Disclosure: The writer’s trip to Nepal to attend People’s SAARC was sponsored by GCAAP (Global Call for Action Against Poverty) with the hope that he could provide some inputs and share his thoughts on freedom of speech and deepening democracy. No idea how useful his inputs were, but once again, thank you GCAAP – Newslaundry office was peaceful for a few days.

What it is:

On the sidelines of the much publicised and well-attended SAARC summit there is the lesser known, poorer cousin that takes place. It’s called the PSAARC (People’s SAARC). Where what some would call “NGO types”, and I call members of civil society and activists, gather to discuss, dissect and draw up policy prescriptions of their own. These consultations after three days of sessions, exchange of ideas and debate are drafted into a People’s SAARC declaration, which was handed over to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mahendra Bahadur Pandey who represents SAARC.

He accepted the declaration with a “On behalf of Nepalese government I accept your declaration. Thank you for the effort in preparing the document”. What was great was the willingness and humility of members of the government of Nepal to at least engage with these “NGO types” and civil society. Whether it amounts to anything or not, I don’t know, but it was heartening to see something other than confrontation between a government and civil society.

What I saw:

Like good jugaad, just a day before international dignitaries were to arrive, there was carpet grass being laid out on otherwise barren road dividers and islands so they may look green and welcoming.

Unfortunately, trees and shrubs were planted at sapling stage to line some main roads with the hope they’ll grow in a day. It didn’t happen. Talk about the weight of expectations from SAARC.

Also, Kathmandu as a city is not quite equipped to handle something like SAARC. The traffic jams and chaos at airports whenever any leader of a SAARC nation arrived was massive. If I were a resident I’d be mega upset. All this for what? SAARC? Which has achieved what exactly? But that’s just cynical me. The local population was a lot more welcoming and pretty thrilled with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi actually.

What I learnt:

From the cabbie I spoke to, to the businessmen I met and hotel staff, everyone loves Narendra Modi. They claim most people in Nepal do. Modi’s tracking down of the family of the young Nepali boy, Jeet Bahadur has had the desired effect it appears. That no Indian PM has visited Nepal for 17 years helps, as well. The Indian state isn’t otherwise very popular there, but Modi quite visibly is.

What I attended:

I attended two complete sessions (almost) and flitted in and out of couple others. There was perceptible rage and disenchantment in many of the activists fighting for marginalised groups. There also appears to be an overwhelming belief (often justifiable) that unless some rights are snatched, they will not be granted.

The session for The Liberation of Manual Scavengers in SAARC region – these are the people who clean our shit (often carrying it on their head) – was for me the most eye-opening. Sure I’m aware of the unfairness, exploitation, dead ended-ness and social immobility that accompanies this job, but reading statistics and reports is not as compelling and alarming as hearing real life stories.

Bezwada Wilson is the national convenor of Safai Karamchari Andolan, an India organisation working towards eradicating manual scavenging. He has seen it up close as his father was a safai karamchari . He however does not couch the job in polite titles and uses the words “clean people’s shit” with regularity and force while describing safai karamcharis. And it works.

There were stories from Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka of discrimination, marginalisation and exploitation. Caste exists across religions it seems. And if one thinks it doesn’t, I think one is either blind or a caste-ist oneself, because you can’t not see it in the world we live in.

When you hear how the shit in our cities is dealt with and who deals with it, there appears an immediacy to tackle these issues just like there seems to be an urgency to tackle licenses or environmental clearances for beverage factories if you attend some other events in Delhi. It all depends whether you’re at a FICCI, CII , ASSOCHAM event or one of manual scavengers who “carry people’s shit on their head”. The session began with a “Jai Bheem” slogan and ended with it as well. Some icons are shared and celebrated across borders even if there are battles, skirmishes and political sparring at the government level. The most marginalised have very different priorities.

Another session I attended was on the “Role of civil society in building regional partnerships and mechanism for achieving gender equality in south Asia”.  In this session I learned about how the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) had pretty much faded from the UN’s and the world’s memory and responsibility. Goals that were tom-tommed with much fanfare at the turn of the century lie unrealized, and targets are far from being achieved.

John Samuel, founder member – Institute of Sustainable Development and Governance kicked off the discussion by questioning what (or how little) has been achieved. There is no attempt or ambition in meeting any targets. “Policy without law, is rhetoric”, a rhetoric that was questioned at many such sessions at the PSAARC.  John also highlighted how women in politics could achieve much in addressing several issues of marginalisation that SAARC nations are afflicted with. The problem with most women in Indian politics is they are not representing women as much as they are the men whose wife, sister, mother or daughter they are, and that’s no help.

Biraj Swain, Co-Director, Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAAP) who was on this panel was distressed that the care economy is completely ignored in all GDP (or National Income if you’re old fashioned) figures and data. Other than rattle off data at breakneck speed, she pointed out how little has been achieved on negotiating tables at events like SAARC and how little transparency there is when representatives of governments negotiate on behalf of their countries at such international forums.  She disagreed with some in the audience that civil society should be at the table at such events (saying elected individuals are the most legitimate representatives of the people), however stating that no one including other arms of the same government seem to know what position they will take at such negotiations – trade, environment, gender or corruption. There has to be a more transparent way for this process to take on board inputs of non-government bodies and civil society.

I was asked for my inputs here and didn’t have any, other than the observation (and surprise) that the care economy problem is no closer to being resolved than it was over two decades ago when I was studying Economics and National Income Accounting (NIA) was a paper we had. The first chapter was about how there is no way to quantify the care-givers (home makers and others in the care economy), and 22 years later there still isn’t.  Maybe some “best and brightest” economists should be given the task of coming up with a formula no matter how flawed. After all, we make do with flawed methodologies and formulae on several other things (like TRPs).

Seema Gaikwad, the Asia Pacific Advocacy Adviser for Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO) who put this session and panel together raised the lack of any examination of gender outcomes of development goals set up during the 2005 SAARC. She stressed how most have not even considered how any policy prescription or intervention plays out from a gender point of view. When she made the point that at forums like the one we were at there is much attention to “women’s rights and women’s empowerment” but little or no attention to the third gender I immediately thought about Nepal’s disembarkation form that we filled while entering the mountain nation. Check it out below. Do we have an “other” box for gender?

The audience in this session was extremely engaged and there were questions and inputs from attendees from Nepal, Pakistan, United Kingdom and Bangladesh – but the presence of only Indians on the panel is something I did rather impolitely bring up and question. I’d have really liked to hear first-hand about gender discrimination, glass ceilings and social barriers in Afghanistan, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Nepal or Pakistan.  I was told there was a dearth of panelists and too many sessions.

I didn’t meet a single person from Afghanistan and Maldives in any of the sessions I went to.

My Input:

The first thing that struck me is how much information and data is imparted all too quickly at such forums. Way more than what audiences can absorb. This doesn’t help any cause. If you tell an audience everything, they remember nothing. Creating the perfect communication material in layers is something the corporate sector has mastered and the not-for-profit sector needs to do as well.

And there is the aggression. If you’re going to slap someone in the face to get their attention, they’re not listening to you, they’re preparing for battle. That seems to be the default relationship between governments and those working for the most marginalised and exploited. The rage and anger is understandable, but not effective for the purpose that a PSAARC exists for.  If battle or confrontation is the desired outcome, then it’s a great strategy. But if sitting at the same table and talking is the motive, it’s not. I think People’s SAARC is about the latter.

A wise friend told me once – never lose the fire of anger within you, but don’t become an angry person. No one wants to deal with you then. This is one space that many civil society groups have not been able to negotiate very well. When they do, it will be better for us all.