I agree with Ashutosh Tiwari's assessment in Strictly Business ('Losing the labour lottery', #221). First of all, it was mysterious why the rookie minister would make the employment lottery an agenda for his administration. As a labour minister of a country with a shameful national employment rate, he should not even make this an issue. Imposing restrictions and conditions only deteriorates the already ailing labor market. As Tiwari says: let the market decide what is best for the consumers (employers in this case) and what is best for the people seeking jobs. He should make the safety of workers his primary agenda. His administration should work with suppliers, both domestic and foreign, and ensure that contracts are in place to safeguard the lives of our poor Nepali workers working in foreign countries.

D Mahat, Baltimore,
USA

. Ashutosh Tiwari missed out an important aspect of Nepal's labour market and Raghuji Pant's disastrous policy of a lottery. Instead of patting ourselves on the back about how much we earn from our overseas workers, we (and this includes the minister) should take the lead in adding value to our workers so they can earn more. This can happen with proper training, orientation to upgrade their skills. It has been proven that a two-month language and skill-based training can improve an average worker's salary by up to $150 a month.

Ashim Shrestha,
Bangkok

. It is easy to blame minister Raghu Pant for trying to implement the labour lottery scheme as Ashutosh Tiwari has. Seen through the blinkers of the free market, it may seem like he tampered with the laws of nature. But Nepal's trouble is precisely that an unbridled free market and a corrupt regulator lead to price-gouging and exploitation of thousands of poor Nepalis by the unscrupulous manpower middlemen. It was this anger that spontaneously poured out into the streets on 1 September. Pant was just trying to set things right and bring a semblance of justice. Why blame him? Blame the crooks in the manpower agncies and the labour mafia which put a spanner in the works. the only criticism of Pant that I have is that he didn't resign on moral grounds when he couldn't see his plan through.

Hem Gurung,
Pokhara