This concept of NGOs is not only foreign but submerged in money making racket. As you can realize these NGOs have been discredited by foreign grants in the form of awards (under different names) are received by their officials only when they show some anti-Hindu streak in their declarations and activities.
The fact is that this concept (and functioning) of NGOs is a fallacy in that it has basic aim of continuity only and nothing more. Since to exist (with sanction of authorities), it needs some Charitable cause. It collects huge (tax Free to the payers) donations but out of the donations that they get, it is up to them to spend on that cause. The example of Parivartan as given in the article by Ms Sandhya Jain illucidates this point quite clearly. Many spend huge (and disproportionate?) amounts on Administration (as well as may be liaison) leaving marginal amount for the cause. A few years back there was an article in TIME News magazine wherein they had pointed out some NGOs spending merely about 10% of the donations received. The directors get fat salaries and move in aeroplanes, expenses are done in advertisements as well as postages etc, leaving bare minimum for the CAUSE. TIME at the end had advised the readers to stop giving donations to such NGOs. But the fact remains that Organisations are established for long period (even immortality). Surely the office bearers must put in adequate efforts in growth of the Organization. To motivate them, they have to be paid handsome salaries and perks. The result is as described by TIME as well as by Ms Sandhyajee.
--
With regards to all,
------Mukund Apte
The fact is that this concept (and functioning) of NGOs is a fallacy in that it has basic aim of continuity only and nothing more. Since to exist (with sanction of authorities), it needs some Charitable cause. It collects huge (tax Free to the payers) donations but out of the donations that they get, it is up to them to spend on that cause. The example of Parivartan as given in the article by Ms Sandhya Jain illucidates this point quite clearly. Many spend huge (and disproportionate?) amounts on Administration (as well as may be liaison) leaving marginal amount for the cause. A few years back there was an article in TIME News magazine wherein they had pointed out some NGOs spending merely about 10% of the donations received. The directors get fat salaries and move in aeroplanes, expenses are done in advertisements as well as postages etc, leaving bare minimum for the CAUSE. TIME at the end had advised the readers to stop giving donations to such NGOs. But the fact remains that Organisations are established for long period (even immortality). Surely the office bearers must put in adequate efforts in growth of the Organization. To motivate them, they have to be paid handsome salaries and perks. The result is as described by TIME as well as by Ms Sandhyajee.
But the system itself being faulty, there does not appear to be any way for its improvement.
With regards to all,
------Mukund Apte
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
"The Government should immediately bring all activists under the RTI
scalpel; this will literally scalp them."
originally posted at http://dailypioneer.com .. Aug 8, 2006
Put NGOs under RTI scalpel
Sandhya Jain
The $50,000 Magsaysay Award was recently conferred upon Arvind
Kejriwal, a former Indian Revenue Service officer campaigning for the
Right to Information (RTI). Though several Indians have received this
prize from Philippines, not many citizens are aware that this is
actually an American award for Asians. Set up by the Rockefeller
Brothers Foundation, most of the purse comes from the Ford Foundation.
The citation does not say when Mr Kejriwal resigned from service, but
mentions his association with Parivartan, an entity campaigning for
RTI. Mr Kejriwal was in service when he was with Parivartan, which is
not a registered NGO (a Society, Trust, or S.25 Company). Under income
tax, it is an Association of Persons (AoP), a coming together of
persons with a profit-motive so that members can share its income,
unlike in a registered society. The Parivartan website conceals its
AoP, barring one Manish Sisodia (part-time volunteer, founder-member
and treasurer), and terms of association, yet demands a level of
transparency from governmental agencies that is not in vogue anywhere
in the world.
In a timely study on some of India's most exalted conscience-keepers,
Radha Rajan and Krishen Kak argue for public scrutiny of those who
hold society or government to ransom, usually at the behest of foreign
sponsors (NGOs, Activists & Foreign Funds. Anti-Nation Industry, Vigil
Public Opinion Forum, 2006). Kak's meticulous research shows that in
FY 2002-03, Parivartan showed receipts for Rs 2,02,489 (Rs 2,01,889
are donations); the total expenditure is Rs 1,88,164, of which
salaries take Rs 1,14,000. The only 'programme cost' is Rs 35,945 on a
'jan sunwai' public hearing), and the rest is standard administrative
expense.
However, Parivartan claims its annual fixed costs are approximately Rs
six lakh, and programme costs are "partly funded through collections
from the community itself including poor people and the shortfall is
made good by raising funds from outside". Its website does not say if
these funds are included in the receipts statement and if receipts are
issued for small sums given by poor people. Yet it wants to make the
Government of India accountable to itself on behalf of the "people of
India".
Radha Rajan argues that many high-profile NGOs serve America's vision
of a post-Cold-War world order. Hence they advocate 'communal harmony'
in India even as jihad batters the Hindu community, and promote
'peace' with Pakistan despite its formidable terrorist infrastructure.
They are essentially political activists using social activism as a
mask for their crusade against an independent nationalist India. Thus
they are invariably anti-Government of India, anti-military,
anti-police, anti-nuclear, and, of course, anti-Hindu.
America uses the Magsaysay and other awards to legitimise its
loyalists. Indian Magsaysay awardees include Mahasweta Devi (1997),
Aruna Roy and Martin Macwan (2000), Sandeep Pandey (2002), Nirmala
Deshpande and Admiral Ramdas (2005). Then, Praful Bidwai and Achin
Vanaik received the Sean Macbride Peace Prize (2000) and Arundhati Roy
the Sydney Peace Prize (2004). In neighbouring Nepal, journalist
Bharat Koirala got the Magsaysay in 2002 for unleashing the anti-Hindu
process there. Today, a Christian Prachanda has taken over the country
by terrorising the effete political parties and the king is a virtual
prisoner.
Krishen Kak's expose of Harsh Mander (Scoring Against Paganism:
Untangling the Manderweb) is a warning to the Government about the
monetary subversion of serving officers by foreign regimes. In March
2002, Mander, an IAS officer, became an international celebrity when
he attacked the communal violence in Gujarat (after 58 Hindus were
burnt alive at Godhra) in an article in a leading newspaper. Feted in
the West, he claimed he had resigned from the IAS on moral grounds.
This was a deliberate falsehood, says Kak, as Mander was serving the
politico-communal agenda of ActionAid, his British employer. Mander
had managed a profitable deputation to ActionAid, getting part payment
in pound sterling in return for scuttling a government enquiry into
its communal agenda in India.
Managing to ward off moves to end his deputation, Mander took
voluntary retirement only on completing pensionable service. He sought
retirement benefits to the tune of upto a million rupees; the
Government stipulated that he cease working for ActionAid; he refused
and continued demanding retirement benefits. When Kak publicly
challenged the lie that he had resigned on moral grounds, Mander
quickly modified his rhetoric.
ActionAid's communal agenda may well be the inspiration for the UPA's
Sachar Committee, and shows how foreign agendas are wormed into the
topmost echelons of power. It recently initiated a study to sensitise
the public and civil society activists about "the dismal economic,
educational and social conditions of the Muslim masses". Of course,
ActionAid conducted no similar study about Hindu survivors in Pakistan
and Bangladesh.
ActionAid used Mander to connect over 300 voluntary agencies. Its
patronage extended to Aruna Roy of the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan
(MKSS) and National Campaign of People's Right to Information (NCPRI).
The MKSS takes foreign institutional support in kind to evade
reporting its funds under FCRA. The MKSS-approved Lok Shikshan
Sansthan states that FCRA money can be sent to its founder-NGO Prayas
or to the Roy-connected SWRC Tilonia "and it would be transferred to
our organisation's account." Very interesting!
Kak's research has uncovered an hitherto unknown entity patronised by
Mander-ActionAid. This is the "unstructured organisation", which
solicits public money but does not say if it is registered and how it
banks the money. Shabnam Hashmi's ANHAD (with Mander, KN Panikkar and
Shubha Mudgal) is one such body. So is the Aman Ekta Manch, Aman
Samudaya, Aman Jathas, Aman Pathiks. Mander's Aashray Adhikar Abhiyan,
funded by ActionAid, does not reveal the names of the core team of
eleven professionals, or its accounts.
The disturbing aspect of these unregistered unstructured organisations
is their complete lack of accountability or legal scrutiny regarding
foreign donations. Ex-IAS officers and ex-judges often provide
respectability and protection to such dubious bodies in return for
post-retirement sinecures. It is a vicious and dangerous circle.
Russia learnt the hard way that unmonitored West-funded NGOs triggered
the spate of revolutions in the former Soviet Republics and out them
under the scanner. The majesty of the Indian state cannot be
subordinated to hupny-tupny rabble-rousers funded by the West. The
Government should immediately bring all activists under the RTI
scalpel; this will literally scalp them.
With regards to all,
------Mukund Apte
No comments:
Post a Comment