So we are invited to DfID
participatory project formulation party! I cud ask the honourables to call from
DfID the mid-90s impact study of its flagship slum n poverty projects in India
that it commissioned me to do, along with its reasons for ignoring my findings
about their killer water components, notably in its official global
best-practice project, and also explanation for its shrugging
we-have-diplomatic-immunity remark when I had brought up the accountability
issue (the proverbial last straw that made me quit mainstream practice). But
before that I wud ask if and why they would value what I tell for free now,
considering DfID ignored what it paid me a packet to find and tell then.
Anyone
submitted views in response to public notice invitations issued by our own
parliamentary committees? I have, and I am not amused by what happens. at
lowest common denominator of democracy all views are treated equally and view
of chaps in control stands out in the report, like happens with all contemporary
participatory business nowadays. It is probably breach of privilege to say
this, but at a parliamentary committee hearing that I was at, MPs said they
could only recommend, etc, till an elderly lady gave a sermon about how she had
not participated in the freedom struggle as a child to have to suffer helpless
young men in old age. to the credit of our MPs they took it all gracefully and
even ordered a report on the specific case the lady had cited. Of course, no
report was forthcoming and every once in a while the lady (who can barely see)
wants to harangue and calls me for secretarial assistance. The case she had
cited was about water and slums (in pro-poor perspective) and I might ask her
if she wants to peg on this public notice something to our parliamentary
committee. (I dare not suggest to her to write to the Brit committee, since she
participated in the freedom struggle as a child, and I dare not write to it
myself lest I offend her and get fired as her occasional secretary).
- gita