Some of those who voted YES had this to say:
• Yes. Since it portrays participation of public with the government. Also public monitoring and evaluating of government projects will help in reducing the complaints of public against the government.
• Absolutely, yes! Public must monitor and evaluate government projects because the government is not trust worthy at all.
• Yes, since the government have a high record of failures, it needs to be monitored and evaluated and corrected or else it will become a rouge government.
• Yes. Because i don't trust the government. Development moves here at very slow pace due to high level corruption from the top to the bottom. So the public should be made aware of the fund and project that comes for development of the state and not as their pocket money or incur their lose during election.
• Yes. The allotted grants for the project & the quality of the project work must match.
• Yes. Because this will ensure better works and responsibilities.
• Obvious yes! for transparency and accountability.
• Yes. There is absolutely no other option but to do so. If it is left to govt alone, it is like letting the fox guard the chicken. But at the same time the public should play its due role for clean elections. Otherwise, the same public which has looted the candidate during elections has no right to voice against or demand govt projects, let alone monitor the same.
Some of those who voted NO had this to say:
• No. The government has sufficient mechanisms to check work executions in hierarchical pattern. We seem to have forgotten this and made government officers as untrustworthy which in my view should not be the case. There are also corresponding punishments if an officer does not perform his or her duty. Now, in many NGO's there are only a few vocal persons who dominates (How many organisations do we have?) The government in its hurry to empower the people, so to put it in a palatable way, have made a mess by making corruption reach the grass roots while circumventing the official responsibilities. The controversies of VDB's are cases in point. Therefore, the public can be the watch dogs but should not be made to sit on the head of our responsible officers. Of course non performing government servants has to be punished also. And by the way a saying goes 'when in doubt; form a committee'!! Check how many committees we have. Most Nagas are linked o government service one way or the other so we all are responsible one way or the other. Follow the rules and progress let us not fool ourselves thinking using margins as " monitoring" will give us short cuts.
• No. Nagaland is like a banana republic where organizations are doing as they wish. Instead I feel there should be independent bodies to do such evaluations.
• No. Let the bureaucrats run amok over the apathetic citizens. Such extremes might help waking up the citizens.
Some of those who voted OTHERS had this to say:
• Nagas know well the root of wrong(corruption, lack of transparency and accountability) but so far no tangible solution has arrived to safe from it. ACUAT and many watchdog NGOs have had unearth misappropriation of government resources however the sad reality is that, but no proper treatment or healing of Naga society.
