It is not the first time, though, that this gentleman has failed to see beyond his own nose. Not too long ago he ridiculed the RMG sector in Bangladesh, the most consistent and highest foreign exchange earner (besides overseas remittance) during the last five years, by saying something to the effect of "Tailors cannot bring development for the country!".

I think the statement of Saifur should be brought to the notice of the Nobel Prize committee. It would be interesting to find out how the committee would react to such allegations as being influenced by the Clintons. But again, the Nobel Committee will have far more constructive things to do than taking a character like him too seriously.

I was a great fan of finance minister M. Saifur Rahman in BNP's first term (1991-96). In that naïve government he was an exception. Despite some slippage of his tongue he was doing well. Since 2001 something has changed with him. He is not only under-performing compared to his predecessor (SAMS Kibria), he is talking crazy too. His performance is evident, in Kibria's tenure our GDP growth was neck-to-neck with our neighbours', in Saifur's tenure our GDP growth has fallen at least 2-3% points below that.

First, he was advising economists to see the construction sites to find real development in the country. Some termed it 'Development by Construction Site (DCS)' model. Now he is taking on our pride professor Yunus. What a goat or a thousand taka can do is beyond the comprehension of a rich man like him, he can only see millions and billions.

Well, the queen also could not understand why people facing shortage of bread were not eating cake instead. There is a time when someone should just retire.

Zakaria Khondker, San Francisco, California, USA

The recent comments by Saifur Rahman are a disgrace to the nation. Initially, he was quoted stating that "True development of the country will be achieved through establishing large-scale industries and modernising agriculture, not by running micro credit programmes." If this was so apparent then what has his government done about it - other than ensuring lucrative contracts for its cronies with no positive outcome for the country.

Then he states that "The present government has distributed more micro credit loans than the Grameen Bank but none was able to relieve themselves of poverty." If micro credit has not worked then why did this government disburse such loans? He needs to decide as to whether the government needs to be praised for its efforts or denounced for its incompetence.

Thirdly, the comments about the links to the Clintons are totally misplaced. Professor Yunus and Grameen Bank were selected for the Nobel Prize from a field of over 150 candidates, and the decision has been widely hailed by the international community by an unprecedented consensus. What the minister should focus on is the shame that the candidature of Professor Yunus and Grameen did not have the "high profile" support of either the immediate past prime minister or the opposition leader.

Nafis Ahmed, Jakarta, Indonesia

Throughout the world, let us face it even if we harbour any animosity toward him, Dr Yunus with his Grameen Bank has spread the arms of righteous pride for all Bangladeshis.

The former finance minister's comment as published on the 20th in the DS on the fame the great son has brought for his motherland, indirectly yet apparently mocking at and questioning the validity of the Nobel Prize , is shocking jealousy at best, pure and simple sadism at worst.

First, even years before the Nobel Prize declaration, the robust ideas of Dr. Yunus had been not only recognized by educated public all over the world but also taken up in nonpartisan intellectual tracts as a wonderful paradigm of poverty alleviation (e.

g. "microeconomics", an excellent mathematical anthology of economic theories, by Varian of Michigan University).

Secondly, the minister became overwhelmingly prejudiced towards bankers. Once, in the name of the World Bank and the IMF, much too hastily and unjustly, by a peremptory fiat shrouded in mystery, he sent to forced retirement about 50 percent of the employees of a development bank in the name of privatization. Then the privatization was shelved. New appointments were made on the heels of the reversal. To those who lost their jobs over nothing for his foul meddling in a boondoggling, his action did appear sadistic.

Third, we know the entrepreneurs in the garment industry have made supernormal profits. But then is it not a market economy where information asymmetry does exist and entrepreneurs must take decisions with risks while investing time, energy, effort, funds and business acumen in an environment of uncertainty? No mean job to bring foreign currency and create sizeable employment generation for thousands of needy people. The minister, however, was too unkind to make comments on the BTV about those entrepreneurs: "They are just tailors!"

Safdar Ali, Kusumbagh, Moulvibazar