x

Abu Dhabi, UAEWednesday 26 September 2018

India did not put people first in demonetisation of 2016

Our readers have their say on Capital Radio, recruitment and Narendra Modi

A demonstrator holds a replica of an abolished 1,000 rupee note during a protest to mark a year since demonetisation was implemented by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in Kolkata, India. Rupak De Chowdhuri / Reuters
A demonstrator holds a replica of an abolished 1,000 rupee note during a protest to mark a year since demonetisation was implemented by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in Kolkata, India. Rupak De Chowdhuri / Reuters

I write in reference to your article India’s central bank says almost all banned notes returned (August 31): the Reserve Bank of India has officially stated that 99.3 per cent of the demonetised currency notes were returned to banks and exchanged for new notes.

Demonetisation was initiated by the government in November 2016 on the grounds that the amount of unaccounted wealth (about 25 to 30 per cent of the currency in circulation) would be exposed. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had announced that the loot of 70 years by many people would be exposed as a result of demonetisation. So, the basic objective of demonetisation seems to have failed since almost all the currency was returned officially to the banks.

It would appear that very little black money was rooted out as a result of demonetisation. However, the Indian people went through immense hardship for almost four months, standing in serpentine queues waiting for their own money. Farmers and small scale businessmen were the worst sufferers as their businesses came to a grinding halt. About 105 people died waiting in queues at the banks for their money.

Demonetisation was not necessary, the policy was not clearly thought through and the woes of citizens were not addressed. Governments should be more circumspect before introducing such policies, which inconvenience the citizens and could even cripple the economy by cutting GDP growth.

Rajendra Aneja, Dubai

Cronyism in recruitment for jobs is no substitute for merit

With reference to your report UAE companies losing out on good talent when posting discriminatory job ads, recruiters say (August 21), it is a very discouraging trend that needs to be addressed morally and legally. Apparently the age of the so-called multinational companies is dead. Consideration of religion, ethnicity, politics, racism and gender have overtaken justice and reason. Equal opportunity is passe, a mere academic slogan. Self-serving clanship ensures self-preservation at the cost of compromised corporate profits for lack of merit and transparency in recruitment.

During my managerial stint in the Gulf region, I have witnessed this regressive phenomenon in hiring. Not only are employers responsible, recruitment agencies are equally adept at this abysmal game. While there are companies who want their own recruit and the recruiter dutifully creates a paper trail, there are recruiting agencies as well who push through their own candidate. Better sense should prevail soonest.

Mohammad Hamza, Dubai

Capital Radio: reliving the sound of the good old days

I write in reference to your article When Capital Radio was the pop soundtrack to life in Abu Dhabi in the 80s (August 31): what a wonderful lookback at life in the good old days. The pictures were an absolute gem. I’ve never seen Tina Turner look so relaxed.

Name withheld by request

RELATED ARTICLES
Recommended