Don't get confined

Sir. The intellectuals and women organisations of Bangladesh only see the events of 1971 and 1975. They do not say anything beyond 1971 and 1975. To them murders and crimes mean the events of 1971 and 1975. Now murders and heinous crimes are being committed on women and children (some of them worse than 1971) and women are publicly being humiliated both inside and outside the Jatiaya Sangsad. Our so-called intellectuals and women organisations (except for one or two) mysteriously do not utter a single word as they do not have the courage to do so.

I fervently urge the intellectuals and women organisations to wake up and not to confine themselves only to 1971 and 1975. See what is happening nowadays. Please vehemently protest against all sorts of crimes. Come forward and help to make our country a happy Bangladesh.

Iqbal Ahmed Dhaka-1000

"Stain on

Parliament"

Sir. Thank you very much lor the thought-provoking editorial under the above caption published bn June 30. 1999. The DS appeared to be very much anguished but a bit surprised by the unmannerly and vulgar outbursts of the Prime Minister. We, the unfortunate onlookers ol the political happenings (and attended bickerings!) in Bangladesh especially since the last, three years or so are all with the DS when.it has rightly pointed but that 'by doing that she (Sk. Hasina) has lowered not only the sanctity of the highest forum of elected representatives but also the prestige of her office.'

In fact, a culttire of vulgarity and violence has recently been germinated on the sacred soil of Bangladesh by the very people pledged-bound to eradicate

thesc 111m from the society. As far as I ran remember, the DS (and a few others, too) have time and again implored the Prime Minister to be careful about her behaviour and titterings.

1 think, the members of the parliament need a soul-search.

An Agonized Citizen' Dhaka

'Genetically engineered seeds'

Sir, The letter published in the DS on the 24th June entitled, 'Genetically engineered seeds' is confusing. The point that the author is trying to make is not at all clear. On the one hand he talks about genetically engineered seeds killing butterfly populations, and on the other, about the World Trade Organisation; and lastly about scientists moving away from the supreme creator.

I would like to put the issue of genetically engineered seeds on the proper perspective, since our subject deals with the matter. The genetically engineered crop in question is transgenic maize which produces an insecticidal protein taken from bacteria that has been reported to cause death of butterflies. This is not of butterflies in general but one particular species only. The reason for producing and growing insecticidal corn plants is so that these would not succumb to the insect called corn borer which can destroy the whole maize crop population. Before the advent of genetic engineering technology, farmers used to spray their crops with the Bt protein to control these corn borers. If any particular butterfly species is also killed by the Bt protein, it would also die and would have nothing to do with genetic engineering. What happens is that whereas any spray of toxic protein is washed away by rain in the case of ordinary plants, transgenic plants have been designed to produce the toxic protein all the time — leading to noticeable reduction in the butterfly population in question.

AU scientists now have to do is design plants to cause expression of the toxin protein only upon wounding or some other stimuli. The research advancements are at such a stage that the latter can easily be done. This was not the case when the transgenic plants above were produced at first.

Therefore when there are problems with a certain product, these have to be analysed and solutions found out. It would be extremely foolish on our part to label genetic engineering as evil and have nothing to do with it. Actually pesticide use is much more dangerous. because as we have found out to our immense misfortune that leaching of pesticide into the environment has caused a lot of damage to our fish population and other organisms. But farmers find it difficult not to use pesticide in order to protect our rice crop which is essential for our survival. Awareness has increased however and efforts are now being made at integrated pest management.

As for moving away from the creator, genetic engineering is no such thing. Man is simply using his intelligence to try and add or subtract a few genes into one organism for the benefit of mankind. These genes are already present due to the benefaction of our supreme creator. Crop genetic engineering can be easily compared with breeding of better crops, with the difference that the former has overcome barriers of cross-species compatibility and is more precise. If the human population had not increased so much, the present agricultural scenario of vast tracts of land planted with one or two types of high yielding varieties of crops would not have existed. The latter situation has resulted in encouragement of pest growth to uncontrollable levels leading to pesticide application. Pesticide use saved our crops but caused damage to the environment. Controlled genetic engineering, particularly in the case of crops is an environment-friendly technology, one in which the

fjovernment needs to encourage urther research, investment and growth to solve major problems afflicting our crop populations. Only then we would be able to stand on solid ground and be able to understand, protect. counteract and even use to advantage, any decisions of WTO or commercial giants like Monsanto, which could affect us adversely.

Zeba I. SeraJ (Ph.D.) Professor

Dept, of Biochemistry, DU.

Income-tax on car

Sir, Income-tax is a tax on a person in relation to his income. The possession of a car does not necessarily create any income, rather it presupposes expenditure on the car, as it is not an income generating instrument when it is used for personal purpose or for family purpose. Now-a-days. possession and maintenance of a car is not a luxury but a necessity, and its maintenance cost is lower than the cost of conveyance by rickshaw, scooter etc., if it is maintained and driven by the owner or by his family members. Many middleclass — even lower middle-class — people have purchased cars by taking loans from banks as it has become a burden to bear the increasing cost of conveyance by rickshaws etc.

Does the Finance Minister think that persons having cars are all rich people? If they earn any income exceeding the exemption limit they will have to pay income tax on their income. but why income tax on car? It is a clear deviation from the basic principles of taxation. If the government wants to expand tax-base to increase internal resources, there are fields which the government as well as the people know and that should be in a logical, legal and proper way.

M Nurunnabi Kajla. Rajshahi