Education Minister Vidya Bhattarai has resigned while the teachers who have come out of the classrooms to fulfill their demands are on the streets in the capital. Although the resignation of the education minister seemed sudden, the background had been building for months. Especially when the Prime Minister was not sensitive to issues from schools to universities, there was a situation where the minister had to be pilfered. The prime minister's role as the chancellor is decisive in the political leadership of the university.
Likewise, the creation of laws to address the concerns of school education is also possible only through the coordination of the government and parliament. However, it is clear that there was constant moral, social and mental pressure on the Education Minister, even when the educational institution was in disarray and the Prime Minister ignored it. In a country like ours with a Prime Ministerial system, the Minister who does not get support from the Prime Minister has only one option - resignation. Bhattarai has followed the same natural path. If the Minister of Education was the obstacle in addressing the demands of the teachers and the issues in the education sector, his resignation would have paved the way. But the resignation of the minister trying to solve the problem has made the way forward more confusing.
Teachers' representatives from all over the country have been protesting in Kathmandu, demanding service facilities and professional rights, for three weeks now. Earlier, during the protests in 2075, 2078 and 2080, the then Prime Ministers KP Sharma Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba and Pushpa Kamal Dahal, respectively, made an agreement and returned the teachers to the district. The teachers are agitating with the demand that the school education act should be introduced based on the consensus of the time. Minister Bhattarai also promised to pass the school education bill pending in the parliament in the winter session. But the bill was not passed, so the teachers' movement began. Not only that, it is not guaranteed that the bill will be passed even in the next session. The Prime Minister and Speaker have not been able to convince the teachers. So the core problem is getting tighter.
Minister Bhattarai could not get success in all his positive efforts. However, his views on most major educational issues were clear. Regarding education, his stance was clear on the implementation of compulsory and free education and not to deviate from the spirit of the constitution. For this, she proposed a model including creating a fund in the municipality. Similarly, she was in favor of letting the outgoing vice chancellor Kesharjung Baral, who is gaining goodwill by starting reforms in Tribhuvan University, work.
He suggested that Baral, who was forced to resign due to the prime minister's non-cooperation, should be returned to the university after talking to him. However, the Prime Minister accepted the resignation without discussion. Although the committee formed to investigate the land of the University submitted the report to Prime Minister Oli, she was dissatisfied that it was not made public. The ongoing teachers' movement came decisively.
Even when the teachers were not participating in the AEEEE copy test and class 12 examination, a decisive initiative was needed from the government and parliament to bring them back to their field of work. However, only two weeks after the start of the agitation, the Prime Minister called the teachers to his residence, but the basic duty of calling the Education Minister in that 'important' meeting, listening to his proposal and supporting the issue was not fulfilled by the Prime Minister. A special person who can see anyway. But there is no doubt that this neglect of the departmental minister in the main issue is not personal, but insensitivity to the overall education system.
The then Prime Minister Oli did not publicize the report submitted by the High Level Education Commission headed by the then Minister of Education Girirajmani Pokharel on 1 January 2075 even after he was in office for one and a half years. While it was said that the School Education Act would be made based on it. After 6 years, the Dahal-led government released the report, but by that time the bill had already been registered in the parliament. The government led by Deuba and Dahal made an agreement with the teachers, but did not prioritize the bill. The bill was not prioritized for 9 months when Oli came to the government.
That's why school education activities are at a standstill all over the country. As long as the leadership of the main political parties, especially the prime minister and former prime minister, remain insensitive to the issue of education reform, this issue will remain eternal in many ways. The three top leaders of the three parties have an additional responsibility towards this issue as they have struck a deal with the teachers when they were Prime Ministers in turn.
Again, the practice is to end the impasse whenever the top leaders agree. But the issue of teacher protest has not been discussed between the leaders in power or in the opposition. While there is a situation where the major political parties must agree to pass the law by both houses of the Parliament. In this regard, the slower the initiative from the government, allies and opposition, the weaker the reputation of community schools scattered in the villages will be.
