same set of people who had so vociferously and full-throatedly condemned the earlier two drafts as indicated above, have now worked overtime to see the passage of this lesser bill through till the Parliament adjourned sine die. Best regards, Poonam! On 2/23/14, Aravind R aravind.andhrab...@gmail.com wrote: dear abidi sir, please clarify me on the following points present in this bill which you supported as a great one. its saying that 5% vacant should be filled by people with disability and if there is any valid reason then those vacancies can be filled by others. already, my experience with companies including public sectors shows that they try their best to proove that we can perform nothing. if law itself says like this then how will they take efforts to identify jobs for us? personally, bank gave job only to compulsion. then they took years to identify jobs which we can do. because, they must pay me so they must identify some works to us. if law provides this loophole, then will they take efforts to identify jobs? its not only in banks, its in all departments. then, what protections are given to ladies with disability? then if this bill leaves each and every responsibility to state governments including definition of important terms, then how can we ensure that the spirit of this bill will be fullfilled? On 2/23/14, Sathiyaprakash Ramdoss sathiya.ramd...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Mr. Abidi, Thanking you in advance for taking your time to write your response; Here is one of the forwarded emails from Mr. Avinash. Dear colleagues, Around 1000 persons with different disabilities assembled on Monday Feb 10 2014 at 9 safdarjang outside malikarjun's house who is minister to MSJE. It was our strong commitment that he be not allowed to go to the parliament. The number kept rising and around 1 when he could not go to the parliament he invited us for a meeting. A delegation under the leadership of NFB general secretary met the minister and the secretary to department of disability affairs. Which also included NPRD, rashtriya viklang munch, human rights law network and others. The delegation raised many questions on the amended version of the draft and pointed out various flaws. The delegation had a discussion over various categories of disabilities and their problems. The minister promised us three things: Firstly, a joint meeting of NFB, law minister and secretary of department of disability affairs will be held to consider the suggestions submitted by the delegation. Secondly, if the problem still persists, the bill will be reffered to the standing committee. Thirdly, in the mean time if the bill is listed in the business, the minister himself will straight away inform the chairman of Rajya Sabha that the consultations are not complete, therefore, he is not pressing the bill for discussion and passage till the consultations are completed. However, shockingly, it was also told to us that when Javed Abidi came for the meeting on third with the secretary of department of disability affairs, he showed my forged signature saying that Mr. Rungta is busy somewhere else and I'm representing the whole disability sector. So you can understand the nepharious plans of self styled people like Javed Abidi. Abidi was saying that he will teach a lesson to the blind, therefore, we all must ask Mr. Javed Abidi now as to where is the bill today? I would like to thank each and everyone who supported us for this cause. Without your support, it wouldn't have been possible to stall the passage of this flawed bill and discrimination against disabled would have been legitimised on grounds of disability. I'm also thankful to the students of JNU whose hard work and intelligent inputs helped us a lot in building up this momentum, Specially Ajay and Avinash. I found
Re: [AI] Protest against promissed ordinance to clear RPWD bill at AICC Ofice
Surprisingly, Mr. Abidi has got time for answer. Sir? is it really a question of other e all had already gone through all his mails, with the help of Mr. Ajay arora. In fact, Mr. Rungtha had sent the same mail to Mr. Abidi also, but, I think, he had never answered for it. At least, it doesn't come to us. Sir! we are also trying to make eforts for other disable along with us, so kindly consider Mr. Rungtha's views, go ahead. This is my personal observation about Mr. Rungtha his team, who is doing countless efort for it. We should aslo say thanks to Mr. Avinash, Pranjal, Mr. Ajay Arora. Who spend their sleepless night. So anyone can simply write disagree here in comment. But, Please! try to convince your view in some manner, so that, someone will not missguide.disable? as you mentioned in your earlier mail. Srinivasu Sir? How can we say that Mr. Rungtha's views are different than us. W -- God examine those whom loves he the most. Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
Re: [AI] Protest against promissed ordinance to clear RPWD bill at AICC Ofice
Neelima: Now that a certain phase is over, I do have more time now than was the case until yesterday! Which email of Mr. Rungta are you talking about? I haven't received any email from him. And if it was worth replying, I would have. Even now, if you kindly forward it to me, I will surely reply if it merits one. And really, what are Mr. Rungta's views? Is any one privy to them? Can any one explain that please? I am particularly keen to know about Mr. Rungta's views on the blind versus low vision issue. Should we go the 0.5% each route or the 1% each route? And since Mr. Rungta is no longer leading only the blind but all disabled people courtesy the newly created AIDA, I would also want guidance from my learned friend on his views vis a vis deaf versus hard of hearing; and also, wheelchair users versus crutch users versus those who limp. Finally, for today, I am also wanting to know from Mr. Advocate (a) if sign language should be treated as an Indian language at par with say Tamil or Gujarati; and (b) Advocate Rungta's views on the issue of legal capacity, specifically if the concept of unsound mind should be abolished and if there should be no total or plenary guardianship. (2) The 20 non negotiables were created more or less by Mr. Rungta with some help from DRG on legal capacity etc. I am sure you know that we were working together until 3rd February under the aegis of the Joint Platform. I and Syamala G. of AADI faithfully took the document to NAC, then to Rahul Gandhi and on his intervention, to Kapil Sibal. On his express instructions, a meeting was convened by the Law Secretary. If Mr. Rungta was not invited to that meeting, I can't help it. If Mr. Rungta is angry that I went and didn't take him with me, that was not within my powers. I have read somewhere that Mr. Rungta has alleged that I told MSJE/Law Secretary that Mr. Rungta could not come for the meeting because he was ill or busy elsewhere and that I even gave something (a “forged” letter) to that effect. That is patently false. I challenge Mr. Rungta to substantiate this allegation and provide the proof if any at all. Neelima, the truth is that we succeeded in getting as many as 16 amendments carried out! Earlier when Mr. Rungta had gone to meet Kapil Sibal, he was brushed aside and not one change was incorporated. Besides, if I didn't take Mr. Rungta with me, so what? Why couldn't the great Mr. Rungta secure a meeting on his own?? (3) We never said that the present Bill was a perfect one. Ofcourse, it wasn't. But, when you looked at it overall, there was much much more good in it than the shortcomings. Therefore, I was indeed very keen that it gets passed ASAP. That has not happened and now, it is anybody's guess as to what further changes/amendments can be made through the Standing Committee and in how much time. I am keen on a good, healthy discourse. That's why I have chosen to join you all on Access India. With good wishes, Javed Abidi 22.2.2014 --Original Message-- From: Neelima Surve To: accessindia Cc: Javed Abidi ReplyTo: neelima24su...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Protest against promissed ordinance to clear RPWD bill at AICC Ofice Sent: Feb 23, 2014 2:04 AM Surprisingly, Mr. Abidi has got time for answer. Sir? is it really a question of other e all had already gone through all his mails, with the help of Mr. Ajay arora. In fact, Mr. Rungtha had sent the same mail to Mr. Abidi also, but, I think, he had never answered for it. At least, it doesn't come to us. Sir! we are also trying to make eforts for other disable along with us, so kindly consider Mr. Rungtha's views, go ahead. This is my personal observation about Mr. Rungtha his team, who is doing countless efort for it. We should aslo say thanks to Mr. Avinash, Pranjal, Mr. Ajay Arora. Who spend their sleepless night. So anyone can simply write disagree here in comment. But, Please! try to convince your view in some manner, so that, someone will not missguide.disable? as you mentioned in your earlier mail. Srinivasu Sir? How can we say that Mr. Rungtha's views are different than us. W -- God examine those whom loves he the most. Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/ To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for
Re: [AI] Protest against promissed ordinance to clear RPWD bill at AICC Ofice
Dear Mr. Abidi, Thanking you in advance for taking your time to write your response; Here is one of the forwarded emails from Mr. Avinash. Dear colleagues, Around 1000 persons with different disabilities assembled on Monday Feb 10 2014 at 9 safdarjang outside malikarjun's house who is minister to MSJE. It was our strong commitment that he be not allowed to go to the parliament. The number kept rising and around 1 when he could not go to the parliament he invited us for a meeting. A delegation under the leadership of NFB general secretary met the minister and the secretary to department of disability affairs. Which also included NPRD, rashtriya viklang munch, human rights law network and others. The delegation raised many questions on the amended version of the draft and pointed out various flaws. The delegation had a discussion over various categories of disabilities and their problems. The minister promised us three things: Firstly, a joint meeting of NFB, law minister and secretary of department of disability affairs will be held to consider the suggestions submitted by the delegation. Secondly, if the problem still persists, the bill will be reffered to the standing committee. Thirdly, in the mean time if the bill is listed in the business, the minister himself will straight away inform the chairman of Rajya Sabha that the consultations are not complete, therefore, he is not pressing the bill for discussion and passage till the consultations are completed. However, shockingly, it was also told to us that when Javed Abidi came for the meeting on third with the secretary of department of disability affairs, he showed my forged signature saying that Mr. Rungta is busy somewhere else and I'm representing the whole disability sector. So you can understand the nepharious plans of self styled people like Javed Abidi. Abidi was saying that he will teach a lesson to the blind, therefore, we all must ask Mr. Javed Abidi now as to where is the bill today? I would like to thank each and everyone who supported us for this cause. Without your support, it wouldn't have been possible to stall the passage of this flawed bill and discrimination against disabled would have been legitimised on grounds of disability. I'm also thankful to the students of JNU whose hard work and intelligent inputs helped us a lot in building up this momentum, Specially Ajay and Avinash. I found Ajay to be a very capable fellow and an able strategist. Avinash kept us posted about the happenings on media and his skills on social networking websites helped us greatly. Lastly, I hope that we will continue to extend our cooperation to one another, and work together in a meaningful manner to dispel any such plans of government. Once again I thank you all for coming together and raising voice against this black law. With regards, S.K. Rungta General Secretary, NFB India block quote end Cheers, Sathiyaprakash. On 2/22/14, abid...@gmail.com abid...@gmail.com wrote: Neelima: Now that a certain phase is over, I do have more time now than was the case until yesterday! Which email of Mr. Rungta are you talking about? I haven't received any email from him. And if it was worth replying, I would have. Even now, if you kindly forward it to me, I will surely reply if it merits one. And really, what are Mr. Rungta's views? Is any one privy to them? Can any one explain that please? I am particularly keen to know about Mr. Rungta's views on the blind versus low vision issue. Should we go the 0.5% each route or the 1% each route? And since Mr. Rungta is no longer leading only the blind but all disabled people courtesy the newly created AIDA, I would also want guidance from my learned friend on his views vis a vis deaf versus hard of hearing; and also, wheelchair users versus crutch users versus those who limp. Finally, for today, I am also wanting to know from Mr. Advocate (a) if sign language should be treated as an Indian language at par with say Tamil or Gujarati; and (b) Advocate Rungta's views on the issue of legal capacity, specifically if the concept of unsound mind should be abolished and if there should be no total or plenary guardianship. (2) The 20 non negotiables were created more or less by Mr. Rungta with some help from DRG on legal capacity etc. I am sure you know that we were working together until 3rd February under the aegis of the Joint Platform. I and Syamala G. of AADI faithfully took the document to NAC, then to Rahul Gandhi and on his intervention, to Kapil Sibal. On his express instructions, a meeting was convened by the Law Secretary. If Mr. Rungta was not invited to that meeting, I can't help it. If Mr. Rungta is angry that I went and didn't take him with me, that was not within my powers. I have read somewhere that Mr. Rungta has alleged that I told MSJE/Law Secretary that Mr. Rungta could not come for the meeting
Re: [AI] Protest against promissed ordinance to clear RPWD bill at AICC Ofice
dear abidi sir, please clarify me on the following points present in this bill which you supported as a great one. its saying that 5% vacant should be filled by people with disability and if there is any valid reason then those vacancies can be filled by others. already, my experience with companies including public sectors shows that they try their best to proove that we can perform nothing. if law itself says like this then how will they take efforts to identify jobs for us? personally, bank gave job only to compulsion. then they took years to identify jobs which we can do. because, they must pay me so they must identify some works to us. if law provides this loophole, then will they take efforts to identify jobs? its not only in banks, its in all departments. then, what protections are given to ladies with disability? then if this bill leaves each and every responsibility to state governments including definition of important terms, then how can we ensure that the spirit of this bill will be fullfilled? On 2/23/14, Sathiyaprakash Ramdoss sathiya.ramd...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Mr. Abidi, Thanking you in advance for taking your time to write your response; Here is one of the forwarded emails from Mr. Avinash. Dear colleagues, Around 1000 persons with different disabilities assembled on Monday Feb 10 2014 at 9 safdarjang outside malikarjun's house who is minister to MSJE. It was our strong commitment that he be not allowed to go to the parliament. The number kept rising and around 1 when he could not go to the parliament he invited us for a meeting. A delegation under the leadership of NFB general secretary met the minister and the secretary to department of disability affairs. Which also included NPRD, rashtriya viklang munch, human rights law network and others. The delegation raised many questions on the amended version of the draft and pointed out various flaws. The delegation had a discussion over various categories of disabilities and their problems. The minister promised us three things: Firstly, a joint meeting of NFB, law minister and secretary of department of disability affairs will be held to consider the suggestions submitted by the delegation. Secondly, if the problem still persists, the bill will be reffered to the standing committee. Thirdly, in the mean time if the bill is listed in the business, the minister himself will straight away inform the chairman of Rajya Sabha that the consultations are not complete, therefore, he is not pressing the bill for discussion and passage till the consultations are completed. However, shockingly, it was also told to us that when Javed Abidi came for the meeting on third with the secretary of department of disability affairs, he showed my forged signature saying that Mr. Rungta is busy somewhere else and I'm representing the whole disability sector. So you can understand the nepharious plans of self styled people like Javed Abidi. Abidi was saying that he will teach a lesson to the blind, therefore, we all must ask Mr. Javed Abidi now as to where is the bill today? I would like to thank each and everyone who supported us for this cause. Without your support, it wouldn't have been possible to stall the passage of this flawed bill and discrimination against disabled would have been legitimised on grounds of disability. I'm also thankful to the students of JNU whose hard work and intelligent inputs helped us a lot in building up this momentum, Specially Ajay and Avinash. I found Ajay to be a very capable fellow and an able strategist. Avinash kept us posted about the happenings on media and his skills on social networking websites helped us greatly. Lastly, I hope that we will continue to extend our cooperation to one another, and work together in a meaningful manner to dispel any such plans of government. Once again I thank you all for coming together and raising voice against this black law. With regards, S.K. Rungta General Secretary, NFB India block quote end Cheers, Sathiyaprakash. On 2/22/14, abid...@gmail.com abid...@gmail.com wrote: Neelima: Now that a certain phase is over, I do have more time now than was the case until yesterday! Which email of Mr. Rungta are you talking about? I haven't received any email from him. And if it was worth replying, I would have. Even now, if you kindly forward it to me, I will surely reply if it merits one. And really, what are Mr. Rungta's views? Is any one privy to them? Can any one explain that please? I am particularly keen to know about Mr. Rungta's views on the blind versus low vision issue. Should we go the 0.5% each route or the 1% each route? And since Mr. Rungta is no longer leading only the blind but all disabled people courtesy the newly created AIDA, I would also want guidance from my learned friend on his views vis a vis deaf versus hard of hearing;
