Our story: Victims of circumstance
What happened is very unfortunate and with serious consequences (‘Tamweel Tower residents to get hotel rooms,’ Gulf News, November 21). Some have been hurt more than others, but all residents have been affected. We were all spared the loss of life by the grace of God, but many people suffered material losses on top of the emotional distress and displacement without warning. This is a real emergency, but one with fairly simple solutions. In my opinion, the matter of accommodating the displaced families should not be one of reimbursement of costs incurred out of pocket, but one of immediate compensation paid in advance, to help the families with extraordinary expenses on top of their emotional, financial and materialistic losses. I believe that just a text message saying do this or that and you’ll be reimbursed, is not a way to deal with the victims... lest anyone believe otherwise. We are victims of the circumstances. Time will tell what the real cause of the fire was, I hope then the responsible party will pay. I cannot understand why those who suffered the fire should continue to suffer even after it has been put out. Why should they pay the price, as if they were responsible? We have enough to deal with trying to relocate our families and going back to the scene to recover our belongings, or simply collect some bare necessities. It may sound easy, but we also have our work and other responsibilities to take care of. It is not just a matter of legal rights, but one of humanitarian and practical significance. Days have passed since the fire was put out. By now all the concerned parties should have set up site offices to support the residents and answer their questions. Emergency funds should have been handed out. This is the least that could have been done. However, it’s not the case. Lesson needs to be learnt from the women and children of the neighbouring buildings who have set up food and beverage stations on site since Monday. It is a wonderful neighbourly gesture to relieve some pain. I’d also like to thank Dubai Multi Commodities Centre Authority (DMCC) for their initiative in putting us up for the first few nights and the neighbours who donated food and supplies to complete strangers. It was so refreshing to have a toothbrush and toothpaste delivered to our door the day after the fire and other daily necessities.
From Mr B P Fakhry
No Salik tag for visitors
I think people who visit a country have knowledge of traffic rules and regulations (‘RTA moves to pre-empt traffic fines by visitors,’ Gulf News, November 19). In my opinion, if there is any unpaid Salik or any other fine, it should be recovered at the border before the vehicle leaves the country. In order to achieve that, our system should be efficient enough to have swift update of fines and penalties. In the case of Salik gates, I don’t think that there should be any tag or fines, as they are only visitors. The Salik fee can be collected on the vehicle before it exits the country.
From Mr Umaiz Memon
Visitors Salik tag
How is this move different from the current process of obtaining a Salik tag? The current Salik tag is also initially prepaid with Dh50 credit. The challenge lies in persuading the visitors to buy this Salik tag. I think that making it mandatory for all visitors to display the tag would fix this issue. However, the visitors to other emirates who will not be passing the Salik gates might be annoyed.
From Mr Suhail Falak
Manual toll lane
The Roads and Transport Authority (RTA) should keep a separate lane for those who wish to use the toll road without a Salik tag. In this particular lane, the RTA can collect toll fee manually.
From Mr Mohammad Moin Al Deen
Standard weekly fee
I live in Abu Dhabi and I find the entire Salik system way too complicated. If it is difficult for me, I don’t think the visitors will be able to understand it. However, if the system were a little easier, I think visitors would be willing to use it. A flat rate visitor fee of say Dh100 per week to cover both Salik and parking fee would probably work wonders.
From A Reader
I think this is ridiculous (‘Ministerial decision enough to alleviate Indian expats’ gold woes,’ Gulf News, November 18)! Our Indian laws date back to times when things were different. Decades have passed but our government is not making any effort to update the laws, relevant to present times. More gold in the country means better reserves and better saving instruments for Indians, who already possess the highest gold reserves. This is not rocket science. People usually buy gold in foreign countries and instead of carrying it, they wear it while travelling. Why are people being forced to find ways around laws? Why can’t our laws be practical?
From Mr Deepak Sachdeva
I am surprised over this decision of the Indian government. This is not a good decision. It will discourage citizens to buy gold, as they will not be able to take it back to their country. Gold is a necessity and a way of investment for Indian families. Why are they making laws to bother their own citizens? Hope the government reverts its decision as soon as possible.
From Mr Jitendra
Reconsider the decision
Indian families usually bring their jewellery with them when they come to the UAE. How and why should they pay taxes on their old gold? The decision needs to be reconsidered very seriously.
From Mr Rizvi
Editor’s note: Do you have an opinion about a news report we published? Share your views on it at firstname.lastname@example.org or post a comment on our Facebook page. You can also tweet to @GNReaders