Top Stories

NDPP more interested in ‘gossip type of talk’: Shürhozelie

Shurhozelie

Dimapur, July 16: NPF president Dr Shürhozelie Liezietsu has accused the ruling NDPP of being more interested in “gossip type of talk” instead of talking about their Government’s achievements and programmes.
“It appears sometime they forget that they are running the government. A Government is expected to talk about its achievements and its programs. In spite of doing that they take more interest in gossip type of talk,” he said in a rejoinder to a NDPP statement.
To prove his point, Shürhozelie cited NDPP’s statement on NPF organizing a ‘beef festival’. “What is wrong if we organize such festival? Even if they take it as a weapon to win the favour of non-beef eating people to go against us, we are not worried because beef eating is part of our food culture,” he said.
On NDPP statement about the crisis of ULB election in Nagaland, in which lives were lost and office buildings were burnt down, he said it was indeed very sad. “But the next question is “Who is responsible for all these incidents?” Let the public guess and bring out the answer by themselves,” he said.
On the June 16 Governor’s letter to the Chief Minister, he said out of many points mentioned in the letter, collapse of law and order in the State was a serious one. He said as per norm of democracy, when law and order fails in a State, those who are holding the rein of that Government should own responsibility, they cannot shift the responsibility to others. And when they own the responsibility, they should step down on ‘moral ground,’ he said.
“The question of morality is involved here. Morality is important for those who understand human virtues. If any one does not understand it, let the matter end there and allow the people to evaluate their moral degree,” he added.
On NDPP claim that law and order situation has tremendously improved as compared to pre-ceasefire in the 60’s and 90’s, Shürhozelie gently reminded that the Governor was not talking about the situation of 20 years back, but was talking about the situation of today and not of 20, 30 years back. (Full Text) (Page News Service)

error: