Hisila Yami says two things: First, she is "concerned about (the background of) the contractor." Fine. Let's unpack this further. The contractor did something wrong in country X; it paid big fines and saw its reputation dip for some time, and now, presumably wiser and more careful, it is moving on. This is how it is in business. You make mistakes. You pay for your mistakes. If you can still stand, then, you try to build from what you have. What's the big deal? You can't go on punishing the contractor for one aspect of its past for which it has already paid a price elsewhere. How much juice is Yami going to squeeze out of ST's past? By Yami's and some of these Nepali journalists' thinking, even Morgan Stanley would be considered a shady business -- a partner not worth doing business with!! - http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/storage/story/0,10801,108687,00.html *************** Yami then says: "And secondly, I have reservations about privatization. These things can be done through public-private partnership." Ah! Then her conclusion shows two things: that she is driven more by ideology and ignorance. How? Ideology, because she's a knee-jerk opponent of 'privatization'/capitalism and all the words that Maoists like her are brought to consider evil! I can't argue against her beliefs -- because beliefs are beliefs. But her ignorance is shocking. Because, what the hell . . . no one is talking about privatizing ANYTHING here. Where did she get this idea? She does not even seem familar with what she's getting into here, and I find this inexcusable. The essence is basically this (bear with me, if you will): 1. There's no point getting water from Melamchi if you have leaky pipes in Kathmandu. 2. So: FIRST you need to plug those leaky pipes, put in new pipes, invest in technology and find efficient distribution points for Kathmandu water. Fair enough, right? 3. The present structure we have in place for water distribution in KTM is jhoor and khattam. The present employment structure at Khanay Pani makes everyone jageer-dars and party-politics people, and Khanay Pani is overstaffed to the point that it is mired in its internal politics and makes zero investment in key areas re: water distribution. So we are stuck with an office tasked to distrbuite water, when in reality it cannot and does not. Is this what we want? 4. Solution? OFFER a time-bound performance-oriented management contract to a private party who will run this water body so that it faces new incentives to make money in such a way it actually has to deliver water to rich and poor people at various prices . . . something the Khanay Paani -- staffed by purebred Nepalis -- neglected to do in the last 50 years! 5. Now, in all that, where is the dreaded word 'privatization'? The Nepalis will continue to OWN the assets of the Khanay Pani Corporation -- and Nepalis will review the performance of the private party to see how it does. If anything, Nepalis have the power to kick out the contractor if it does something wrong. 6. Sure, there ARE risks in doing this. But which business comes to you risk-free? Besides, what's the alternative? Is Yami going to deliver water door to door in Katmandu? 7/ The public-private partnership is a heartwarming concept. But its successful requires so much of trust and understanding and institutional strengths that building them up alone takes many years. Besides, it's hypocritical for a Maoist whose cadres destroyed so much of community forests and private businesses across Nepal to NOW be getting all high-and-mighty about public-private partnership. 8. Finally, I am happy with Yami's dxecision. A decision like this coupled with Prachanda's hard-to-believe utterings and Maoists' MPs beating up others and carrying firearms to the parliament do wonders for most Nepais to NOT take this party seriously when the REAL elections take place. oohi ashu