What men want

Sir — The phrase, “woman crime reporter”, in the report, “Scribe held in scribe murder” (Nov 26), is disturbing. The word, “woman”, seems redundant in introducing Jigna Vora, the deputy bureau chief of The Asian Age, who has been held in connection with the murder of Jyotirmoy Dey. Again, the detail that a sobbing Vora was “dressed in a red kurta” in the courtroom is meaningless. It is alarming how women, whenever they make it to the news, are still described in physical terms. A phrase like ‘man crime reporter’ is unthinkable, while the dress of the accused when he ‘sobbed’ would have hardly mattered had he been a man.

Yours faithfully,
Ritwika Mitra, Chennai

Quite a joke

Sir — Giving ministers a daily allowance for merely attending office, in addition to their salaries and perks, is a ludicrous idea (“Day cash for ministers”, Nov 30). This turns the whole issue of salaries and allowances on its head. What is the salary for if a minister is to get a daily allowance for attending office? Perhaps the state government should look up the dictionary to know the meaning of words. ‘Salary’ is defined as the money that employees receive for doing their job — in this case, it is the money a minister gets for attending office and working. An allowance is something extra, paid for a stated purpose. As people who work for the government know well, ‘dearness allowance’ is meant for inflationary correction; ‘daily allowance’ is usually to cover expenses incurred during tours; ‘house rent allowance’ is meant to compensate rental charges of houses, and so on. No allowance is given for just attending office and working, for which a person is paid what is called a salary.

Then there is the baffling excuse that this cabinet decision is “aimed at cushioning the loss of rewarding careers”. Each of the ministers who stood for elections and won had his/her own political ambitions and agendas. They could hardly have joined politics out of altruism. And if indeed they were driven by altruism (let us not laugh, please), then why are they so much in favour of an allowance of Rs 31,000 per month for just going to office — in official cars, no doubt — in addition to their salaries and perks? The present dispensation, so obsessed with name games, Tagore and daily allowances for ministers, should finally stop whining that the previous lot had emptied the coffers. There seems to be plenty of money at its disposal.

Yours faithfully,
Amit Banerjee, Calcutta

Broken history

Sir — The periodic border clashes between Arunachal Pradesh and Assam are a conflict constructed by Delhi. In these times of widespread travelling and inter-mixing, is it possible for the people of particular tribes to remain confined to one hill or valley? The government of India should not have broken the Northeast into so many states in the first place. The best arrangement for Arunachal Pradesh and Assam would have been the formation of districts under the supervision of respective MLAs. The Nyishis (of Arunachal Pradesh) and the Mishings (of Assam) are traditional land rivals. The formation of the two states has increased the animosity between the two clashing tribes. In spite of conflicts between the tribes, there have also been exchanges and movements between them from time immemorial until the two-state theory created an India-Pakistan-like situation.

Yours faithfully,
Sanjib Taye, Pasighat, Arunachal Pradesh