If, we repeat, if the Okram Ibobi Singh led government is really serious about development in the hill areas as the IFCD minister Ngamthang Haokip said, we also would like to put forth some ideas. Well, the idea of convening a meeting of all six MLAs of the Senapati district and ADC representatives of the district on June 12 to discuss ways of developing the district is good for starters. It is about planning at the district level. Development involves a planning process which has to be determined first. As we have seen in the past, the state has a rather lopsided view of development and a top down approach in planning with a yearning for project based development. Okram Ibobi calls the imposing structures of the state capitol complex models of development. He calls the proposed Tipaimukh High Dam a development project. It is the same in the case of the Imphal Sewerage project based on a system dumped by the French. But the moot question is whose development he is talking about. What is there for the primary stakeholders which is the common people. Yes, we certainly understand that infrastructure development is also necessary for ushering in change and development. But it should not intervene into the lives of the general population. While a balancing act is needed, development should be essentially need-based approach generated from among the people. That is exactly where the bottom-up approach to planning should come in the picture. We have had enough of patronizing plans in the region and the time has come to simply say no. It is for us to stand firmly on our feet and say we will start planning on our own. By picking a leaf from Minister Ngamthang Haokip’s idea, we must say the bottom-up process should start from the village level through either the Block or sub-divisional level to the district level then to the state level. What do the villagers want? Let us start with the basics like safe drinking water, sanitation, proper health care facilities, transport and communication facilities. What is the main occupation of the village and do they need any skill enhancement to the traditional methods? What is the basic produce of the village and do they require any support structure for marketing it? Say for example, the main produce of Kachai village in Ukhrul is lemon. Here, we must say the yearly ritual of lemon festival is a mockery to the farmers. All you have to ask the villagers is do they want good roads for transporting the lemon either to Ukhrul HQs or do they want a processing unit inclusive of cold storage facilities and a marketing support base. It is the same in the case of the oranges of Tamenglong. Also take the case of Sirarakhong chillies which is not very hot but tasty and also act as a colouring agent. We rarely get it in Imphal except for some homes. But it is sold in the Ukhrul market for Rs 50 a packet. Look at the wonders it would do to the economy of Sirarakhong village if a packaging unit is opened in the village itself with a marketing support structure. These are but a few examples which come to mind. The most important is asking the right question, which is the domain of economists. Questionnaires have to be developed and it has to be processed at various levels and vetted to suit the needs of the villagers, sub-divisions, districts and the state. Here care must be taken on the aspect of information on opportunities. The villagers need to be explained the various opportunities or possible difficulties open to them. And that would provoke more meaningful ideas from the villagers and the general population. The Chief Minister and his colleagues must ponder upon these ideas, if they are serious about ushering in change and development in the hill areas of the state. With economic prosperity the hearts and minds of the general people could be won.
Home Editorial