[cr-india] why distinguish CR from regular FM?

[Vickram Crishna]

At 12:14 AM -0700 10/16/04, Subramaniam Vincent wrote:
>Are you saying that even the legitimate amongst the current crop of 
>NGOs in the rural areas are 'not representative' enough to apply for 
>licenses on behalf & with the communities they work for? An NGO is 
>already a Trust or a Society or a Coop or a Sec 25 non-profit.

Not at all. I am not in favor of any exclusionary policy, that is all 
I want to say. I say nothing about the worthiness of any NGO. There 
certainly are many whose work is exemplary. The Charitable Societies 
Act or whatever it is called should not be the starting point, it is 
setting the bar too high.

>We cannot on the one hand argue for an interim policy 'that needs to 
>get the bus going' and also say that that the policy must at once be 
>broad enough to deliver licenses to the weakest organized of groups 
>that are not already in associations of some sort. Plenty of rural 
>India is covered by SHGs, rural trade/farmers/water-users 
>associations, NGOs, et al. Perhaps the policy should look to 
>applicants from here first and then look at other situations where 
>no organizing exists at all.

Why should we not ask for an interim policy that allows the largest 
number to start, then look for refinements down the road once we have 
a working base of operational stations? Do you think if a village had 
a really good station going anyone should care who owned it? An ideal 
interim policy would be inclusive, with exclusionary principles being 
added on a need basis only after real evidence is collected.

Unlike some others, including government officers whose quotes have 
been seen in the local and international press, I have an abiding 
faith in both the Constitution and in the people of India. Not 
necessarily in that order, or in any order, mind you.
-- 
Vickram