Editorial»
Needs and luxury
JAN 20 - For a common man, the difference between bare necessity and luxury is pretty wide. However, the distance narrows for
the rich people. The margin becomes unrecognisable for the richest. The self-proclaimed god Osho Rajnish was close to acquiring 365 Rolls Royce cars. Maybe he thought that it was a bare necessity for a God like him to ride one Rolls Royce just once a year. Too bad, he was busted by the US police, and his status consistently deteriorated until he died.
The poor people do not even know what luxury is. On the other hand, the rich people also get confused about the limit of necessity, and they fail to realise when they have moved into the realm of luxury. The rich people, spending their own money for their comfort and luxury, are normally envied, but nobody can really flay them. When the same rich taste has to be funded by the national coffer, it becomes a matter of public concern. The rich people feel comfortable to pull wool over their own eyes, and claim the luxury to be a bare necessity. However, the people who sanction the people’s money for such luxury should be alert. They have to be capable enough to adjudge whether or not the rich people’s “necessity” is really justified.
The sanctioning of Rs 142 million by the government for three luxury limousines for the royal palace has also triggered a controversy regarding needs and luxury. Anyone who has been keeping a track of whooping increase in the royal palace expenditure for the last few years would say that the additional appropriation for the luxury limousines is not justified. In less than two years, the royal palace expenditure has increased more than two folds to reach Rs 329 million. Just last year, the Ministry of Finance had released Rs 87 million from its non-budgeted fund to import two bullet-proof cars for the palace. It is learnt that for a small royal family there are already about five bullet-proof cars in the palace. It is beyond any debate that the government should provide the royal palace with all the necessary facilities. But for a country with per capita income of less than USD 230, the necessity should be justified.
The royal palace security and the departments concerned might have found the requirement valid, and should have lobbied for it, and they are not wrong about it. Given the current situation of resource crunch, the government should have resisted the demand, or at least prolonged it for a year or two. It seems the absence of a democratically elected government has shown its effect in this decision. It seems the king appointed government could not see the importance of health, education and other basic needs of the poor people over the requirement of the palace. This incident is just a simple but powerful indication that the country is in dire need of a democratically elected government.Posted on: 2004-01-21 03:55
Headlines
Advertisements
