friday,may31,2019 bills of rights for the vulnerable · tra cking bill. in each of the cas ......
Post on 26-Oct-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
DELHI THE HINDU
FRIDAY, MAY 31, 201910EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
CMYK
A ND-NDE
EDITORIAL
Krishnan Srinivasan
Over the past few months ithas been a season of elections. The word populism
has been much used, though never clearly defi��ned, and it becomesnecessary to fall back on the dictionary meaning — ‘various, oftenantiestablishment or antiintellectual political movements that off��erunorthodox political policies andappeal to the common person’.The election result in India hasbeen greeted with predictable hostility in the British and U.S. media,with commentators, often of Indian origin, scorning the electorate’s decision and accusing PrimeMinister Narendra Modi of populism, majoritarianism and failureto deliver on promises. These analysts clearly want India transformed into a mirror image of thesubsiding Western liberal democratic model.
The European transformation It is in Europe that the populist nationalist trend is most pronounced. In Ukraine, VolodymyrZelensky, whose political experience is confi��ned to portraying apresident on TV, beat the incumbent by winning over 70% of thevote to become the head of state.
His new political party, Servant ofthe People, will now contest elections to Parliament. President Emmanuel Macron of France broughta new party called Republic on theMarch into offi��ce with him. NigelFarage, an ardent champion forBritain leaving the European Union, launched a new party calledBrexit Party to contest EuropeanParliament elections, and inFrance Marine le Pen rebrandedher party ‘National Rally’. Thechanges of name are to distancethe new entities from the wellestablished parties of the centreright and centreleft.
In Spain this April, despite bitter memories of dictator FranciscoFranco, the farright Vox partywon nearly 10% of the vote. In thePhilippines, President Rodrigo Duterte, condemned in the West forauthoritarianism and abuse of human rights in dealing with drug users and traffi��ckers, has swept themidterm polls, enabling him torestore the death penalty. Newlyelected Brazilian President JairBolsonaro has made commoncause with U.S. President DonaldTrump against immigration, climate change, abortion and guncontrol. Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, presenting himself as the defender of Hungarianand European values, secured athird term last year for his partyFidesz.
The Italian Five Star Movement,founded by comedian Beppe Grillo, is in a government coalitionwith the farright Lega Nord, and
Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini has emerged as a powerfulpersonality in trying to unify rightwing parties across Europe, including Austria, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Estonia and Finland,with some success. The Dutch provincial elections saw the newcomer Forum for Democracy win mostseats.
Mr. Salvini has pledged tochange the European Union (EU)by making the populist allianceone of the largest groupings in theEuropean Parliament. This group,seeing the chaotic process of Britain leaving the EU, prefers insteadto stall any reforms proposed byFrance and Germany, and tochange the EU from within. Itsstated aim is to regain sovereigntyfor their countries, take back thepower to make their own rules andcontrol their borders. With typicalbravura, Mr. Salvini described theEuropean Parliament elections asa “referendum between life anddeath”.
Enthusing votersThese populist parties have internal diff��erences on free trade, fi��scal
responsibility and dealings withRussia and China. It is of little consequence that they hold diff��erentpositions; this is about politicalmarketing, presenting an alternative to current Europe, and obtaining power in the European institutions. The populist surge hassqueezed the traditional politicalparties; only the populists seem tobe able to light the fi��re of enthusiasm among voters. The electionsfor the European Parliament forthe fi��rst time became nationalrather than purely European; allthe top leaders were involved, including the British political bosses, ironically when the country ison the cusp of leaving the EU. Theoverall EU voting turnout of 51%was the highest for two decades.The results announced on May 26showed the traditional centristparties losing ground, nationalistpopulist parties gaining, and theGreens and Liberals also doingwell across Europe. No group appears to be able to dominate theagenda. It will be harder for theEuropean leaders to manage theParliament or the European Commission, and reformers like Mr.Macron will have to lower theirambitions.
The EU is a hybrid confederacywhere political fragmentation andpolarisation have reached seriousproportions. The public are abandoning mainstream political parties because they feel that existingpolitical and economic systemshave failed. After the global fi��nancial crisis of 2008, for which bank
ers were responsible but nonewere punished, the implicit Western social contract that promisedequal opportunity and rising incomes for both elites and massesis discredited. While fi��nancial corporates benefi��tted hugely fromglobalisation, the working classlost jobs in global competition. Inthe U.S., the average income of thebottom half declined, while the average income of the top 1% was 138times higher than the bottom 50%.
Basket of anxietiesThe democratic insurrection seenin recent elections is a sign ofacute concerns about globalisation, corruption, immigration,alienation, dilution of nationalidentity, social injustice and economic inequality. The conclusionis that liberalism and liberal democracy cannot be taken forgranted; Western democracy, thefl��agship model which prolongedits career through widening thefranchise and the empowermentof women, is now heading for along decline. Economic redistribution of wealth is the answer to thedilemma confronting liberal andinclusive societies. Economistsfrom Adam Smith to Thomas Piketty have stressed that an economically equal society is a contented society. Prime MinisterNarendra Modi and his Ministersmust now take heed and bendthemselves urgently to this task.
Krishnan Srinivasan is a former Foreign
Secretary
Season of populist discontentElections worldwide show that liberal democracy cannot be taken for granted
AFP
more letters online:
www.hindu.com/opinion/letters/
Towards the end of the previous government’s tenure, anumber of controversial bills
were introduced in Parliament.Political imperatives ensured thatthey were not, ultimately, enactedinto law: some were stalled in theRajya Sabha after being passed bythe Lower House, while in othercases, the government itself decided not to proceed with them. Withthe dissolution of Parliament,these bills lapsed; however, withthe 2019 general election yieldinga decisive mandate in favour of theruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP),the attention will undoubtedlyturn to whether the new government will attempt to revive someaspects of its erstwhile legislativeprogramme.
The problematic social billsIn the social sphere, the government introduced the TransgenderBill, the Surrogacy Bill, and theTraffi��cking Bill. In each of the cases, the draft legislation was — correctly — introduced with the aim ofaddressing an existing lacuna inthe legal landscape. The recognition of transgender rights by enshrining them in law had longbeen a demand of the community;the legal regulation of surrogacyand the tackling of traffi��cking aswell arose out of the articulatedclaims of grassroots social movements, debated and framed overmany years of engagement andactivism.
However, when it came to thecontent of these bills, consultationwith impacted communities was
eff��ectively eschewed, and the result was a set of drafts that, farfrom protecting rights, activelyharmed them. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the draft bills were metwith a spate of objections andprotests. For example, the Transgender Bill did away with the fundamental and nonnegotiableprinciple — and one recognised bythe Supreme Court in its NALSAjudgment — of the right to selfdetermination of gender identity. Instead, it placed such decisions inthe hands of governmentappointed committees, extending statecontrol over gender identitiesrather than liberating or emancipating them. It also containeddeeply suspect provisions on gender reassignment surgery.
Similarly, the Surrogacy Bill excluded LGBT individuals from itsambit (despite their recognition asequal citizens under the Constitution by the Supreme Court), imposed discriminatory age restrictions upon men and women, andby entirely outlawing “commercial” surrogacy (instead of regulating it with appropriate safeguards)opened up space for undergroundand unreported exploitation ofwomen, eff��ectively creating ablack market.
Lastly, the Traffi��cking Bill criminalised begging without providingany manner of eff��ective alternatives and failed to distinguish between nonconsensual traffi��ckingand consensual sex work. It thusopened the door to criminalisinglivelihoods on the basis of whatwas eff��ectively a set of narrow, moral objections.
Thus, what united these threeproblematic bills were the following aspects. First, each of themdealt with intimate subjects suchas individuals’ decisions of what todo with their body, personal dignity and autonomy, and genderidentity. Second, they concerned
the rights of some of the most vulnerable and marginalised members of our society. Third, theywere drafted without adequatelyconsulting with, or listening to, themembers of the communities whowere impacted. Fourth, instead ofguaranteeing and securing therights of these communities to befree from state interference, theyextended the state’s control anddomination. And last, they weremet by extensive and widespreadprotests from the communitiesthemselves.
The Citizenship Bill and NRCThe government also attempted toenact the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill into law — an attempt itwas forced to abandon when itsown allies protested against it. Advertised as a measure for benefi��ting the vulnerable and the marginalised, the bill would havegranted fasttrack to citizenship topersecuted minorities from neighbouring countries, who were Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, and Christians — but notMuslims. This was, at a very basiclevel, illogical and selfcontradictory, apart from being clearly discriminatory on grounds of religion: the examples of theAhmadiyyas and the Baloch in Pakistan make it clear that, just likeany other identity, there are communities of Muslims in neighbouring countries who face persecution on the basis of their religious
beliefs. Had the bill been enacted,therefore, it would undoubtedlyhave been challenged in the courtsand tied up for a long while in litigation. However, strong movements in the northeastern States —concerned both about the demographic consequences and the antisecular nature of the bill — ultimately forced the government tonot go through with thelegalisation.
At the same time, however, theSupreme Courtdriven NationalRegister of Citizens (NRC) processin Assam became a signifi��cant aspect of the ruling party’s electionrhetoric during the recent campaign, with some senior party fi��gures stating that they would replicate the NRC process for the wholeof India. Apart from the principleof it — there is something particularly repugnant over placing theentire country under a presumption that they are interlopers, unless they prove otherwise — such amove would be a nightmare of administration and implementation,as the example from Assam hasshown. There has been considerable — and continuing — confusionover the methods and form ofidentity that one can use to“prove” one’s citizenship (including “family trees”, which havebeen found to have a disproportionate impact upon vulnerableand minority claimants). The overlapping functions of the NRC process and the Foreigners Tribunalshave added to the confusion, the“objections” process has beenopenly and publicly abused by individuals in order to harass NRCapplicants (what they have called“collateral damage”), familieshave found themselves bizarrelyseparated from each other in theNRC, and there have been reportsof suicides after each round of thedraft.
When this is all happening in
Assam, one can imagine the consequences of an attempt to scale itup to the national level. And as abackdrop to the debate, it is important to remember that there isno credible evidence to demonstrate that there actually is largescale, illegal immigration takingplace in India. Therefore, apartfrom being constitutionally suspect, a massive waste of resources,and a gateway to triggering violence, it is unclear why there evenexists the need for such a step.
What lies aheadIt is trite to say that a general election confers a mandate upon theincoming government to legislatein the manner that it deems bestand in the public interest. Whilethe government is, of course, entitled to frame its own policies,and draft and implement legislation to enact those policies, thereare certain constraints upon howit should go about that task. At theminimum, the voices of those whowill be directly impacted by thepolicy should be listened to andengaged with in good faith, andbasic constitutional principles andvalues ought to be respected.
The last phase of the previousgovernment’s tenure presented anumber of examples where theseconstraints were insuffi��cientlycomplied with, and the resultingbills would therefore have endedup harming those whose rightsthey were meant to protect, apartfrom falling foul of crucial constitutional rights. It is to be hopedthat these lacunae and shortcomings are remedied by the continuing government in power. Apartfrom the courts, however, thiswould need a sustained publicmovement around these issues,which can make its voice heard inthe halls of power.
Gautam Bhatia is a Delhi-based lawyer
Bills of rights for the vulnerable Why the second Modi government should send lapsed legislation back to the drafting stage
Gautam Bhatia
AP
The troubleshooterIt is unfortunate that ArunJaitley won’t be a part ofthis government (“Citingillhealth, Arun Jaitley optsout of ministerial position,”May 30). This will be a greatloss to the BJP as he was theparty’s maintroubleshooter. His tenureas Finance Minister will beremembered for theimplementation of keyreforms like the Goods andServices Tax and theInsolvency and BankruptcyCode. We pray for his quickrecovery and return tooffi��ce.Vidhya B. Ragunath,
Thanajvur
Mr. Jaitley’s defence of
demonetisation and themurky Rafale deal went along way in helping thegovernment save face. It isunfortunate that at a timewhen his services arerequired by the newgovernment to set right itspast blunders in thefi��nancial and economicarenas, he has decided tocall it a day. Tharcius S. Fernando,
Chennai
No redress mechanisms This incident reminded meof the mental harassment Ifaced during my stint as aDNB trainee in a trusthospital in Mumbai whichled to my resignation fromthe post (“2 more held for
abetting suicide of Mumbaidoctor,” May 30). Ihighlighted this fact tomultiple functionaries,including the director ofthe governing body, but noaction was taken againstthe erring senior doctors orthe institute. It is importantto recognise that regionbased, castebased andreligionbased harassmentare everyday occurrencesand there are no redressmechanisms available tostudents who face suchdiscrimination. Rahul D. Arora,
New Delhi
Religious divideThe Lokniti postpoll surveyindicates that the majority
of Hindus support the BJPwhile the minorities don’t(“The verdict is amanifestation of thedeepening religious dividein India,” May 30). Whilethe NDA has reasons tocelebrate its astoundingvictory in the election, it isshocking to see howpolarised India hasbecome. We need to thinkabout how we arrived atthis juncture. One hopesthat political parties willrefrain from furtherdividing the nation in thename of religion for pettypolitical gains.V. Shujaath Ahmed,
Ambur
Many minorities do not
the proportion of Muslimsis high. However, Hindus inthe south have voteddiff��erently. What explainsthe lack of consolidation ofHindu votes in favour of theBJP proportional to theconcentration of minoritiesin Kerala, where Muslimsand Christians togetherconstitute nearly 45% of thepopulation? I think thisexception is the only savinggrace in the election. Thereis very little to dispute theconclusion of the survey. Itbasically means we areseeing the demise ofsecularism.Abdul Assis, P.A.,
Thrissur
take Prime MinisterNarendra Modi’scatchphrase ‘sabkavishwas’ seriously. BJPleaders use it to gloss overthe party’s strident standon linguistic and religiousminorities. If the strayincidents of violenceagainst Muslims on theheels of the party’s victoryare anything to go by,things are not likely to beany diff��erent in the next fi��veyears. Second, the BJP’softrepeated criticism ofvote bank politics doesn’thold water as the party hascarved out a mammothvote bank for itself alongreligious lines. Third, thesurvey also shows thatpolarisation is most where
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Letters emailed to letters@thehindu.co.in must carry the full postal address and the full name or the name with initials.
The pervasive and persistent signatures of modern
human activity on the earth have been so striking
that they are set to be offi��cially recognised and
named as a new geologic epoch. On May 21, the Anthro
pocene Working Group (AWG) overwhelmingly voted to
recognise Anthropocene as an epoch. The vote gives
form to the eff��orts of scientists, notably the Nobel Lau
reate Paul Crutzen and Eugene F. Stoermer, who coined
the term in 2000 to highlight how human activity had
changed many facets of the earth. So overwhelming is
the concept of the Anthropocene that it got main
streamed in scientifi��c and general literature years ago.
The AWG vote is a sobering reminder to humanity that
failure to end destructive activities will irrevocably
change the face of the earth and make it uninhabitable.
Offi��cially, humans will continue to live in the Holocene
epoch for a couple of years more before the Anthropo
cene epoch is fi��nally ratifi��ed by the International Union
of Geological Sciences. The vote by the working group
will contribute to the formalisation of the Anthropo
cene as a stratigraphic entity on a par with other geolog
ic epochs. But unlike the others, it will be the fi��rst time
that the beginning of an epoch would be based on hu
man activity and not the consequences of changes
brought about by nature. For instance, the start of the
Holocene epoch 11,700 years ago marks the end of the
transition from the last glacial phase to a period of
warming and a rise in sea level. Human activity has
been drastically changing the earth, with the greatest
impacts coming from agriculture, largescale deforesta
tion, the industrial revolution and increase in atmos
pheric carbon dioxide, besides the creation of mate
rials such as concrete and plastic. However, the working
group voted to look for unique signatures around the
1950s to defi��ne the start of the Anthropocene.
A decrease in deuterium excess, a proxy for climate
change, owing to the reorganisation of North Atlantic
Oceanatmosphere circulation was a defi��nitive geologic
marker, or golden spike, to signify the base of Holo
cene. Now, radionuclides from atomic bomb tests from
the early 1950s are emerging as a favourite golden spike
candidate to defi��ne the base of the Anthropocene. To
be chosen as a geologic marker, the golden spike must
be present globally across most environments and must
be a part of deposits for a geologically signifi��cant length
of time. Thus, plutonium isotope Pu239 with a halflife
of 24,110 years will remain detectable for more than
1,00,000 years and continue to exist as uranium 235
when Pu239 decays. The next task is to fi��nd a single site
from among the 10 sites chosen across the world for in
clusion in the formal proposal. Here, coral reefs and
Antarctic glacial ice located far from nuclear detonation
test sites might be more suitable as they would not re
fl��ect any local spike but a global distribution pattern.
Changing the earth The move to recognise the Anthropocene
as an epoch is a caution to humanity
Nonbanking fi��nancial companies, already reeling
under a painful liquidity crisis, are up against a
fresh challenge in the form of new regulatory
norms set by the Reserve Bank of India. The central
bank has released draft norms on liquidity risk manage
ment for deposit taking and nondeposit taking NBFCs.
According to these proposed rules, NBFCs would have
to comply with a higher liquidity coverage ratio (LCR),
which is the proportion of assets that an NBFC needs to
hold in the form of highquality liquid assets that can be
quickly and easily converted into cash. The new norms,
which are expected to be implemented by the RBI over
four years starting from April 2020, would likely put sig
nifi��cant pressure on the margins of NBFCs. Under these
norms, NBFCs would have to maintain their LCR at 60%
of net cash outfl��ows initially, and improve it to 100% by
April 2024. If the norms are implemented, NBFCs may
be forced to park a signifi��cant share of their money in
lowrisk liquid assets, such as government bonds,
which yield much lower returns than highrisk illiquid
assets. The strict norms have to be seen in the context
of the present crisis where even prominent NBFCs are
struggling to meet their obligations to various lenders.
While the profi��t outlook and other shortterm fi��nan
cial metrics of NBFCs may be aff��ected by the norms,
there are good reasons to be optimistic about their long
term impact on the health of NBFCs and the wider fi��
nancial sector. NBFCs, which are in the business of bor
rowing short term to lend long term, typically run the
risk of being unable to pay back their borrowers on
time due to a mismatch in the duration of their assets
and liabilities. This is particularly so in instances where
panic sets in among shortterm lenders, as happened
last year when lenders, worried about the safety of
their capital, demanded to be paid back in full. In other
words, NBFCs rely heavily on shortterm lenders rolling
over their loans without fail in order to avoid any kind
of liquidity crisis. The new norms would discourage
NBFCs from borrowing over short term to extend long
term loans without the necessary buff��er capital in
place. This could compel NBFCs to shrink the scope of
their lending from what it is today, but it would save
them from larger crises and signifi��cantly reduce the
need for the government or the RBI to step in as the len
der of last resort. Undeniably, NBFCs have done a tre
mendous job in recent years in widening and deepen
ing access to credit by taking a share from the public
sector banks, which have been severely aff��ected by the
bad loans crisis. However, the latest liquidity norms for
NBFCs are still necessary to ward off�� systemic crises.
Capital buff��ers The RBI’s draft norms for nonbanking
fi��nancial companies are timely
https://t.me/TheHindu_Zone_official
https://t.me/SSC4Exams https://t.me/Banking4Exams https://t.me/UPSC4Exams
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
THE HINDU DELHI
FRIDAY, MAY 31, 2019 11EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
CMYK
A ND-NDE
OPED
Although Japan did not make any pledge as to its share of contribution for the coming year at the Aid India Consortiummeeting in Paris last week, it is understood from qualifi��ed Foreign Offi��ce sources here [Tokyo] today [May 30] that it willagain make available the same amount as in previous years,namely $45 million (Rs. 33.75 crores), all in commodity aid.The sources said Japan’s contribution to Pakistan for the sameperiod would also remain constant at $30 million. However,while there would be no project aid for India, in case of Pakistan, project assistance would continue to be made availablewithin the pledged amount.
FIFTY YEARS AGO MARCH 31, 1969
India to get $45 million aid from Japan
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
FROM ARCHIVES
As considerable abuses existed by teachers taking up privatework, Mr. C.R. Reddy, InspectorGeneral of Education in Mysore, issued a circular [from Bangalore] restricting teachersfrom undertaking private work without the previous sanctionof the InspectorGeneral. Interested criticisms were madeagainst the circular and the matter was brought before the Representative Assembly and the Legislative Council. The Government have now issued a revised circular which will comeinto force from 1st June next. The circular lays down that noteacher employed in a public institution shall take up privatework of any kind, except in the case of a master employed in aGovernment school, with the express permission of the inspecting offi��cer who conducts the inspection of that schooland in the case of a teacher of an aided or Municipal schoolwith the express permission of the Manager of the MunicipalBoard. Offi��cers empowered to grant permission are expectedto exercise the utmost vigilance in seeing that the private workpermitted to be taken up does not cause any interference withthe professional duties of any kind whether relating to teaching in school, preparation at home or correction of exercises.
A HUNDRED YEARS AGO MAY 31, 1919.
Restrictions on Private Work.
In 1938, concluding a report thathe made after lunching with Jawaharlal Nehru, the Viceroy of India, Lord Linlithgow, observed,“Judging the man as I found himtoday I can hardly suppose thathe could ever emerge as an outstanding leader of men, muchless that he has in him to prove
himself a great man of action.” Linlithgow was among thosewho grossly underestimated Nehru.
As Indians paid tributes to Nehru on his 55th death anniversary this week, they remembered him, among otherthings, for establishing India’s space and atomic energy programmes and for setting up the Indian Institutes of Technology and Indian Institutes of Management that make Indiansproud. But what is hardly ever acknowledged or accepted isNehru’s decisiveness as a leader.
After being inducted into the Congress party by MahatmaGandhi, Nehru rose to become its most powerful leader andits sole negotiator of the terms of India’s freedom with theBritish. He ensured India’s emergence as a secular state withuniversal adult franchise and not one that had long beensaddled with an electoral system that allowed communal representation, even if that meant conceding Muhammad AliJinnah’s demand for a separate Muslim homeland.
As Prime Minister, Nehru had a troubled relationshipwith his powerful Home Minister, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel,widely credited for integrating the princely states into theIndian Union. Gandhi had to mediate between them. When,with Patel’s support, Purushottam Das Tandon — who Nehru disliked for his “obscurantism”, “communalism” and“zeal for Hindi” — became President of the Congress, heforced him to resign and proceeded to get himself elected inhis place. Nehru stood up for India’s Muslims at a time whenit was unfashionable to do so and intervened strongly tomake sure that Hindi was not forced on the country’s nonHindi speakers. Some of his actions bordered on the undemocratic but in hindsight they were necessary. He retainedseveral of colonial India’s repressive laws and never hesitated to use them. He had Sheikh Abdullah dismissed as Kashmir’s Prime Minister and imprisoned him for 11 years forconspiring against the state. He had an elected communistgovernment in Kerala dismissed in 1959 and proceeded toquell an insurgency in Nagaland by forcing its leader, Angami Zapu Phizo, to fl��ee the country in 1956.
It is strange then that many, including wellknown historians such as Perry Anderson, view Nehru as a waffl��er in theface of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. But for thedecisive way that he repeatedly intervened to preserve theintegrity, unity and secularism of a fl��edgling country, wewouldn’t have this India to call our own today.
The writer, a former civil servant, taught public policy and contemporary
history at IISc. Bengaluru
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
SINGLE FILE
The maker of secular IndiaThough there is overwhelming evidenceof Nehru being a decisive leader, he ishardly ever acknowledged as one
Uday Balakrishnan
TH
E H
IND
U A
RC
HIV
ES
Emotional contagionPsychology
This refers to a form of social infl��uence wherein a person’semotional state can have a signifi��cant impact on the emotionsof other people as well. Even momentary exposure to negative emotions experienced by others can cause a person’sown mood to deteriorate instantly. Positive emotions can alsosimilarly spread quickly among people. It is believed that suchemotional contagion is often subconscious in nature and iscaused by the triggering of mirror neurons within the brain.There are various theories to explain the phenomenon. Somebelieve that the mimicking of emotions can help people empathise with each other.
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
CONCEPTUAL
Interactive: Know your MP
http://bit.ly/KnowyourMP
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
MORE ON THE WEB 3
string of Assembly elections in 2018, when theywanted Statespecifi��c updates and, worse, trendscomparing past results. Ifound it hard to keep up.
I have noticed over thelast few years that their interest or familiarity isn’tconfi��ned to Indian politics.I’ve got a range of usefulpointers from my Sri Lankan friends on lesserknown bookshops, quietcafes and reasonablypriced handloom outlets indiff��erent Indian cities. Ihave also received YouTube links — for instance,to a Farida Khanum ghazal,a brilliant rendition by a‘super singer’ contestant,and a newly released coverversion of an Ilaiyarajaclassic.
One day I got reallylucky; I was treated tohomecooked pav bhajithat my friend made virtually from scratch, following a recipe from a bigcookery book with glazedpages that lay on his kitch
Months ahead of the general election in India, friendsin Sri Lanka would eagerlyask me: “So, do you thinkNarendra Modi will comeback?” As someone following the polls only throughmedia coverage in India —some shrill and some sane— there was little I could saythat they may not have already known. I did notpredict the number of seatsthe BJP would win or speculate much on how TamilNadu might vote. It was notjust diffi��cult, it was impossible to sit across the PalkStrait and attempt astutereadings.
As avid news trackers,these friends are often disappointed that I have nothing “latest” to add. In fact,often they are the onesalerting me to news breaking in India, or to politicalanalysis that they think off��ers nuance.
This sort of eagerness hitme harder during the
en counter. “I didn’t getcoriander leaves to put ontop,” he said apologetically.
Cricket buff��s bringanother degree of intensityto this India acquaintance.It isn’t just about Virat Kohli’s last innings. They wantto discuss lapses in team selection and BCCI controversies. I know the WorldCup has begun, but there islittle else I can bring to thetable on this subject. I doeven worse with RanveerSingh fashion updates. Often, I wonder if Sri Lankansknow more about Indiathan Indians perhaps knowabout Sri Lanka.
And then there’s another dimension to this thatgets tricky. After a signifi��cant development in SriLankan politics — be it elections or a political crisislike last year’s — some keenanalysts of politics and policy invariably ask, “What isIndia thinking?” Theymean the Indian state andmostly the government ofthe day. “Do you’all sup
port him?” some quiz meon India’s position on a political leader. “Can’t you’allpush?” they ask about NewDelhi possibly pressuringSri Lankan polity on delivering on the promised,but muchdelayed constitutional reform.
In an extension of thisline of thinking, I have evenbeen credited for an Indiangovernmentbacked development project. At a recent background briefi��ngwith a Colombobased diplomat, a civil societymember was arguing passionately that all thatfriendly countries do mustnot be viewed through thegeopolitical lens. He spokeof “India’s good intentions”in Sri Lanka, pointing to itsbig housing scheme in theTamilmajority north andhill country.
Suddenly turning towards me, he said: “Youhave built 50,000 housesin the north, no?” I had tobreak it to him: “No, I haven’t built a single house.”
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
NOTEBOOK
‘What’s your opinion on elections, cricket and Ranveer Singh?’The art of fi��elding questions on a range of subjects as a foreign correspondent
Meera Srinivasan
After a decisive verdict in the LokSabha election, Prime Minister Narendra Modi begins his new termfaced with the diffi��cult task of reviving economic growth and fi��xing India’s job problem. In a conversationmoderated by Anuradha Raman,Rathin Roy and M.R. Madhavandiscuss the challenges ahead for theeconomy and polity. Editedexcerpts:
You have been saying that Indiais going through an economicslowdown. The government, onthe other hand, says everythingis fi��ne.
Rathin Roy: If you look at the stateof the economy, we’ve had verysound macroeconomics over thelast fi��ve years. Our fi��scal defi��citshave been reasonably under control. Infl��ation is low, and the balanceof payments problem and currentaccount defi��cit are also reasonablyunder control.
I don’t tend to get alarmed byshortterm ups and downs. Thetrouble is a more longterm one andit’s a bipartisan problem. It’s a consequence of the way we have grownover the last 2528 years, which isthat we haven’t been an exportledeconomy and I am presuming thatthis will not happen in the near future. But you are not going to makethe Indian economy rich by merelyexporting. You have got to make itrich by producing what people inIndia consume. And the trouble is,so far we have been meeting theconsumption demands of thosewho have become more and moreaffl��uent over the last 28 years, andthat is the top 150 million Indians.When you go to Bombay and look atwhat they call leading indicators ofeconomic growth, you hear aboutfourwheelers, twowheelers, airconditioners and fastmoving consumer goods, but this is not what allof India consumes, it is what someIndians consume. And so far thiswas okay because 150 million is abig market. It’s a bigger market thanGermany, so growth was just fi��ne.
But what I am noticing now isthat this consumption demand isbeginning to plateau. Therefore, wereally have to now think about how,
without subsidies, the next 200300million Indians and their consumption demands can spur growth inthe years ahead. And what do theyconsume? They consume what weconsume. A nutritious meal, clothing. They would like to buy onehouse in their lifetime, they wouldlike decent health and education. Sounless we move away from our fourwheelers, twowheelers and air conditionersbased economy to an economy in which these things are produced at aff��ordable prices, growthwill begin to peter out. And Iwouldn’t like that because there’shuge potential in the Indian economy to change the composition ofgrowth such that our growth is sustainable and we complete our development transformation withoutsubsidies. A beginning has beenmade by thinking about agricultureas a place where we maximise output to doubling farmers’ income.That’s positive. The NDA government promised aff��ordable housingand healthcare. So I’m quite confi��dent that the sort of plateauing ofIndia’s growth story can be avoidedif economic actions to do so are putin place.
Aff��ordable housing for all hasbeen a policy of almost allgovernments in the past.Governments over time haveplaced emphasis on nutritionand health and we have severalprogrammes targeting thepopulation that is outside thegrowth story. So, what isdiff��erent this time?
RR: Until this government increased the scale of it, aff��ordablehousing was essentially given to people with a subsidy. Now, here’s myproposition. If you’re earning, let’ssay, twice the minimum wage inDelhi, that would mean ₹�16,000₹�18,000 a month. Now, if you areearning ₹�16,000₹�18,000 a monthover a 30year period, what is the likelihood that you will be able to buya housing unit with a secure land title and amenities that some wouldconsider minimum for someonewith those kind of wages? The probability is very low. There is plenty ofland available with the Government
of India. But the government has given it away to media companies,group housing societies, clubs. I amsaying you take the land and repurpose its use and provide modest butdecent housing to people who earnthe minimum wage, through themarket without subsidy.
Coming to nutrition, yes, we havetalked about nutrition but I challenge any economist in this countryto tell me in any part of the countrywhat the nonsubsidised price of anutritious meal is. They won’t beable to. That’s why this doubling offarmers’ income initiative is so important because we are saying okay,if we double farmers’ income, thenit is reasonable to expect that theywon’t need subsidies. This is thekind of economic calculus that wehave to start doing.
With textiles it is a diff��erent matter. Upmarket textiles are mostlymade in India. But if you go to Fashion Street [in Delhi] and try and buya ₹�400 shirt, you will discover that itis made in Bangladesh and Vietnam.So why are we uncompetitive compared to Bangladesh and Vietnam?The answer is we are wage uncompetitive. And how are we wage uncompetitive? Wages in U.P., Bihar,Chhattisgarh and Odisha are notmuch higher than in Bangladesh orVietnam. But wages in south Gujaratand Tiruppur are higher. So we arenot able to make textiles in ourcountry because we are unable toactually locate industries wherewages are low. We are also increasing regional inequality because ifyou ask the question which I oftenask, which is that since 1991 what
has been the major benefi��t to eastern U.P., Bihar and Jharkhand, Iwould say it has been in the migration to the south and west of India.We have to change this. And thesestructural changes are what I ampointing to as barriers to India’sgrowth story going forward.
So, you say from 1991respective governments havenot really focused on thestructural shifts that need to bemade to change the growthstory? Where does the fault lie?
RR: I don’t think that is the rightway of putting it. If I go back andbreak up the objective of the development state in India, I would saythat from 1950 to about 1971, the objective was selfreliance and we succeeded. From 1971 to the late 1980s,the objective was to continue withmodernisation but also to end poverty and hunger. We succeeded insubstantial measure. From 1991 onwards, macroeconomic stabilitybecame very important as the worldglobalised and old formulationsbroke down. So, what we had to dowas fi��nd our place in the growth story that was consistent with someeconomic liberalisation which wasnot terribly iniquitous, and be successful in transforming the lives of
at least the fi��rst 150 million Indians.And we did that quite substantially.The period from 2004 till very recently is the period when we triedto recognise that productive inclusion was not happening. Hence wehad MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. We’ve had mixed results. Thisis why I have been uncomfortablewith the Nyuntam Aay Yojana(NYAY). The development stateneeds to continue the business ofdevelopment. NYAY or universalbasic income is not development.
You also mentioned in aninterview that if we don’t lookat these things, we are going toprobably end up like Brazil andSouth Africa.
RR: That was, of course, rhetorical,but I do want to point out something that is not rhetorical. If you lookat the history of postwar development, you have Japan, South Koreaand now China. You can see howthey have transformed the lives ofthe majority of the population.That’s what I call a developmenttransformation. But if you look atcountries like Brazil and Indonesia,they have not done so. Despite theper capita income of Brazil beingfour times that of India’s, there isendemic poverty and crime there.So there are two development stories, and a linear growth path maynot actually lead to a developmenttransformation. We have to choosein favour of getting productive inclusion into the economy. By that Imean how to get people to participate in growth and what are the factors that inhibit them from takingpart... you have to fi��x that.
How is this huge mandate goingto play out in Parliament?
M.R. Madhavan: Clearly, thestructure of the Lok Sabha in termsof parties has not had any majorchange. The BJP had a majority onits own last time. It has a slightlylarger majority on its own this time.The NDA enjoys a very comfortablemajority now. The largest Opposition party is the Congress and it remains without the post of Leader ofthe Opposition. What is worryingme — and it has nothing to do withthis Parliament or this governmentor the last government — is thestructure that has been built up.
I would say 1985 was the breakpoint when we ended the parliamentary system of the Indian government by passing the antidefection law. We have a Parliament. Wehave a set of bosses who tell everybody under them to vote in a particular way in Parliament. The periodfrom 1985 to 1990 was bad. Afterthat we had coalition governmentswhere you needed to convince yourallies of what you wanted to do. Butin a single majority government,you don’t need to convince anybody. So one huge check is gone andthis goes against everything that aparliamentary democracy standsfor. Why do we have a Parliament?We have it as there is legitimacywhen representatives discuss issuesin public and reach some sort of aconsensus.
There was another check whichdeveloped from 1993 onwards. Thishas disappeared in the last fi��veyears. That is the committee system. Committees were behaving ina reasonably nonpartisan manner.They were discussing Bills and coming up with good recommendations. They have continued to dothat in the last fi��ve years but therewas one major issue, which is thatonly 25% of the Bills were referredto committees. When the Bills werereferred to them, the committeesdid a great job. For example, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Codewent to the joint committee. Itmade a number of changes and allof them were accepted. Committeeswere performing a check. But weare not referring that many Bills tothe committees. I hope the new Parliament will look into that. The other check was the Rajya Sabha. Thatcould change in 202122 when theBJP/NDA has 45% of the seats.
The primary job of Parliament isto hold the government accountable for its actions. I would say theburden of this will always fall on theOpposition and I hope that theylearn something from the Britishand say, let’s form a shadow government. Let’s allocate certain peoplewith certain responsibilities. Fromday one we will focus on our job.Clearly, there are over 350 with thegovernment and we have about 200in the Opposition, but 200 is not aninconsequential number. Let us atleast organise ourselves so that wecan hold the government to accountfor its action. Will they do that?
Is India’s growth story plateauing?A government with a mandate can bring aboutstructural changes needed for economic growth
M.R.Madhavanis the president and
cofounder of PRS
Legislative Research
Rathin Roy is Director,
National Institute
of Public Finance
and Policy, and
member, Economic
Advisory Council
to the Prime
Minister of India
Scan the QR code towatch the fullinterview online
S.
SIV
A S
AR
AV
AN
AN
PARLEY
<> You are not going to make
the Indian economy rich by
merely exporting. You
have got to make it rich by
producing what people in
India consume.
https://t.me/TheHindu_Zone_official
https://t.me/SSC4Exams https://t.me/Banking4Exams https://t.me/UPSC4Exams
top related