Praise be for the ones who toil

Sir — Debashis Bhattacharyya’s “Notes from Bihar village” (Feb 24) reveals just how much the entire country depends on Bihari workers. They leave their native land and migrate to every possible corner of India. But I do not see why the Bihari migrant labourers should make the local workforce feel threatened. In Assam, for instance, Bihari labourers are more in demand for jobs which require physical exertion, while local workers are well ensconced in their skilled professions. We should all express our gratitude towards the workers from Bihar for making our lives comfortable in lieu of meagre wages.

Yours faithfully,
Mithi Dey, Silchar

State of health

Sir — It was only a month or so ago that Anbumani Ramadoss, the Union health minister, waxed eloquent about India’s roadmap for pandemic preparedness and human security at the International Ministerial Conference on Avian and Pandemic Influenza in New Delhi. The bird flu that attacked West Bengal soon afterwards must have followed a different route from the one he boasted about. Ramadoss’s claim that India’s containment measures were better than global standards and that the roadmap prepared by his ministry was going to be a ‘role model’ for the 105 countries which attended the conference, proved to be little more than tall talk. Why must we suffer pompous, self-important ministers who cannot deliver the goods?

Yours faithfully,
Basudeb Bhattacharya, Calcutta

Sir — Anbumani Ramadoss has rightly taken up the issue of surrogate advertisements for harmful products like liquor and cigarettes with the minister for information and broadcasting, Priya Ranjan Das Munshi. Interestingly, the total cost for the surrogate advertisements is, in many cases, greater than the total sale-value of the products. This is a clear hint that these ads are indirectly promoting other products. In fact, many of the advertised items are distributed free with the ‘hidden’ liquor or tobacco products. The I&B ministry should take immediate steps to stop surrogate advertisements.

Yours faithfully,
Madhu Agrawal, Dariba, Delhi

Low, yet high

Sir — The report on the IIMC increasing postgraduate diploma course fees from the present Rs 2 lakh to Rs 3 lakh (“IIMC diploma course dearer”, Feb 27), brings back memories of the good old days when the annual fee for the course was not as dear. The first batch of students of this course was admitted in 1964 and the annual fee was a princely Rs 500 per annum — and nothing extra for food. This continued for more than a decade at least. I was at the IIMC from 1962 to 1973, and the fee was still Rs 500. In fact, the present chairman of the board of governors of the institute, Ajit Balakrishnan, was a student during this period. True, the IIMs were subsidized by the State , but I wonder if those who got educated in those days were any worse for it. One can safely say that the students who passed from the institute during the low-fee regime have contributed no less to build the reputation of IIMC than the more recent students.

Now, the students will have to pay for all the infrastructural supports and salaries (the existing ones as well as the anticipated pay hikes) of the teachers, of the supporting staff and more. The extent of State support for higher education can be debated ad nauseam, but we find much opposition whenever there is a proposal for even the smallest fee-hike in government-funded colleges and universities from where most of the B-school students come. Let us not forget that IIMC is still a ‘government’ institute. Or is it that education in B-schools is only for the affluent, with scholarships for a few thrown in?

Yours faithfully,
Susanta Ghosh, Calcutta