வடகிழக்குப் பருவமழையை எதிர்கொள்ள எல்லா நடவடிக்கைகளும் எடுக்கப்பட்டு, நிர்வாகம் தயார் நிலையில் இருப்பதாக தமிழக அரசு தெரிவித்திருக்கிறது. பருவமழைக்காலம் என்பது தொற்றுக்காலமும்கூட என்பதை நாம் மறந்துவிடக் கூடாது.
வட இந்தியாவின் பல்வேறு பகுதிகளில் பருவமழையைத் தொடர்ந்து டெங்கு காய்ச்சல் பரவி வருவது கவலையளிக்கிறது. பஞ்சாப் மாநிலம் மொஹாலியைச் சுற்றியுள்ள பகுதிகளிலும், ஹரியாணாவில் குருகிராமிலும், உத்தர பிரதேசத்தில் ஆக்ராவிலும், மகாராஷ்டிரத்தில் புணேயிலும் பெருமளவு பாதிப்பை எற்படுத்திக் கொண்டிருக்கும் டெங்கு காய்ச்சல், அங்கெல்லாம் சுகாதாரக் கட்டமைப்புக்கு மிகப் பெரிய சவாலாக மாறியிருக்கிறது. அண்டை மாநிலமான கேரளத்தில் காணப்படும் நிபா விஷக்காய்ச்சலையும் கருத்தில்கொள்ளும்போது, நாம் எந்த அளவுக்கு முன்னெச்சரிக்கையாக இருக்க வேண்டும் என்பதை உணரலாம்.
மருத்துவத் துறையினரும், சுகாதாரத் துறையினரும் கொவைட் 19 கொள்ளை நோய்த்தொற்றின் மூன்றாவது அலையைத் தொடக்கத்திலேயே கட்டுப்படுத்தும் முனைப்பில் இருக்கும் வேளையில், டெங்கு காய்ச்சல் பரவத் தொடங்கியிருக்கிறது. கடுமையான ஃபுளூ காய்ச்சல் போன்று காணப்படும் டெங்கு காய்ச்சல், உயிரிழப்புக்குக் காரணமாகக் கூடும் என்பதால் எச்சரிக்கை உணர்வுடன் இருக்க வேண்டிய கட்டாயம் ஏற்பட்டிருக்கிறது. சமீப காலங்களில் டெங்கு காய்ச்சல், இந்தியாவில் மட்டுமல்லாமல் ஆப்பிரிக்கா, தென்னமெரிக்கா, பசிபிக் கடல் நாடுகள் என்று பரவலாகவே காணப்படுவதாக உலக சுகாதார நிறுவனம் தெரிவித்திருக்கிறது.
கடந்த ஜூலை மாதம் தொடங்கிய பருவமழை காரணமாக ஆங்காங்கே ஏரிகளும், குட்டைகளும் நிறைந்திருப்பதால் கொசுக்கள் மூலம் பரவும் நோய்கள் அதிகரித்திருப்பதில் வியப்பில்லை. குறிப்பாக, தேங்கி நிற்கும் தண்ணீரில் முட்டையிட்டு இனப்பெருக்கம் செய்யும் ஏடிஎஸ் எஜிப்டை கொசுக்களால் பரவுகிறது டெங்கு காய்ச்சல். இதற்கு முன்னால் தமிழகத்தை பலமுறை தாக்கியிருக்கிறது என்பதால் இதுகுறித்த விவரங்கள் சுகாதாரத் துறையினருக்கு புதிதல்ல. அதேநேரத்தில், மக்கள் மத்தியில் விழிப்புணர்வு ஏற்படுத்தி டெங்கு பரவாமல் இருப்பதை உறுதிப்படுத்த வேண்டிய அவசியம் இப்போது முன்பைவிட அதிகமாகவே இருக்கிறது.
கடந்த ஐந்து ஆண்டுகளில் மிக அதிகமான அளவில் தில்லியை அடுத்த ஹரியாணா மாநிலம் குருகிராமும் டெங்குவால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கிறது. பஞ்சாப் மாநிலம் மொஹாலி டெங்குவின் மையமாக மாறியிருக்கிறது. கடந்த ஒன்றரை மாதத்தில் மட்டும் 100-க்கும் அதிகமானோர் டெங்குவால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கிறார்கள்.
செப்டம்பர் மாதம் ஆங்காங்கே டெங்கு பாதிப்புகள் காணப்பட்டன என்றாலும், அக்டோபர் மாதத்தின் முதல் எட்டு நாள்களிலேயே சுமார் 300-க்கும் அதிகமானவர்கள் பாதிக்கப்பட்டபோது மத்திய சுகாதார அமைச்சகம் விழித்துக்கொண்டது. கொவைட் 19-ஆல் கடுமையாக பாதிக்கப்பட்ட மகாராஷ்டிர மாநிலம், செப்டம்பர் மாதத்தில் மட்டுமே 8,000 டெங்கு பாதிப்புகளும், 1,700 சிக்குன்குனியா பாதிப்புகளும் தெரியவந்தன. இந்த மாதத்தில் மட்டும் புணேயில் பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை இரட்டிப்பாகியிருக்கிறது.
கேரளத்தில் கடந்த மாதம் முதல் நிபா தீநுண்மி கோழிக்கோட்டில் பரவத் தொடங்கியிருக்கிறது. 2001-இல் மேற்கு வங்கத்திலும், கேரளத்திலும் கடுமையான பாதிப்புகளை ஏற்படுத்திய நிபா தீநுண்மி, கடந்த ஆண்டு கேரளத்திலுள்ள கோழிக்கோட்டில் மட்டும் 17 பேரின் உயிரிழப்புக்கு காரணமானது. இப்போது கேரளத்தில் பரவத்தொடங்கியிருக்கும் நிபா, 2018 போல கடுமையாக இருக்கப் போகிறதா அல்லது 2019 போல வந்த சுவடு தெரியாமல் விரைவிலேயே வீரியம் இழக்கப் போகிறதா என்று கணிக்க முடியவில்லை.
1998 செப்டம்பர் மாதம் மலேசியாவிலும், சிங்கப்பூரிலும் பரவத் தொடங்கிய நிபா, 2001 முதல் இந்தியாவில் தொடர்ந்து அவ்வப்போது தலைதூக்கி வருகிறது. பழங்களை உண்டு வாழும் வெளவால்களிலிருந்து உருவாகும் நிபா தீநுண்மி, பன்றிகள் மூலமாகப் பரவுகிறது என்று சொல்லப்பட்டாலும் தெளிவான ஆய்வு முடிவுகள் எதுவும் இல்லை.
கேரளத்தில் பலா உள்ளிட்ட பழத்தோட்டங்கள் அதிகம் காணப்படுவதால் நிபா தீநுண்மி அங்கு பரவுவதற்கான வாய்ப்புகள் அதிகம். அதே காரணம் தமிழகத்தின் சில மாவட்டங்களிலும் இருப்பதால் சிறிய கவனக்குறைவும் பருவமழைக் காலத்தில் நிபா பரவலுக்குக் காரணமாகிவிடக்கூடும்.
காய்ச்சல், உடல் சோர்வு, தலைவலி, மூச்சு விடுவதில் சிரமம், இருமல், வாந்தி, தசை வலி, வயிற்றுப்போக்கு உள்ளிட்ட எந்தவொரு சிறிய பாதிப்பாக இருந்தாலும்கூட உடனடியாக மருத்துவரை நாடி சிகிச்சை பெற வேண்டும் என்கிற விழிப்புணர்வை அரசும், ஊடகங்களும் மக்கள் மத்தியில் ஏற்படுத்த வேண்டும். அதேபோல, உள்ளாட்சி, நகராட்சி அமைப்புகள் எந்தவொரு இடத்திலும் குப்பை சேராமலும், தண்ணீர் தேங்கி நிற்காமலும் இருப்பதை உறுதிப்படுத்துவதும் அவசியம்.
டெங்கு, பன்றிக்காய்ச்சல், சிக்குன்குனியா, மலேரியா என்று ஒன்றன் பின் ஒன்றாக கொசுவாலும், தேங்கி நிற்கும் தண்ணீர் மூலமும் உருவாகும் நோய்த்தொற்றுகள் பரவுவதற்கு வரிசை கட்டிக் காத்திருக்கின்றன. கொவைட் 19 கொள்ளை நோய்த்தொற்றின் மூன்றாவது அலை வருகிறதோ இல்லையோ, நிபா, டெங்கு பாதிப்புகள் வரக் காத்திருக்கின்றன என்பதை நினைவில் கொள்ள வேண்டும்.
கொவைட் 19 கொள்ளை நோய்த்தொற்றை எதிர்கொள்வதற்காக "பி.எம். கேர்ஸ்' நிதித் திட்டம், கடந்த ஆண்டு பிரதமர் நரேந்திர மோடியால் தொடங்கப்பட்டது. இதன் வெளிப்படைத்தன்மை குறித்து தில்லி உயர்நீதிமன்றத்தில் தொடரப்பட்ட வழக்கில், பிரதமர் அலுவலகத்தின் துணைச் செயலர் பதிலளிக்கையில், பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் நிதி அரசு நிதி இல்லை என்றும், இதன் மூலம் பெறப்பட்ட நிதி, நாட்டின் நிதித்தொகுப்பை சென்றடையாது என்றும் தெரிவித்தது வியப்பளிக்கிறது.
பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் நிதி சட்ட வரையறைக்கு உட்பட்டோ முறையான அறிவிக்கையின் வாயிலாகவோ உருவாக்கப்படவில்லை. மாறாக, கொள்ளை நோய்த்தொற்றால் பாதிக்கப்படுபவர்களுக்கு உதவுவதற்காக வெறும் இணையத்தளத்தை மட்டுமே மையமாக கொண்டு ஏற்படுத்தப்பட்டது.
அதன் அமைப்பு, செயல்படும் விதம், கடமைகள் ஆகியவை தன்னிச்சையாகப் பட்டியலிடப்பட்டு, தேசிய நினைவுச் சின்னமான சாரநாத் தூண், தேசத்தின் தாரக மந்திரமான "வாய்மையே வெல்லும்' ஆகியவற்றின் அடிப்படையில், பொதுமக்களிடம் நன்கொடை கோருகிறது. அந்த நிதி அரசின் நிதித்தொகுப்பைச் சென்றடையாவிட்டால், அரசின் நினைவுச் சின்னங்களைப் பயன்படுத்துவது ஏன்?
மேலும், இந்த நிதித்தொகுப்பு உருவாக்கப்பட்டதன் மூலம் பேரிடர் மேலாண்மை சட்டம் 2005-இன் கீழ் உருவாக்கப்பட்ட தேசிய பேரிடர் மீட்பு நிதி (என்டிஆர்எஃப்) அப்பட்டமாகப் புறக்கணிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கிறது. பேரிடர் காலத்தில் பொதுமக்களிடம் இருந்து நன்கொடை பெற்று, அதை பாதிக்கப்பட்ட பகுதிகளின் நலனுக்காக செலவிடும் பொருட்டு உருவாக்கப்பட்ட தேசிய பேரிடர் மீட்பு நிதி, தகவல் அறியும் உரிமைச் சட்டத்தின் (ஆர்டிஐ) வரையறைக்கு உட்பட்டது.
ஆர்டிஐ வாயிலாக இதன் தகவலை எளிதில் கேட்டுப் பெறலாம். மேலும், இது பொது ஆணையமாக இருப்பதால், இதன் கணக்குகள் அனைத்தும் தலைமைக் கணக்கு தணிக்கையாளரின் (சிஏஜி) தணிக்கைக்கு உட்பட்டவை. ஆனால், பொதுமக்களிடம் இருந்து பெறப்பட்ட நன்கொடையையும், அதன் பயன்பாட்டையும் மையப்படுத்தும் பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் நிதி, கூட்டாட்சித் தத்துவத்துக்கு முரணாக இருக்கிறது.
ஏற்கெனவே, பேரிடர் காலத்தில் பொதுமக்களுக்கு உதவுவதற்காக முன்னாள் பிரதமர் ஜவாஹர்லால் நேரு காலத்தில் பிரதமரின் நிவாரண நிதி (பிஎம்என்ஆர்எஃப்) ஏற்படுத்தப்பட்ட நிலையில், தற்போது ஏற்படுத்தப்பட்டிருக்கும் பி.எம். கேர்ஸின் நோக்கம் பல்வேறு கேள்விகளை எழுப்புகிறது.
நேரு பிரதமராக இருந்தபோது (1948) பொதுமக்களின் பங்களிப்புடன் ஏற்படுத்தப்பட்ட பிரதமரின் நிவாரண நிதி, பிரிவினை காரணமாக பாகிஸ்தானில் இருந்து இடம்பெயர்ந்து, இந்தியாவில் அடைக்கலம் புகுந்த மக்களின் நலனுக்கு பெரிதும் உதவியது.
இன்றளவும் பயன்பாட்டில் இருக்கும் இந்த நிதித்தொகுப்பு, பேரிடர், பெரும் விபத்து, வன்முறை போன்ற எதிர்பாரா நிகழ்வுகளில் உயிரிழப்பவர்களின் குடும்பத்தினருக்கு நிவாரணம் அளிக்கவும், பொதுமக்களின் இருதய அறுவை சிகிச்சை, நுரையீரல் மாற்று அறுவை சிகிச்சை, புற்றுநோய் சிகிச்சைக போன்றவற்றுக்கும் பிரதமரின் ஒப்புதலுடன் பயன்படுத்தப்படுகிறது.
வருமான வரிச் சட்டத்தின்கீழ், அறக்கட்டளை என அங்கீகரிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கும் பிரதமரின் நிவாரண நிதி, பிரதமரால் நிர்வகிக்கப்படுகிறது. அதற்கான அறக்கட்டளையில் குடியரசுத் தலைவரும், நாடாளுமன்ற எதிர்க்கட்சித் தலைவரும் உறுப்பினர்களாக உள்ளனர். இதற்காக பொதுமக்களிடம் இருந்து நன்கொடையாகத் திரட்டப்படும் நிதி, பொதுத்துறை வங்கிகளில் சேமிக்கப்பட்டு பேரிடர் காலங்களில் பயன்படுத்தப்படுகிறது.
இதைப் புறக்கணித்துவிட்டு பிரதமரின் தலைமையின்கீழ், மத்திய பாதுகாப்புத்துறை, உள்துறை, நிதித்துறை அமைச்சர்களை கொண்ட பி.எம்.கேர்ஸ் நிதித்தொகுப்பை மத்திய அரசு இன்றைக்கு ஏற்படுத்தியிருக்கிறது.
தொடக்கத்தில் இதை அறக்கட்டளையாக அறிவிக்க மறுத்த மத்திய அரசு, பின்னர் தனது நிலைப்பாட்டை மாற்றிக் கொண்ட போதிலும், இதை பொது ஆணையமாக அறிவிக்க மறுக்கிறது. திட்டங்களில் வெளிப்படைத் தன்மையைப் பற்றி பேசும் மத்திய அரசு, பிஎம் கேர்ஸ் நிதித்தொகுப்பை தகவல் அறியும் உரிமைச் சட்ட வரம்புக்குள் கொண்டுவர மறுப்பது ஏன்?
பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் நிதிக்கும், மத்திய அரசுக்கும் தொடர்பில்லை எனில், அது லாபநோக்கமுடைய நிதியாகத்தான் கருதப்படுமே தவிர சேவை நோக்கு உடையதாகக் கருதப்படாது.
மேலும், பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் நிதி தொகுப்புக்கு நன்கொடை அளிக்கும் நபர்களுக்கு வருமான வரிச்சட்டம் 80ஜி பிரிவின்கீழ், வரிவிலக்கு அளிக்கும் வகையில், வருமான வரிச்சட்டம் 1961-இல் திருத்தம் கொண்டுவர அவசரச் சட்டமும் பிரகடனப்படுத்தப்பட்டது.
இதுதவிர பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் நிதிக்கு அளிக்கப்படும் நன்கொடை, வருமான வரிச் சட்டத்தின் 80ஜி பயன்பாட்டைப் பெற உதவும் என அதிகாரபூர்வ இணையத்தள பக்கத்திலும், சுற்றறிக்கையிலும் குறிப்பிடப்பட்டிருக்கிறது.
பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் நிதிக்கு பெருநிறுவனங்கள் அளிக்கும் நன்கொடைகள், நிறுவனச் சட்டம் 2013-இன் கீழ், பெருநிறுவன சமூகப் பொறுப்புணர்வு செலவினமாக (சிஎஸ்ஆர்) கருதப்பட்டு வரிவிலக்கு அளிக்கப்படும் என்றும் விளம்பரப்படுத்தப்படுகிறது.
மேலும், அயல்நாடுகளில் இருந்து நிதி திரட்டுவதற்காக தனிப்பட்ட கணக்கு தொடங்கப்பட்டு, வெளிநாட்டுப் பங்களிப்பு ஒழுங்குமுறை சட்டத்தின்கீழ், விதிவிலக்கையும் பி.எம். கேர்ஸ் பெற்றிருக்கிறது.
இந்திய அறக்கட்டளை சட்டப் பிரிவு 19-இன் கீழ் பெறப்பட்ட தொகையின் மொத்த விவரங்களையும், சொத்து விவரங்களையும் துல்லியமாகப் பயனாளிகளுக்கு அறக்கட்டளையின் அறங்காவலர்கள் தெரிவிப்பது கட்டாயமாக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.
ஆகையால், சட்டத்திட்டங்களுக்கு உட்பட்டு அனைத்து சலுகைகளையும் பெற்றுள்ள பிஎம் கேர்ஸ் நிதித்தொகுப்பும், ஆர்டிஐ சட்டம் 2 (எஃப்)-இன் கீழ், தகவல்களை அளிக்கக் கடமைப்பட்டிருக்கிறது.
தேர்தல் ஜனநாயகத்தில் எப்போதுமே எதிர்க்கட்சிக்குத்தான் நாயக அந்தஸ்து. ஆனால், தேசிய அளவில் பிரதான எதிர்க்கட்சியாக இருக்கும் காங்கிரஸ், தன்னைக் குணச்சித்திரப் பாத்திரமாகவே சுருக்கிக்கொண்டுள்ளது. கடந்த ஆண்டு இதே அக்டோபர் மாதத்தில் ஹத்ராஸ் கூட்டுப் பாலியல் வன்கொடுமையால் உயிரிழந்த பெண்ணின் வீட்டுக்கு ஆறுதல் சொல்லச் சென்ற ராகுலும் பிரியங்காவும் தடுத்து நிறுத்தப்பட்டனர். அப்போது ராகுலைக் காவல் துறை கையாண்ட விதம் இந்தியா முழுவதும் பெரும் கொந்தளிப்பை உருவாக்கியது. இந்த ஆண்டு அக்டோபரில் லக்கிம்பூர் கெரி சம்பவம். வழக்கம்போல, பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்களைச் சந்தித்து ஆறுதல் சொல்லச் சென்ற ராகுலும் பிரியங்காவும் தடுக்கப்பட்டு, அதுவும் விவாதத்திற்குள்ளாகியுள்ளது. பிரியங்கா தங்கவைக்கப்பட்டிருந்த விடுதியில் அவர் தரையைச் சுத்தம்செய்யும் காட்சி, அனுதாபிகளிடையே வருத்தத்தை உண்டாக்கியிருக்கிறது. பிரியங்கா கைதுசெய்யப்பட்டதைக் கண்டித்து, அக்கட்சியின் சார்பில் ஆர்ப்பாட்டங்களும் நடத்தப்பட்டன. ஆனாலும்கூட, நம்பிக்கைக்குரிய இளம் தலைவர்களான ராகுலோ பிரியங்காவோ கட்சியைத் தலைமையேற்று நடத்துவதற்கு இன்னமும்கூடத் தயங்குகின்றனர். இந்திராவின் குடும்பத்தை அல்லாது வேறு யார் அக்கட்சியின் தலைமையை ஏற்றாலும் மூத்த தலைவர்கள் கட்டுப்பட்டு நடப்பார்கள் என்பதற்கு எந்த உறுதியுமில்லை. ஒருவேளை, அக்குடும்பத்தை அல்லாது வேறொருவர் தலைவராக நியமிக்கப்பட்டாலும் அவரும் அக்குடும்பத்தின் கட்டுப்பாட்டில்தான் இருப்பார். இந்நிலையில், வருகிற சனிக் கிழமையன்று நடக்கவிருக்கும் காங்கிரஸ் செயற்குழுக் கூட்டத்தில், அக்கட்சிக்கு நிரந்தரத் தலைவர் நியமிக்கப்படலாம் என்ற எதிர்பார்ப்புகள் எழுந்துள்ளன. இந்தக் கூட்டத்திலும் தலைவர் யார் என்பது முடிவுசெய்யப்படவில்லை என்றால் ‘ஒரு தலைவரைத் தேர்ந்தெடுக்கக்கூட இயலாத காங்கிரஸால், ஆளும் கட்சியின் செயல்பாடுகளை விமர்சிக்க என்ன தகுதி இருக்கிறது?’ என்பது போன்ற கேள்விகள் எழுவதைத் தவிர்க்க இயலாது.
சனிக்கிழமைக் கூட்டத்தில் காங்கிரஸ் கட்சியின் உட்கட்சித் தேர்தலைப் பற்றி விவாதிக்கப்படலாம் என்றும் எதிர்பார்க்கப்படுகிறது. செயற்குழு உறுப்பினர்கள், மத்திய தேர்தல் குழு, நாடாளுமன்றக் குழு ஆகியவற்றின் தேர்தலை நடத்த வேண்டும் என்பது மூத்த காங்கிரஸ் தலைவர்கள் 23 பேர் கூட்டாக முன்வைத்த கோரிக்கைகளில் ஒன்றாகும். ‘காங்கிரஸ் கட்சியில் முடிவெடுப்பது யார் என்று தெரியவில்லை’ என்பதாக கபில் சிபல் தெரிவித்த கருத்து அக்கட்சிக்குள் கடும் சலசலப்பை ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளது. எனவே, பெருந்தொற்றின் காரணமாகத் தள்ளிவைக்கப்பட்டிருந்த உட்கட்சித் தேர்தலுக்கு நாள் குறிக்கப்படலாம். விரைவில் நடைபெறவிருக்கும் பஞ்சாப், உத்தராகண்ட், உத்தர பிரதேச மாநிலங்களின் சட்டமன்றத் தேர்தல்கள் குறித்தும் விவாதிக்கப்படலாம். ஆனால், அதைக் காட்டிலும் பஞ்சாப் முதல்வர் மாற்றம் உள்ளிட்ட உட்கட்சிப் பிரச்சினைகள்தான் முக்கிய விவாதப்பொருளாக இருக்கக்கூடும். பிரிந்து கிடக்கும் குழுக்களை ஒன்றிணைத்து, கட்சியை வலுப்படுத்திய பிறகுதான் எதிர்க்கட்சிகளுக்குத் தலைமை வகிக்கும் தகுதியை காங்கிரஸ் பெற முடியும். அது சாத்தியமில்லை என்றால், பாஜகவை எதிர்க்கும் மற்ற கட்சிகள் காங்கிரஸைத் தவிர்த்துவிட்டு தங்களுக்குள்ளேயே கூட்டணி அமைக்கும் நிலைகூட வரலாம். தற்போதைக்கு, உறுதியான தலைமையை எதிர்பார்த்துத் தத்தளித்துக்கொண்டிருக்கிறது காங்கிரஸ்.
இந்தியக் காடுகளில் வசிக்கும் பழங்குடிகளுக்கு ஆங்கிலம் தெரியும் என்று கூறினால் நம்ப வேண்டும். கடந்த அக்டோபர் 2 தேதியிட்டு, வனப் பாதுகாப்புச் சட்டம் (1980) திருத்த வரைவை ஒன்றிய அரசு ஆங்கிலத்தில் மட்டுமே வெளியிட்டுள்ளதை வேறு எப்படிப் புரிந்துகொள்வது? இது குறித்து முதலில் அறிய வேண்டியவர்கள், கருத்துத் தெரிவிக்க வேண்டியவர்கள் அந்தப் பழங்குடிகள்தானே?
வனப் பாதுகாப்புச் சட்டம் 1980, அன்றைய பிரதமர் இந்திரா காந்தியால் கொண்டுவரப்பட்டது. அரசியலில் சர்வாதிகாரத்தன்மை கொண்ட அவர், சுற்றுச்சூழல் பாதுகாப்பிலும் அவ்வாறே விளங்கினார். மாநிலப் பொறுப்பில் இருந்த வனத் துறையைப் பொதுப் பிரிவுக்கு மாற்றியவர் என்ற குற்றச்சாட்டு அவர் மீது உண்டு. சுற்றுச்சூழல் ஆர்வலரான அவர், அன்றைய சூழலில் காடுகளைப் பாதுகாக்கும் முயற்சியில் பல மாநில அரசுகள் தீவிரமாகச் செயல்படவில்லை என்கிற காரணத்தால் புதிய சட்டத்தைக் கொண்டுவந்ததோடு, இந்திய ஒன்றியத்தின் முதல் சுற்றுச்சூழல் அமைச்சராகவும் பொறுப்பேற்றார்.
இன்று நிலைமை தலைகீழாகிவிட்டது. மாநில அரசுகளைவிட ஒன்றிய அரசே காடுகளின் பாதுகாப்புக்கு எதிராகச் செயல்படுகிறது. சுற்றுச்சூழல் ஆர்வலரான பூபேந்தர் யாதவ் சுற்றுச்சூழல் அமைச்சராகியும் நிலைமை மாறவில்லை. அன்று இந்திரா காந்தி வனப் பாதுகாப்புச் சட்டத்தை நிறைவேற்றிய பிறகு, காடு சாரா காரணங்களுக்காகக் காட்டு நிலங்களை ஒதுக்குவது பெருமளவில் குறைந்தது என்கிறார் மேனாள் சுற்றுச்சூழல் அமைச்சர் ஜெய்ராம் ரமேஷ். நாடு விடுதலை அடைந்த முதல் 30 ஆண்டு காலத்தில் 40 லட்சம் ஹெக்டேர் நிலங்கள் அவ்வாறு ஒதுக்கப்பட்டிருந்தன. புதிய சட்டத்தின் விளைவாக அடுத்த 30 ஆண்டுகளில் அது 10 லட்சம் ஹெக்டேராகச் சுருங்கியது என்கிறார் அவர்.
சொற்களைக் கவனிக்கவும் ‘சுருங்கியது’, ஆனால் முற்றிலும் தடுக்கப்படவில்லை. ஏனெனில், வனப் பாதுகாப்புச் சட்டம் என்பது காட்டைப் பாதுகாக்கும் சட்டமல்ல. அது, காட்டு நிலங்களின் பயன்பாட்டை ஒழுங்குபடுத்தும் ஒரு சட்டமேயாகும். பின்னர், தொடர்ச்சியாக நடைபெற்ற பல சட்டத் திருத்தங்களால் நிலைமை மேலும் மோசமடைந்தது. மாநிலங்களவையில் சுற்றுச்சூழல் அமைச்சகம் அளித்த தகவலின்படி 2008-2019 காலத்தில் 2,51,727 ஹெக்டேர் காட்டு நிலம் காடு சாரா பயன்பாட்டுக்காக ஒதுக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இது ஏறக்குறைய டெல்லி மாநிலத்தின் பரப்பளவைப் போல 1.5 மடங்கு அதிகம். இந்நிலையில்தான், தற்போதைய சட்டத் திருத்த முன்வரைவு வெளியிடப்பட்டுள்ளது.
அரசு அனுமதி மட்டும் போதுமா?
தனியார் காடுகள் மற்றும் வருவாய்க் காடுகள் உள்ளிட்ட நிலங்களை வேறு நோக்கங்களுக்குப் பயன்படுத்த தற்போதுள்ள சட்டப்படி வனத் துறையின் அனுமதி தேவைப்படுகிறது. அதை முற்றிலும் நீக்கவே இந்தச் சட்டத்திருத்தம் முனைகிறது. உண்மையில், காடுகளைப் பாதுகாக்கும் சட்டம் என்றால், அது வன உரிமைச் சட்டம் 2006-தான் எனலாம். காப்புக்காடுகள் உள்ளிட்ட எந்தக் காட்டு நிலமாக இருந்தாலும், அதைக் காடு சாராத பயன்பாட்டுக்கு அரசாங்கம் மட்டுமே முடிவெடுத்து வழங்கிவிட முடியாது. அதற்குப் பழங்குடிகளின் கிராம சபை ஒப்புதல் தேவை. இந்த உரிமையைக் கிராம சபைக்கு வன உரிமைச் சட்டம் வழங்கியுள்ளது. அதனால்தான் காடுகள் மீதான பன்னாட்டு நிறுவனங்களின் படையெடுப்புகளைப் பழங்குடிகளால் தடுத்து நிறுத்த முடிந்துள்ளது.
எடுத்துக்காட்டாக, 2013-ல் ஒடிசா காட்டுக்குள் பாக்சைட் சுரங்கம் அமைக்க அம்மாநில அரசின் சுரங்கக் கழகம் வழங்கிய அனுமதியைப் பழங்குடிகளின் 12 கிராம சபைகள் தடுத்து நிறுத்தியதைக் குறிப்பிடலாம். எனவே, இந்தப் புதிய சட்டத்திருத்த வரைவு, மறைமுகமாக வன உரிமைச் சட்டத்தை நீர்த்துப்போகச் செய்யும் நடவடிக்கையோ என்கிற அச்சம் இயல்பாகவே எழுகிறது. காரணம், ஒரு பழைய சட்டத்துக்கும் புதிய சட்டத்துக்கும் முரண்பாடு தோன்றினால், வழக்கில் புதிய சட்டமே செல்லுபடியாகும். அது மட்டுமல்லாமல், 2013-க்குப் பிறகு காடுகளின் பாதுகாப்பு சார்ந்திருந்த சட்டங்கள் ஒவ்வொன்றாகத் தளர்த்தப்பட்டுவிட்டன.
கையில் இருப்பதை இழக்கலாமா?
புதிய திருத்த வரைவில் காட்டு நிலப் பகுதிகளைக் கையகப்படுத்துவதைத் தடுக்கும் கூறுகள் உள்ளன என்று கூறப்படுவதை, “ஒரு மோசடி” என்று மறுக்கிறார் பழங்குடிகள் செயல்பாட்டாளர் சி.ஆர்.பிஜாய். “2006 வன உரிமைச் சட்டத்திலேயே குறிப்பிட்ட காட்டு நிலத்தை ‘முக்கியத்துவம் வாய்ந்த வனவிலங்கு வாழ்விடம்’ (Critical wildlife Habitate) என்று அறிவித்தால், அதைக் காடு சாராத பயன்பாட்டுக்கு வழங்க முடியாது என்ற விதிமுறை உள்ளது. அதாவது, அச்சட்டம் ஏற்கெனவே இங்கு இருக்கிறது” என்கிறார் அவர்.
காடு சாரா பயன்பாடுகளை ஆதரிக்கும் பொருளியல் வாதங்கள் வழக்கம்போலவே ‘உயிரினப் பன்மை’ என்பதைக் கணக்கில் கொள்வதில்லை. உயிரினப் பன்மை விலைமதிப்பற்றது என்பதையும் உணர்வதில்லை. அது மட்டுமன்றி, பருவநிலை மாற்றம் குறித்த ஐ.பி.சி.சி.யின் ஆறாவது மதிப்பீட்டு அறிக்கையின் எச்சரிக்கையை இந்த சட்டத் திருத்த வரைவு கேலிசெய்கிறது. கையில் இருக்கும் காடுகளை அழித்துவிட்டு பருவநிலை மாற்றத்தை எப்படிக் கட்டுப்படுத்தப்போகிறோம்?
காடழிக்கப்பட்ட நிலத்துக்கு ஈடாக இரு மடங்கு நிலத்தில் புதிய காடு உருவாக்கப்பட வேண்டும் என்பது சட்டம். ஆனால், அங்கு எவ்வகைத் தாவரங்களை வளர்க்க வேண்டும் என்பதற்கு வழிகாட்டுதல்கள் ஏதுமில்லை. எனவே, ஓரினப் பயிர்த் தோட்டங்களே காடு என்ற பெயரில் உருவாக்கப்படுகின்றன. ஓரினப் பயிர்களின் தோட்டம் அசல் காட்டைவிடக் குறைவான கார்பனையே வளிமண்டலத்திலிருந்து ஈர்த்துக்கொள்ளும் என்பதே உண்மை.
கூடுதல் அழுத்தம் தேவை
தமிழ்நாடு அரசின் தனியார் வனப் பாதுகாப்பு 1949 சட்டத்தை, ஒருவிதத்தில் நல்லதொரு சட்டமாகச் சுற்றுச்சூழல் செயல்பாட்டாளர்கள் கருதுவார்கள். ஆனால், ஒன்றிய அரசின் புதிய வரைவு, மாநில அரசின் வனப் பாதுகாப்புச் சட்டத்திலும் கைவைக்க முனைகிறது. காடுகளில் தன் அதிகாரத்தை நிறுவ பிரிட்டிஷ் அரசு வனப் பாதுகாப்புச் சட்ட வரைவு ஒன்றைக் கொண்டுவந்தபோது, அதை முதலில் எதிர்த்தது மெட்ராஸ் மாகாணம்தான் என்கிற வரலாற்று உண்மையை இங்கு நினைவில் கொள்வது அவசியம்.
வரைவுக்கு எதிராகப் பொதுமக்கள் மட்டும் மின்னஞ்சலில் கருத்துகளை அனுப்புவது போதாது. அதனுடன் அரசியல் அழுத்தமும் தேவைப்படுகிறது. கேரளத்தின் மேனாள் சுற்றுச்சூழல் அமைச்சர் பினாய் விஸ்வம் அதைத் தொடங்கி வைத்துவிட்டார். தமிழ்நாடு அரசின் குரலும் வரைவுக்கு எதிராக, வலுவாக ஒலிக்க வேண்டும் என்பதே சுற்றுச்சூழல் செயல்பாட்டாளர்களின் எதிர்பார்ப்பு.
- வீ.நக்கீரன், ‘காடோடி', ‘நீர் எழுத்து' உள்ளிட்ட நூல்களின் ஆசிரியர். தொடர்புக்கு: vee.nakkeeran@gmail.com
பொருளியலுக்கான நோபல் பரிசாகக் கருதப்படும் ஸ்வீடன் மத்திய வங்கிப் பரிசினை இந்த ஆண்டு அமெரிக்காவைச் சேர்ந்த மூன்று பொருளியல் அறிஞர்கள் பகிர்ந்துகொண்டுள்ளனர். பரிசின் ஒரு பகுதியை கனடாவில் பிறந்து, தற்போது கலிபோர்னியா பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் பணியாற்றிவரும் டேவிட் கார்ட் (David Card) பெறுகிறார். மறுபகுதியை மாசசூசிட்ஸ் தொழில்நுட்ப நிறுவனத்தைச் சேர்ந்த ஜோஷ்வா ஆங்கிரிஸ்ட் (Joshua Angrist), ஸ்டான்போர்ட் பல்கலைக்கழகத்தைச் சேர்ந்த குய்டோ இம்பென்ஸ் (Guido Imbens) இருவரும் பகிர்ந்துகொண்டுள்ளனர். ஜோஷ்வா ஆங்கிரிஸ்ட் இஸ்ரேலைப் பூர்வீகமாகக் கொண்டவர். குய்டோ இம்பென்ஸ், நெதர்லாந்து நாட்டில் பிறந்தவர். மூவரும் பொருளியலின் ஆய்வுமுறைகளை முற்றிலுமாக மாற்றியமைத்திருக்கிறார்கள் என்று பாராட்டியிருக்கிறது ஸ்வீடிஷ் அகாடமி.
கூலி உயர்வின் விளைவுகள்
குறைந்தபட்சக் கூலி அதிகரித்தால் உற்பத்திச் செலவுகள் அதிகரிக்கும். எனவே, தொழிலாளர்களின் எண்ணிக்கையைக் குறைக்க வேண்டியிருக்கும்; புதிதாகக் குடியேறுபவர்களால் பூர்விகக் குடிமக்களுக்கு வேலையிழப்பு ஏற்படும் என்பது போன்று காலம்காலமாகத் தொடர்ந்துவந்த நம்பிக்கைகளைக் கேள்விக்குள்ளாக்கி, அதற்கு எந்த ஆதாரங்களும் இல்லை என்று எடுத்துக்காட்டியவர் டேவிட் கார்ட். குறைந்தபட்சக் கூலி உயர்த்தப்பட்டதன் தாக்கத்தை மதிப்பிடுவதற்கு நியூ ஜெர்ஸியிலும் கிழக்கு பென்சில்வேனியாவிலும் உள்ள உணவகங்களை அவர் தனது ஆய்வுப்பொருளாக எடுத்துக்கொண்டார்.
நியூ ஜெர்ஸியில் குறைந்தபட்சக் கூலி உயர்ந்தது. பென்சில்வேனியாவில் அதே கூலி தொடர்ந்தது. ஆய்வின் முடிவில், குறைந்தபட்சக் கூலி உயர்த்தப்படுவதால் தொழிலாளர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை குறைந்துவிடவில்லை என்பது நிரூபணமானது. தொழிலாளர்களின் ஊதிய உயர்வுக் கோரிக்கை, அவர்களது வேலைவாய்ப்புக்கே பாதகமாக மாறும் என்ற முதலாளித்துவ அச்சுறுத்தல்களுக்கு அறிவியல்பூர்வமான விடையாக இந்த ஆய்வு அமைந்தது.
டேவிட் கார்ட்டுடன் இணைந்து இந்த ஆய்வுகளில் ஈடுபட்ட ஆலன் க்ரூகெர் (Alan Krueger) 2019-ல் காலமாகிவிட்டார். க்ரூகெர் உயிருடன் இருந்திருந்தால், அவரும் இந்தப் பரிசினைப் பகிர்ந்துகொண்டிருந்திருப்பார். உழைப்புச் சந்தையில் நிலவும் இனவாதப் போக்கு, மருத்துவக் காப்பீடு, தொழிற்சங்கங்கள், அவற்றின் பேரம் பேசும் திறன் என்று டேவிட் கார்டின் ஆய்வுப் பரப்பு மிகவும் விரிவானது. எனினும், பொருளியலில் உழைப்பின் பங்களிப்புதான் அவரது ஆய்வுகளின் மையம்.
பானர்ஜி-டுஃப்ளோ பாராட்டு
2019-ல் இந்தியாவைப் பூர்வீகமாகக் கொண்ட அபிஜித் பானர்ஜிக்கும் அவரது இணையர் எஸ்தர் டுஃப்ளோவுக்கும் நோபல் பரிசு அளிக்கப்பட்டது. அதே ஆண்டில், வெளியான அவர்களது ‘குட் எகானமிக்ஸ் ஃபார் ஹார்ட் டைம்ஸ்’ புத்தகமும் பெருங்கவனம் பெற்றது. குடியேற்றம் குறித்தும் பூர்விகக் குடிகளின் அச்சம் குறித்தும் அந்நூலில் விவாதித்த பானர்ஜியும் டுஃப்ளோவும் டேவிட் கார்ட் ஆய்வுகளைத்தான் மேற்கோள் காட்டியிருந்தனர்.
1980-ல் கியூப அதிபர் ஃபிடல் காஸ்ட்ரோ, விரும்புபவர்கள் நாட்டை விட்டு வெளியேறலாம் என்று அறிவித்த வேகத்தில், அந்நாட்டிலிருந்து 1.25 லட்சம் தொழிலாளர்கள் அமெரிக்காவின் மியாமி நகரத்துக்குக் குடியேறினார்கள். அந்நகரில் உள்ள தொழிலாளர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை ஒரே ஆண்டில் 7% கூடியது. கியூப தொழிலாளர்களின் குடியேற்றத்துக்கு முன்பும் பின்பும் அந்நகரத்தில் கூலியின் விகிதமும் வேலைவாய்ப்பின் விகிதமும் எப்படி உயர்ந்தன என்பதை மற்ற நான்கு அமெரிக்க நகரங்களோடு ஒப்பிட்டு எடுத்துக்காட்டினார் டேவிட் கார்ட். தொழிலாளர்கள் புதிதாக வந்து குடியேறுவதால், பூர்விகக் குடிகளின் வேலைவாய்ப்பில் உடனடியாகவோ நீண்ட கால அளவிலோ எந்த மாற்றமும் வருவதில்லை என்பதை ஆய்வுகளின் வழியாக அவர் உறுதிப்படுத்தினார்.
அந்த ஆய்வின் முக்கியத்துவத்தை பானர்ஜி இணையர் விதந்தோதிப் பாராட்டியிருப்பார்கள். கியூபாவிலிருந்து மியாமிக்குக் குடியேறியவர்கள், அங்கு கிடைக்கும் வேலைவாய்ப்புக்காக மட்டும் அந்நகரத்தைத் தேர்வுசெய்யவில்லை. கியூபாவுக்கு வெகு அண்மையிலுள்ள நகரம் அதுதான். டேவிட் கார்ட் ஆய்வுகளின் அணுகுமுறை மட்டுமல்ல, எட்டப்பட்ட முடிவுகளும் மிகவும் முக்கியமானவை. தொழிலாளர்களின் குடியேற்றப் பிரச்சினைக்கு மரபான ‘அளிப்பு - தேவை’ விதியை அப்படியே பொருத்திப் பார்க்க முடியாது என்பதை முதலில் எடுத்துக்காட்டியது டேவிட் கார்ட் ஆய்வுகள்தான் என்கிறது ‘குட் எகானமிக்ஸ்’ புத்தகம். டேவிட் கார்ட் மேற்கொண்ட இத்தகைய பொருளியல் ஆய்வுகள், சமூகவியல் ஆய்வுகளாகவும் அமைந்துள்ளன. அவை, உழைக்கும் வர்க்கத்துக்குள்ளேயே பகைமை வளர்க்கும் வளர்ந்த நாடுகளின் தேர்தல் அரசியல் உத்திகளை மறுதலிக்கவும் செய்கின்றன.
இயல்புச் சோதனைகள்
ஆங்கிரிஸ்ட், இம்பென்ஸ் இருவருக்கும் அறிவிக்கப்பட்டுள்ள பரிசானது காரண காரிய விளைவுகளின் அடிப்படையில் தெளிவான முடிவுகளைப் பெறும் வகையில், அவர்கள் உருவாக்கிய ஆய்வுமுறைகளுக்கானது. இயல்புச் சோதனைகள் என்றழைக்கப்படும் இந்த ஆய்வுமுறை தற்போது நோபல் பரிசு பெற்றிருக்கும் பொருளியல் அறிஞர்களால் 90-களில் வளர்த்தெடுக்கப்பட்டது. புதிதாகக் கண்டறியப்பட்ட ஒரு மருந்தின் விளைவுகளைச் சோதனைக்கூடத்தில் ஆராய்ந்து பார்ப்பதுபோல, பொருளியல் கொள்கைகளின் தாக்கங்களை மக்கள் சமூகத்தில் ஆராய்ந்து பார்க்கும் முறை இது.
வருமானத்துக்கும் கல்விக்கும் இடையிலான உறவு குறித்து, ஆலன் க்ரூகெருடன் இணைந்து ஜோஷ்வா ஆங்கிரிஸ்ட் மேற்கொண்ட ஆய்வு இயல்புச் சோதனைகளின் அடிப்படையிலானது. பள்ளிக்கூடங்களில் கூடுதல் கல்வியைப் பெற வாய்ப்புள்ளவர்கள், கூடுதல் ஊதியத்தைப் பெறும் தொழிலாளர்களாக இருக்கிறார்கள் என்ற முடிவுக்கு அந்த ஆய்வு இட்டுச்சென்றது. ஒரே ஆண்டில், தொடக்க மாதங்களில் பிறந்தவர்களுக்குக் கல்வியாண்டு உடனடியாக முடிந்துவிடுகிறது. ஆண்டின் இறுதி மாதங்களில் பிறந்தவர்கள் அடுத்த கல்வியாண்டின் முடிவுவரைக்கும் கூடுதலாகப் படிக்கும் வாய்ப்பினைப் பெறுகிறார்கள் என்ற அளவுக்கு அமெரிக்காவின் ஆரம்பக் கல்வி முறைக்கும் உடலுழைப்புத் தொழிலாளர்களின் ஊதிய விகிதத்துக்கும் இடையிலான உறவைப் பேசியது அந்த ஆய்வு. அதன் முடிவுகளை மேம்படுத்துவதில் ஆங்கிரிஸ்ட், இம்பென்ஸ் இருவரும் இணைந்து பணியாற்றினர். இத்தகைய நம்பகமான ஆய்வுமுறைகளுக்கு இதற்கு முன் பொருளியல் துறையில் அவ்வளவு முக்கியத்துவம் கொடுக்கப்படவில்லை. இப்போதும்கூட, மாதிரி ஆய்வுகள் முழுமைக்கும் பொருந்துமா என்ற கேள்விகள் இல்லாமலில்லை.
‘மற்றவை மாறாதிருக்கும்போது’ என்று தொடங்கி எப்போதுமே தர்க்கரீதியான ஊகங்களையே முடிவுகளாக முன்மொழிகிற பொருளியல் துறையில், அறிவியல்பூர்வமான ஆய்வுமுறைகள் ஒரு புதிய வெளிச்சத்தைக் கொண்டுவந்துள்ளன. மூலதனத்துக்கான லாபத்தையும் அதற்கான சந்தை அமைப்பையுமே பிரதான ஆய்வுப்பொருளாகக் கொண்டிருந்த நிலை மாறி, உழைப்பும் கூலியும்கூட இப்போது ஆய்வுப்பொருளாக மாறியிருக்கின்றன. அந்த ஆய்வுகளுக்குக் கிடைத்திருக்கும் பரிசு என்பது உழைக்கும் வர்க்கத்துக்கு ஒரு மரியாதையும்கூட.
- செல்வ புவியரசன், தொடர்புக்கு: puviyarasan.s@hindutamil.co.in
நிலக்கரி மற்றும் மின் அமைச்சகங்களின் மூத்த அதிகாரிகளுடன் செவ்வாய்க்கிழமை நடைபெற்ற சந்திப்பில் இந்தியாவின் அனல் மின் நிலையங்களில் நிலக்கரி இருப்பு நிலவரத்தை பிரதமர் அலுவலகம் ஆய்வு செய்தது. இந்தியாவின் அனல் மின் நிலையங்களின் நிலக்கரி கையிருப்பு 15-30 நாட்களுக்கு இருக்க வேண்டும் என பரிந்துரைக்கப்பட்ட நிலையில், தற்போது சராசரியாக நான்கு நாட்களுக்கான நிலக்கரி அளவே கையிருப்பில் உள்ளது. எனவே நிலக்கரி பற்றாக்குறையின் விளைவாக பல மாநிலங்கள் மின்தடை பற்றிய கவலைகளை வெளிப்படுத்தியுள்ளன.
தற்போதைய நிலக்கரி நெருக்கடியின் அளவு என்ன?
டெல்லி, பஞ்சாப் மற்றும் ராஜஸ்தான் உள்ளிட்ட பல மாநிலங்கள் அனல் மின் நிலையங்களில் நிலக்கரி இருப்பு குறைந்துள்ளதால் ஏற்படும் மின்வெட்டு குறித்து கவலை தெரிவித்துள்ளன. ராஜஸ்தான், பஞ்சாப் மற்றும் பீகார் மாநிலங்கள் குறைந்த திறன் கொண்ட அனல் மின் நிலையங்களின் செயல்பாட்டின் விளைவாக சுமை குறைப்பை (லோடு ஷெட்டிங்) ஏற்கனவே அறிவித்துள்ளன.
நிலக்கரி பற்றாக்குறையானது, தொற்றுநோயின் விளைவுகளிலிருந்து பொருளாதாரம் மீட்கப்பட்டதால் மின் தேவையின் கூர்மையான அதிகரிப்பின் விளைவாகும். ஆகஸ்ட் 2019 இல் 106 பில்லியன் யூனிட்டுகளிலிருந்து ஆகஸ்ட் மாதத்தில் மொத்த மின் தேவை 124 பில்லியன் யூனிட்டுகளாக உயர்ந்துள்ளது. சீனாவில் நிலவும் பற்றாக்குறையால் நிலக்கரி விலை சர்வதேச அளவில் கடுமையாக உயர்ந்துள்ளது மற்றும் ஏப்ரல்-ஜூன் காலகட்டத்தில் அனல் மின்நிலையங்களின் குறைந்த அளவிலான சேமிப்பும் நிலக்கரி பற்றாக்குறைக்கு பங்களித்தன. செப்டம்பரில் நிலக்கரி வெட்டி எடுக்கும் பகுதிகளில் பெய்த கனமழையால் அனல் மின்நிலையங்களுக்கு நிலக்கரி வழங்குவதில் மந்தநிலை ஏற்பட்டது.
இந்தியாவின் நிறுவப்பட்ட மின் உற்பத்தித் திறனில் சுமார் 54 சதவிகிதம் நிலக்கரி மற்றும் லிக்னைட் மூலம் செயல்படும் அனல் மின் நிலையங்கள் தான் கொண்டுள்ளன. ஆனால் தற்போது நாட்டில் உற்பத்தி செய்யப்படும் மின்சாரத்தில் 70 சதவிகிதத்தை அனல் மின் நிலையங்கள் கொண்டுள்ளன.
நிலைமையை சமாளிக்க அரசு என்ன செய்கிறது?
மின்சாரம், நிலக்கரி மற்றும் ரயில்வே அமைச்சகங்களில் உள்ள அதிகாரிகள் அனல் மின் நிலையங்களுக்கான நிலக்கரி விநியோகத்தை கண்காணித்து, மின் உற்பத்திக்கு நிலக்கரியை தினசரி அனுப்புவதை அதிகரிக்க நடவடிக்கை எடுத்துள்ளனர். அனல் மின் நிலையங்களுக்கான நிலக்கரி ஏற்றுமதி அக்டோபர் 11 நிலவரப்படி தினசரி 1.87 மில்லியன் டன் நிலக்கரி தேவைக்கு எதிராக 2 மில்லியன் டன்களை தாண்டியுள்ளது என எரிசக்தித்துறை அமைச்சர் பிரல்ஹாத் ஜோஷி புதன்கிழமை ட்வீட் செய்தார்.
நிலக்கரி கையிருப்பை அதிகரிக்க, இறக்குமதி செய்யப்பட்ட நிலக்கரியின் 10 சதவிகித கலவையைப் பயன்படுத்த, உள்ளூர் நிலக்கரியைப் பயன்படுத்தி மின் உற்பத்தி செய்யும் அனல் மின்நிலையங்களுக்கு மின் அமைச்சகம் அனுமதி அளித்துள்ளது. சர்வதேச நிலக்கரி விலைகள் உச்சத்தை நெருங்கினாலும், இறக்குமதி செய்யப்பட்ட நிலக்கரியின் 10 சதவிகித கலவை ஒரு யூனிட் (கிலோவாட்-மணிநேரங்கள்) மின் உற்பத்தி செலவில் 20-22 பைசா அதிகரிப்புக்கு வழிவகுக்கும் என்று அரசாங்கம் மதிப்பிடுகிறது. மின் விநியோக நிறுவனங்களுடனான மின் கொள்முதல் ஒப்பந்தங்களின் கீழ் உற்பத்தியாளர்கள் விநியோகப்பாளர்களுக்கு விலையை அதிகரிக்க முற்படலாம் என்று அதிகாரிகள் குறிப்பிட்டனர், ஏனெனில் இந்த நிறுவனங்கள் தற்போது மின் பரிமாற்றங்களில் கணிசமாக அதிக விலையில் மின்சாரம் வாங்குவதன் மூலம் மின் விநியோகத்தில் பற்றாக்குறையை சந்திக்கின்றன.
அக்டோபர் 12 அன்று இந்தியா எரிசக்தி பரிமாற்றத்தில் (IEX) டே ஏஹெட் சந்தையில் (DAM) வாங்கும் ஏலம் 430,778 MWh (மெகாவாட்-மணிநேரங்கள்) ஆக உயர்ந்துள்ளது. இது ஒரு மாதத்திற்கு முன்பு 174,373 MWh ஆக இருந்தது. கொள்முதல் ஏலங்கள் சப்ளையை விட அதிகமாக உள்ளது, ஒரு மாதத்திற்கு முன்பு யூனிட் ஒன்றுக்கு ரூ .2.35 ஆக இருந்த சராசரி மார்க்கெட் கிளியரிங் விலை ரூ .15.85 ஆக உயர்ந்துள்ளது.
What coming back to full flight capacity means for passengers Tamil News : இந்தியாவில் பண்டிகை காலம் தொடங்கிவிட்டதால், விமானப் பயணத்திற்கான தேவை மீண்டும் உயர வழிவகுத்துள்ளது. உள்நாட்டு விமானங்களுக்கான விமானக் கட்டுப்பாடுகள் விதிக்கப்பட்டு, அவை திட்டமிடப்பட்ட திறனில் 100% செயல்பட அனுமதித்துள்ளது.
திறன் கட்டுப்பாடுகளை அரசாங்கம் ஏன் தளர்த்தியுள்ளது?
“விமானப் பயணத்திற்கான பயணிகளின் தேவைக்கு ஏற்ப திட்டமிடப்பட்ட உள்நாட்டு செயல்பாடுகளின் தற்போதைய நிலையை மறு ஆய்வுக்குப் பிறகு … திட்டமிடப்பட்ட உள்நாட்டு விமானச் செயல்பாடுகளை 18.10.21 முதல் மீளமைக்க எந்த முடிவும் எடுக்கப்படவில்லை. எவ்வாறாயினும், விமான நிறுவனங்கள்/விமான நிலைய ஆபரேட்டர்கள், கோவிட் பரவுவதைக் கட்டுப்படுத்துவதற்கான வழிகாட்டுதல்கள் கண்டிப்பாக கடைப்பிடிக்கப்படுவதையும், பயணத்தின் போது கோவிட் பொருத்தமான நடத்தை கண்டிப்பாக அமல்படுத்தப்படுவதையும் உறுதி செய்ய வேண்டும்” என்று ஓர் அரசாங்க உத்தரவில் குறிப்பிடப்பட்டுள்ளது.
காலப்போக்கில் இந்த கட்டுப்பாடுகள் எவ்வாறு தளர்த்தப்பட்டன?
ஆரம்ப இரண்டு மாத லாக்டவுனுக்கு பிறகு மே 2020-ல் உள்நாட்டு விமானப் போக்குவரத்து மீண்டும் திறக்கப்பட்டதிலிருந்து, துறையின் அதிக வெப்பத்தைத் தடுக்க உள்நாட்டு வழித்தடங்களில் விமான நிறுவனங்கள் இயக்கக்கூடிய விமானங்களின் எண்ணிக்கையை மையம் ஒழுங்குபடுத்தியது. ஆரம்பத்தில், கோவிட்-க்கு முந்தைய கால அட்டவணையில் விமானங்களின் எண்ணிக்கை 33%-ஆக இருந்தது. மேலும், இது கோவிட் -19-ன் இரண்டாவது அலை வரும் வரை படிப்படியாக 80%-ஆக அதிகரிக்கப்பட்டது. அதன் பிறகு அரசாங்கம் அதை 50%-ஆகக் குறைத்து பின்னர் அதை 60%, 72.5%, 85%ஆகத் தளர்த்தியது. இப்போது கட்டுப்பாடுகளை முழுமையாக நீக்கியுள்ளது.
இந்தியாவில் விமானப் போக்குவரத்து தேவை எப்படி உருவாகிறது?
அக்டோபர் 10-ம் தேதி, உள்நாட்டுப் பயணிகளின் எண்ணிக்கை 3.04 லட்சத்தை எட்டியது. இந்த ஆண்டு பிப்ரவரி 28-ம் தேதிக்குப் பிறகு, 3.14 லட்சம் பயணிகள் உள்நாட்டு விமானங்களில் பயணம் செய்த முதல் நாள் என்பது குறிப்பிடத்தக்கது.
அதிகரித்து வரும் தேவையைக் கருத்தில் கொண்டு, நாட்டின் இரண்டு பெரிய விமான நிலையங்கள் – டெல்லி மற்றும் மும்பை, குறைந்த பயணிகளின் எண்ணிக்கை காரணமாக மூடப்பட்ட டெர்மினல்களை, மீண்டும் திறப்பதாக அறிவித்தது. இதன் மூலம் விமான போக்குவரத்தில் முன்னேற்றத்திற்குத் தயாராக உள்ளது என்பது தெளிவாகத் தெரிகிறது.
இண்டிகோ மற்றும் ஸ்பைஸ்ஜெட் ஆகிய நிறுவனங்கள் மூடப்பட்ட 18 மாதங்களுக்குப் பிறகு அக்டோபர் 31 முதல் டெர்மினல் 1-ல் மீண்டும் செயல்படும் என்று டெல்லி விமான நிலையம் அறிவித்தது. மும்பை விமான நிலையம், கடந்த வாரம் திடீர் போக்குவரத்து அதிகரிப்பு காரணமாகக் குழப்பம் மற்றும் விமான தாமதங்களைக் கண்டது. அக்டோபர் 20 முந்தைய தேதியிலிருந்து அதன் முனையம் 1 முதல் புதன்கிழமை வரை மீண்டும் தொடங்கப்பட்டது.
Two decades after September 11, 2001, when al-Qaeda carried out its most audacious attacks ever on American soil, leading to the Global war on terror and triggering the invasion of Afghanistan by the United States, it might be worthwhile to do a fact check on the outcome. More so given the latest turn of events, which has seen the return of the Taliban in Afghanistan, leading to the question as to whether the Global war on terror was a failure. Also, are there lessons to be learnt from it?
A perspective
In retrospect, it is possible to surmise that the 9/11 attacks were the sum total of a series of systemic and structural shortcomings of the U.S. security establishment. Seldom mentioned, it was also, perhaps, the failure of human imagination. No one in the U.S. establishment imagined that an attack on this scale could take place. It is unclear whether even today security agencies in the U.S. and elsewhere are better positioned in this respect.
Historians surmise that Osama bin Laden’s actions were inspired as much by geopolitical as they were by religious objectives, and that he was obsessed by the ‘sufferings of Muslims’ in many far-flung regions. He believed — mistakenly — that delivering a decisive blow against the U.S. by an action such as 9/11 would force the U.S. to alter its policies in many areas of conflict.
Osama bin Laden failed to succeed in his attempt, and over time it was al-Qaeda that faced the wrath of not only the U.S., but the rest of the world as well. Osama bin Laden’s aims to destroy the ‘myth of American invincibility’ failed, but since then, the world has witnessed prolonged periods of uncertainty as also the spawning of many more terror groups worldwide. The Global war on terror did, however, neutralise fears that terrorism was poised to create large-scale mayhem across the globe.
Several reasons could be attributed to bin Laden’s failure. It would seem, in hindsight, that bin Laden and other leaders associated with al-Qaeda such as Ayman al-Zawahiri, other jihadi leaders such as Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of the Islamic State (IS) or Mukhtar Abu Zubair of Al-Shabab, all lacked the centrality of vision or power so essential to sustain the momentum of an initiative of this kind. Moreover, while in the initial stages, Afghanistan — and to an extent, Pakistan — provided safe havens (which together with the presence of several disparate terror groups in a common milieu provided powerful unifying forces for disparate groups), the situation changed once the safe havens were no longer available. In addition, the lack of visibility of the leaders of the movement over time and diminished authority also contributed to dissipation of the terror momentum and the capacity for militancy and violence.
Persistent challenge
Two decades of the Global war on terror did not, however, eradicate terrorism. Notwithstanding leadership losses, including that of leaders like bin Laden and al Baghdadi, and despite organisational fracturing and territorial degradation, terror groups such as al-Qaeda and the IS today pose a persistent challenge. Hard intelligence on the myriad terror modules has been hard to come by and the absence of a single core for either al- Qaeda or the IS, is making it even more difficult to assess the true nature of the threat that looms. It would be tempting for intelligence agencies to think that the current low-tech attacks, involving small arms, the occasional use of Improvised Explosive Devices, and random ‘lone wolf’ attacks reflect the weakening of terror modules, including that of al-Qaeda and the IS. Nothing could be more misleading. Not only the major terror groups but even smaller terror modules currently retain the potential for both sophisticated and mass casualty attacks.
History is, therefore, more relevant and important when assessing future threats such as terrorism. The broad sweep acquired by radical Islam in recent decades has, by no means, been eliminated. Terrorism, stemming from a mixture of religious fervour and fundamentalist aims, remains vibrant. The newer breed of terrorists may be less familiar with the teachings of the Egyptian, Sayyid Qutb or the Palestinian, Abdullah Azzam, but they are well-versed in the practical methodologies practised by: the Jalaluddin and Sirajuddin Haqqanis (the latter is a Minister in the Interim Afghan Government), Hafiz Saeed of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Maulana Masood Azhar of the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), etc. Hence, it is possible to surmise that notwithstanding some temporary setbacks caused by the Global war on terror, the broad contours of terrorism, specially Islamist terrorism, remain much the same.
A grim warning
The return of the Taliban in Afghanistan, after humiliating the combined forces of the U.S., the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Afghan Armed Forces is a grim warning of what lies in store for the neighbourhood. Apart from giving radical Islam a fresh lease of life and a new thrust, it has come at a time when the democratic world is demonstrating a diminishing appetite to fight terror away from their own ‘locales’, thus leaving the field wide open to the forces of Terror Inc., of which the Taliban is an indispensable entity. Several terror groups which possess varying capabilities such as al-Qaeda, the IS, the Daesh across Asia, the LeT, JeM and the TRF (The Resistance Front, which is backed by the LeT) in India, the Al-Shabab in Africa, etc., are certain to feel energised and gain a fresh lease of life.
In India
One can already see emerging signs of what can be expected in Afghanistan given that its capital, Kabul, has been wracked by a series of bomb blasts, reflecting a more intensified intra-denominational strife which has the potential to become a ‘prairie fire’. Nearer home, Kashmir is beginning to see a new wave of terror attacks reviving grim memories of the 1990s. Targeted killings of minorities have begun to send shockwaves across not only Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), but many other pockets of the country. Given the prevailing scenario, the dice is heavily loaded against India, with J&K being in the cross-hairs of several terror factions, further complicated by Pakistan’s efforts to aid and abet them through the use of its ‘regulars’. That Sirajuddin Haqqani, a Pakistani acolyte, holds a key position in the new interim Government of Afghanistan, makes it easier for forces inimical to India in the region, essentially Pakistan, to wage an ‘undeclared war’ against India.
While the past is often a good guide to the future in comprehending what shape terror could manifest itself going forward, it is even more important to recognise the paradigmatic changes beginning to take shape in the practice of violence in different parts of the world. The emerging shape of terror and terror attacks during coming periods is likely to be very different from what many of today’s experts possibly anticipate. While ‘Zero-day’ attacks like New York (9/11) and Mumbai (26/11) are still very much on the drawing board of terror groups, it is also known that a new breed of terrorists is experimenting with newer forms of terror, specially the possibility of ‘enabled or remote controlled terror’. This is a frightening prospect.
The forms of ‘new era’ terror
Intelligence and terror specialists must begin to anticipate how to deal with ‘new era terrorists’, recruited over the Internet, who would thereafter be guided through different steps, over a sustained period, by anonymous handlers located elsewhere. This is not science fiction. There is already evidence of the existence of remote controllers who choose the targets, the actual operatives, the nature of the attack itself, and even the weaponry to be used, operating behind a wall of anonymity. Internet-enabled terrorism — a completely new genre of terrorism — would be very different from what we have seen so far.
Linked to this is the threat posed by cyber-terrorism. Digital sabotage has already entered the armoury of certain terror groups. Cyber sabotage is a distinct possibility in certain situations today. It is well-known that terror groups that have state backing, have the capacity today to employ cyber techniques to carry out hostile attacks on the ICT-enabled infrastructure of another country. While little is talked about these aspects, the reality is that the limits of human imagination have become the virtual parameters of terror threats today.
M.K. Narayanan is a former National Security Adviser and a former Governor of West Bengal
Seven years after the bifurcation of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh, many of the promises made in the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act of 2014 affecting the two Telugu States remain unfulfilled. Unkept promises and flow of funds apart, the two States are struggling to cope with post-bifurcation challenges like river water-sharing.
A new trend
Andhra Pradesh’s demands, some of which were articulated by Chief Minister Y. S. Jagan Mohan Reddy in a recent meeting with Union Home Minister Amit Shah, and some others earlier, include Special Category Status; Rs. 55,656 crore for the Polavaram irrigation project, designated as a national project; shifting of the Polavaram Project Authority from Hyderabad to Rajahmundry; relocating the High Court of Andhra Pradesh from Amaravati to Kurnool; restructuring of debts of Rs. 50,000 crore in which the Andhra Pradesh power utilities are mired; and release of pending dues — Rs. 3,299 crore related to subsidy for Public Distribution System rice from the Union Food Ministry and Rs. 4,652 crore from the Union Rural Development Ministry.
Telangana Chief Minister K. Chandrasekhara Rao’s list is similar. During a meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi last month, Mr. Rao sought an Indian Institute of Management at Hyderabad. His other demands have been a Hyderabad-Nagpur Industrial Corridor, Rs. 1,000 crore for a textile park at Warangal, 100% funding for road network in Left-Wing Extremism affected areas, the setting up of a Tribal University in Warangal, and additional funds for improving road connectivity in backward areas as promised in the State Reorganisation Act.
Despite their customary visits to Delhi and meeting the Prime Minister and Union Ministers, both the Chief Ministers have scrupulously avoided making these long-pending problems a big Centre-State federal issue of national importance. They prefer to maintain a strategic silence.
This is a new trend in Telangana-Andhra politics. It is a perceptible shift from the days of former Chief Minister N.T. Rama Rao, who was in constant battle with the Centre over issues affecting erstwhile Andhra Pradesh, beginning with Telugu culture, language and pride. A fiery fighter against centralisation, the misuse of Article 356, and the institution of governors, Rao strongly worked for multi-party federalism. This is what inspired him to form an anti-Congress rainbow coalition, the National Front. His famous statements — the “Centre is a conceptual myth” and the Congress had “mortgaged” the self-respect and interests of Telugus in Delhi — were a big hit with the Telugu people. Former Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu too sparred with the Centre over Special Category Status and this ultimately led to his Telugu Desam Party (TDP) snapping ties with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Ironically, it was Mr. Reddy’s YSR Congress Party’s strident posture on Special Category Status that pushed Mr. Naidu to take a tough stand. Mr. Reddy used to taunt Mr. Naidu and tell people that if he had all 25 MPs fiom Andhra Pradesh in the Lok Sabha, he could have forced the Centre to grant Special Category Status to Andhra Pradesh. The YSR Congress Party now has 22 MPs in the Lok Sabha, but not much is heard about Special Category Status anymore. After provoking Mr. Naidu to walk out of the National Democratic Alliance, Mr. Reddy started cultivating the BJP. Their relationship continues to blossom, pushing State issues to the background.
Notably, both the YSR Congress Party and the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) supported the revocation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories. Though the TRS opposed the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill (CAB) in Parliament, Mr. Rao did not categorically say that the National Register of Citizens (NRC) will not be implemented in Telangana. Mr. Reddy first supported the CAB, but several days later, after Asaduddin Owaisi appealed to him to withdraw his party’s support, said the NRC would not be implemented in Andhra Pradesh.
Fighting for federalism
So, what happened to the fighting spirit of the Chief Ministers and political leaders from Andhra and Telangana? Why are they now going soft on the Union government and being perceived as compromising with it? Why has the battle for federalism been left to leaders like West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee?
The reasons are layered. Both Mr. Rao and Mr. Reddy appear to be wary of the dominance of the BJP and the power of Mr. Modi and are aware of the political implications of taking on the Centre. In Mr. Reddy’s case, it may be political compulsion, given the slew of charges of acquiring disproportionate assets that he faces in a special CBI court. He also considers the TDP as a bigger political adversary than the BJP in Andhra Pradesh. Mr. Rao too has preferred to settle for a non-confrontational approach towards the BJP, having realised the futility of floating a non-BJP non-Congress front.
But while strategising for their political survival, the two leaders are either unable to fathom or conveniently ignore the BJP’s centralising tendencies and its attempts to implement its idea of ‘One Nation One Ration Card’, ‘One Nation One Election’, ‘One Nation One Language’. This project fits into the BJP’s long-cherished ideological agenda of homogenising India in total disregard to the nation’s historic diversity and plurality and seeks to bulldoze the federalism cherished by erstwhile Andhra Pradesh’s former leaders.
The beauty of Indian federalism is that it not only created enough space for the States to flourish and fight for their rights, but also safeguarded multiculturalism. This happened over time — first, when the Centre and States were ruled by different parties and later, when national and regional parties came together to form coalition governments. Differences were respected and sorted out in true federal spirit. Some States were accorded special privileges for historical, cultural and ethnic reasons. One party now wants to wipe this out in the name of national unity and its one nation theory.
The signs are already there. For all its talk of promoting ‘cooperative federalism’, the BJP keeps undermining the concept, as seen in the abrogation of Article 370 and its attempt to change the political landscape of Kashmir; the multiple ways in which it creates trouble in West Bengal and Maharashtra; and the defections it has engineered in Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka.
Politically savvy and strong regional leaders like Mr. Rao and Mr. Reddy should rise to the occasion and foil such crude attempts to hit at federalism and democracy. Their attitude of running with the hare and hunting with the hounds could even boomerang. By remaining silent and indirectly toeing the BJP’s line, they are lending legitimacy to its one nation agenda, besides unwittingly enabling this agenda to grow and become stronger. Whatever their compulsions, they should not forget that Indian federalism is intrinsically woven into the Constitution, and they have every right to challenge moves to weaken it, eroding the autonomy of the States. If they chose to be reluctant, they will be doing a great disservice to the nation.
K. Venkateshwarlu is a senior journalist based in Hyderabad
Every year on the second Monday of October, The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel a.k.a. the Nobel Prize for Economics is announced. This year, on October 11, three econometricians – David Card, Joshua D. Angrist and Guido W. Imbens — were given this distinct honour. Interestingly, David Card was awarded half the prize while the remaining half was split equally between Angrist and Imbens. Incidentally, every year the actual prize is awarded in a grand ceremony on December 10 which coincides with the death anniversary of Alfred Nobel.
A connecting thread
The Nobel citation says that the prize was awarded “for empirical labour economics and methodological contributions to the analysis of causal relationships”. All three have many more things in common beyond their interest in this aspect of econometrics. Not surprisingly, they teach at some of the finest universities in the world — Card teaches at UC Berkeley, Angrist at MIT and Imbens at Stanford. Both Card and Angrist got their PhDs from Princeton, and their doctoral supervisor was the legendary labour economist, Orley Ashenfelter. Imbens obtained his doctoral degree from Brown University, and all three are fellows of the Econometric Society, a rare honour among economists. Their list of honours is extensive, but it is worth mentioning that the unique honour of being Guido Imbens ‘best man” goes to Joshua Angrist.
An important quest
For me this year’s Nobel Prize for economics is especially precious since it has been given to those making a methodological contribution for establishing causality. Economics has always been interested in causal relationships, already evident from Adam Smith’s book title,An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. This is particularly important in matters of human behaviour as casual relationships are critical for making policy. Suppose you observe that whenever my sister buys shoes, it rains in Bhubaneswar. If this was a coincidence or spurious correlation, then we have nothing to worry about. But if this was causal, then a flood prevention policy for Bhubaneswar would be to put an end to my sister’s shoe shopping sprees! This quest for causality is doubly important in this era of big data where analysts simply look for patterns in the data and not for behaviours that might give rise to the data generating process.
When we observe two events, A and B, being correlated, in general we cannot conclude that A causes B simply because a bunch of confounding factors that we have not taken into account may be present or there may even be reverse causality. A way out is to consider an experimental framework where we think of event A as a treatment and see what events it generates.
However, even this is problematic. Once we offer a treatment to an individual, it is not possible to study the same individual without the treatment. Therefore, we need to resort to statistical techniques. One type of statistical technique in this vein which was introduced and popularised in economics by the winners of the 2019 Nobel Prize Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo (incidentally Angrist was one of Duflo’s PhD supervisors) and Michael Kremer is called a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT). In this approach we compare the outcomes in the treatment and no treatment (control) groups just like in a medicine trial to establish causality while guarding against things like contamination across the two groups.
A different technique
This year’s Nobel Prize winners use a different technique called Natural Experiments. To quote Peter Fredriksson, Chair of the Prize Committee, “Sometimes nature or policy changes provide situations that resemble randomized experiments,” and the brilliance of those scholars lies in their ability to recognise these situations and identify the conditions under which causal links can be established using these naturally occurring phenomena.
Take for instance the work of David Card (with the late Alan Krueger who many believed would have shared the Nobel) on minimum wages. Typically, economists believed that raising the minimum wage will lead to greater unemployment as firms will hire fewer workers. In 1992, New Jersey increased its minimum wage while neighbouring Pennsylvania did not. Card and Krueger surveyed a large number of fast food workers on either side of the New Jersey-Pennsylvania border in this natural experiment and established that the higher wages had no impact on employment! This study has helped change how economists view minimum wages; today it is widely believed that minimum wages may not affect employment since firms may pass on the costs to consumers.
Statistical techniques
One drawback of natural experiments is that we cannot control who participates in them. This is where the work of Angrist and Imbens has been very important to economics and other related fields. Angrist and Imbens developed a framework and demonstrated how statistical techniques can be used to draw precise conclusions about causal relationships from natural experiments.
Finally, if you are looking to access some of the work of these scholars you can find plenty of papers on Google Scholar. Angrist is one of the authors of two excellent introductory books:Mostly Harmless EconometricsandMastering Metricsthat are probably the most accessible of all their work. Imbens is the author of an all-encompassing book titledCausal Inference for Statistics, Social and Biomedical Sciences. David Card is one of the editors of several volumes of the encyclopedic,Handbook of Labor Economics.
Sudipta Sarangi is a Professor of Economics at Virginia Tech, U.S., and is the author of the recent book, ‘The Economics of Small Things’
In the run-up to the 26th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), media reports have claimed that developed countries are inching closer to the target of providing $100 billion annually in climate finance to developing countries by 2025 (the original target was 2020). This view has been bolstered by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which claimed that climate finance provided by developed countries had reached $78.9 billion in 2018.
Flawed claims
These claims are erroneous. First, the OECD figure includes private finance and export credits. Developing countries have insisted that developed country climate finance should be from public sources and should be provided as grants or as concessional loans. However, the OECD report makes it clear that the public finance component amounted to only $62.2 billion in 2018, with bilateral funding of about $32.7 billion and $29.2 billion through multilateral institutions. Significantly, the final figure comes by adding loans and grants. Of the public finance component, loans comprise 74%, while grants make up only 20%. The report does not say how much of the total loan component of $46.3 billion is concessional. From 2016 to 2018, 20% of bilateral loans, 76% of loans provided by multilateral development banks and 46% of loans provided by multilateral climate funds were non-concessional. Between 2013 and 2018, the share of loans has continued to rise, while the share of grants decreased. The overwhelming provisioning of climate finance through loans risks exacerbates the debt crisis of many low-income countries.
The OECD reports on climate finance have long been criticised for inflating climate finance figures by including funds for development projects such as health and education that only notionally target climate action. The Oxfam report on climate finance discounts for the climate relevance of reported funds to estimate how much climate finance is actually targeting climate action and also discounts for grant equivalence. In contrast to the OECD report, Oxfam estimates that in 2017-18, out of an average of $59.5 billion of public climate finance reported by developed countries, the climate-specific net assistance ranged only between $19 and $22.5 billion per year.
The hollowness of the OECD claims is also exposed by the accounts provided by the developed countries themselves in their Biennial Reports submitted to the UNFCCC. The 2018 Biennial Assessment of UNFCCC’s Standing Committee on Finance reports that on average, developed countries provided only $26 billion per year as climate-specific finance between 2011-2016 even if these numbers are still open to challenge. This rose to an average of $36.2 billion in 2017-18.
Broken promises
U.S. President Joe Biden recently said that the U.S. will double its climate finance by 2024. But any claim that such a pledge will make the U.S. a “leader in international climate finance” is misleading. It is Congress that will decide on the quantum after all. The U.S. also has a history of broken commitments, having promised $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund (GCF) under President Barack Obama, but delivering only $1 billion before President Donald Trump withdrew U.S. support from the GCF. Mr. Biden initially promised only $1.2 billion to the GCF, which fell well short of what was already owed.
In any case, the future focus of U.S. climate finance is the mobilisation of private sector investment, as John Kerry, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate Change, made it clear during his recent visit to India. Alongside claims that a few trillion dollars of private investment were being mobilised, he was clear that public finance would only contribute to “de-risking” of investment. At the end of the day, the bulk of the money coming in would be through private funds, directed to those projects judged “bankable” and not selected based on developing countries’ priorities and needs. Regrettably, behind the rhetoric of mobilising climate finance lies the grim reality of burdening the G77 and its peoples with a fresh load of “green” debt.
Climate finance has also remained skewed towards mitigation, despite the repeated calls for maintaining a balance between adaptation and mitigation. The 2016 Adaptation Gap Report of the UN Environment Programme had noted that the annual costs of adaptation in developing countries could range from $140 to $300 billion annually by 2030 and rise to $500 billion by 2050. Currently available adaptation finance is significantly lower than the needs expressed in the Nationally Determined Contributions submitted by developing countries.
Delivering on climate finance is fundamental to trust in the multilateral process. Regrettably, while developing countries will continue to pressure developed countries to live up to their promises, the history of climate negotiations is not in their favour.
T. Jayaraman is Senior Fellow, Climate Change, M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF) and Sreeja Jaiswal is a senior scientist with MSSRF
The health of a country’s agri-food systems determines the health of its people. The findings from the first round of the Fifth National Family Health Survey suggest that nutrition-related indicators have worsened in most States. The survey covers 17 States and five Union Territories, which comprise 54% of India’s population. In addition, findings from the Comprehensive National Nutrition Survey (2016-18) have highlighted the role of micro-nutrient malnutrition.
A multi-pronged approach
For Indians to eat better, India must sow better. A structural shift in dietary pattern and nutrition requires a shift in production. Pathways for nutritional security consist of improving dietary diversity, kitchen gardens, reducing post-harvest losses, making safety net programmes more nutrition-sensitive, women’s empowerment, enforcement of standards and regulations, improving Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, nutrition education, and effective use of digital technology.
Addressing the complex problem of malnutrition is a colossal task for which we need to look at agri-food systems as a whole and adopt a multi-pronged approach. While COVID-19 has exacerbated the nutrition issue, climate change has challenged agricultural production itself. However, the country’s agri-food systems are facing new and unprecedented challenges, especially related to economic and ecological sustainability, nutrition and the adoption of new agricultural technologies. The edifice of India’s biosecurity remains vulnerable to disasters and extreme events,.
The agri-food systems are the most important part of the Indian economy. India produces sufficient food, feed and fibre to sustain about 18% of the world’s population (as of 2020). Agriculture contributes about 16.5% to India’s GDP and employs 42.3% of the workforce (2019-20).
There is an urgent need for reorientation of the long-term direction of agri-food systems to not only enhance farm incomes but also ensure better access to safe and nutritious foods. Additionally, the agri-food systems need to be reoriented to minimise cost on the environment and the climate. This need is recognised by the theme of World Food Day 2021: ‘Our actions are our future. Better production, better nutrition, a better environment and a better life’. The four betters represent the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)’s contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals and other high-level aspirational goals.
World Food Day marks the foundation day of the FAO. FAO has enjoyed valuable partnership with India since it began operations in 1948. More recently, FAO has been engaged with the Indian government for mainstreaming agrobiodiversity, greening agriculture, promoting nutrition-sensitive agriculture and strengthening national food security.
FAO’s support for the transformation of agri-food systems is rooted in agro-ecology. The more diverse an agricultural system, the greater its ability to adapt to shocks. Different combinations of integrated crop-livestock-forestry-fishery systems can help farmers produce a variety of products in the same area, at the same time or in rotation.
In January this year, FAO in collaboration with NITI Aayog and the Ministry of Agriculture convened a National Dialogue to evolve a framework for the transition to a more sustainable agri-food systems by 2030 and identify pathways for enhancing farmers’ income and achieving nutritional security. A sustainable agri-food system is one in which a variety of sufficient, nutritious and safe foods are made available at an affordable price to everyone, and nobody goes hungry or suffers from any form of malnutrition. Less food is wasted, and the food supply chain is more resilient to shocks. Food systems can help combat environmental degradation or climate change. Sustainable agri-food systems can deliver food security and nutrition for all, without compromising the economic, social and environmental bases.
Tomio Shichiri is FAO’s Country Director/Representative in India
The latest sets of data on industrial output and retail inflation are beguilingly heartening, with the former showing a double-digit year-on-year increase in production, and the latter positing a sharp slowdown in price gains. The Index of Industrial Production (IIP) and Consumer Price Index (CPI) figures released on Tuesday show industrial output rose 11.9% in August, while inflation in September slowed by 95 basis points from the preceding month to 4.35%. The numbers seem to indicate a gathering recovery in economic momentum, even as CPI-based inflation eases towards the RBI’s mandated target of 4%. The IIP constituents — mining, manufacturing and electricity — posted appreciable improvements of 23.6%, 9.7% and 16%, respectively. But a closer look shows the production figures were buoyed substantially by the contractions that occurred last year when the economy was still struggling to recover from the first COVID-19 lockdown. The eroded base in the case of the August 2020 IIP data disguises the fact that output actually shrank 0.2% on a month-on-month basis this year with mining and manufacturing, which together account for 94% of the index, posting sequential contractions of 0.8% and 0.5%, respectively. Only consumer non-durables and construction goods posted increases from July. The slowdown in the consumer durables category reflects the lack of demand for white goods amid the pandemic.
With last fiscal’s IIP numbers showing output rebounding in September-October 2020, and some industrial sectors, including automobile manufacturing, hit this year by raw material shortages and logistic constraints, it is hard to see production sustaining the pace of growth. Inflation too has benefited from the elevated levels in the year-earlier period when the headline reading had accelerated to 7.3% in September 2020, and subsequently touched 7.6% last October. The CPI data mask the real extent of price pressures across major product categories. Undermining nutritional security especially among the sizeable number who have suffered job or income cuts, key protein sources including meat and fish and pulses and products recorded provisional inflation of 7.99% and 8.75%, respectively, while the vital cooking medium of oils and fats saw price gains accelerate to a punishing 34.2%. Transport and communication, which captures pump prices of petrol and diesel, also stayed stuck close to double digits at 9.5%. With global crude oil ruling near three-year highs, unless the Central and State governments deign to respond to the RBI’s entreaties and cut fuel levies, there is little scope for inflation easing by much in this category. The coal crisis that is roiling power output is sure to also ripple across sectors and undermine price stability unless policy makers intervene post haste.
At a meeting of countries with the world’s highest GDPs — the G-20 — Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke about the looming humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, especially as winter nears. He also called for the international community to provide Afghanistan with “immediate and unhindered access to humanitarian assistance”. The meeting came as the UNHCR published a new appeal for funds, with a report that half the population (more than 20 million people) are in need of “lifesaving humanitarian assistance”, and the UN has received only 35% of the funds needed for its relief operations. As a result of the Taliban takeover, most direct aid to the Afghan government has dried up; its reserves have been frozen by the U.S., making it impossible for salaries to be paid. The Taliban government’s refusal to allow women to work and its stopping girls from schooling have made the situation more dire. While recognition of the Taliban and any governmental engagement is a long way off, the world is faced with the stark choice on how to ensure Afghanistan does not suffer further. At the summit, the EU committed $1.15 billion for Afghanistan and neighbouring countries where refugees have fled, while other countries including the U.S. and China pledged $1.1 billion at a donor conference in Geneva last month. India has not announced any monetary or food assistance.
The PM’s words are a welcome sign that the Government remains seized of the welfare of ordinary Afghans even as New Delhi has closed its embassy but maintains only a limited exchange with Taliban officials in Doha. Given the manner of the Taliban’s takeover in August, with support from Pakistan, maintaining links with terror groups including those that target India leaves the Government hard put to increase its engagement, or to send aid directly to the new regime. But India could contribute to international agencies that are working with displaced Afghans, particularly for about one million children at the risk of starvation. It could also help Iran and the Central Asian states that are housing refugees with monetary assistance. The Government could also consider liberalising its visa regime for Afghans, which at the moment has cancelled all prior visas to Afghan nationals, and is releasing very few e-visas for Afghans desperate to travel here. As a goodwill gesture, India could once again send food aid, including wheat, grain, fortified biscuits and other packaged food, directly to Kabul. Clearly, the imperative to act is now, at what the UN Secretary General has called a “make or break” moment for the Afghan people, and to heed the warning that if the international community, which includes a regional leader like India, does not help stave off the unfolding humanitarian crisis, not only Afghans but also the rest of the world will pay a “heavy price”.
The Pakistan President has interspersed his latest address to his people about the election programme in the east wing with invective against India which is accused of massing troops on the border. Since Pakistani forces are observed in strength on all our frontiers, the question as to who moved first is really academic in view of the growing tension in East Pakistan where the Awami League guerrillas are extremely active. What is happening in Gen. Yahya Khan’s political programme is his determination to hold bye-elections to fill a large number of empty seats in the national and provincial assemblies despite the unrest in the region. In the second week of December some 78 National Assembly and 105 Provincial Assembly seats have to be voted for with new candidates, and the whole process is to be completed by December 23. Early in the new year, the President promises to convene the assemblies and give them a new constitution drafted by his experts. The National Assembly may propose amendments, provided they do not contravene the integrity or ideology of Pakistan. Three months will be allowed for making changes in the document, all of which will have to have Gen. Yahya Khan’s approval.
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi will meet the Akali delegation on October 16. Besides the Akalis, Mrs Gandhi will also meet important Hindu leaders of Punjab before her departure on a 10-day-tour abroad. The PM’s secretariat is busy arranging her meeting with the Akali leaders. Mrs Gandhi is not depending on the advice of either Home Minister Zail Singh or Punjab CM Darbara Singh. While Zail Singh has been in favour of a dialogue with the Akalis, Darbara Singh was not too keen on this. Mrs Gandhi is aware of the views of these two leaders. She may, therefore, seek the guidance of Swaran Singh, former minister of external affairs, to solve the Punjab tangle. It is possible that the Hindu leaders may be invited either on October 16 or even earlier. This is considered necessary, especially after the assassination of Lala Jagat Narain, which had generated a lot of tension in the state.
Evasive Zia
Pakistan appears not to have made up its mind yet about what it should do with the five hijackers who forced an Indian Airlines Boeing to land at Lahore two weeks ago. In an off-the-cuff talk with reporters after a function in Rawalpindi, President Zia-ul Haq avoided a direct answer to a query about Islamabad’s decision on the Indian request for the return of the hijackers. The decision would be made known later, officially, the general said. The Indian ambassador, Natwar Singh, made a formal request for the return of the hijackers led by Gajendra Singh of Dal Khalsa within hours of their arrest at Lahore on September 30 by Pakistani commandos.
Credit For Ghana
India is to provide Ghana credit assistance of Rs 50 million according to one of the five agreements signed between the two countries to strengthen bilateral cooperation in economic, trade, scientific and cultural fields.
To the surprise and delight of many fans — and the grumblings of a few — Superman has come out as bisexual. Jon Kent, who has recently taken on the burden of the good fight from his father Clark Kent, is in a relationship with a male journalist named Jay Nakamura, according to publisher DC Comics, which shared some artwork from the fifth issue of the Superman: Son of Kal-El series this week.
It may seem to some that the writers are merely jumping onto a bandwagon of a sort — as alleged by Dean Cain, who played the character in the 1990s TV series. After all, Superman isn’t the first superhero to come out of the closet, especially in the last two decades. The list of queer heroes in DC alone includes Wonder Woman, Harley Quinn, Batwoman and the third Robin, Tim Drake, who came out as bisexual in Batman: Urban Legends in August.
Yet, the Man of Steel’s bisexuality is a big deal for many reasons, not the least of which is that this is yet another blow against the sexism and queerbaiting that has plagued the genre. LGBTQI+ fans of the comics have long lobbied for the queercoding in the stories — double lives and multiple identities, the homoerotic overtones of many of the male relationships, notably between Batman and Robin — to be elevated from subtext to text. And recently, it seems like the writers have listened, making explicit the queer aspects of existing characters, introducing new LGBTQI+ characters and canonising pet fan theories and “ships”. Still, a fuller representation was slow to come, especially as the largest populariser of the superhero genre, the Marvel cinematic universe (MCU), has stayed rigidly heteronormative (except in the case of Loki who was recently identified as gender-fluid and bisexual, like he has been in the comics). In such a context, a bisexual Superman — still the most popular superhero, despite the MCU juggernaut — is well worth celebrating.
With Bharat Biotech-developed Covaxin receiving a recommendation for approval for use among children over two years of age, India is now the only country to have a Covid-19 vaccine for every age group. No other vaccine has so far been approved for infants and young children. Pfizer and BioNTech had announced last month that their vaccine had elicited robust responses among children of 5 to 11 years of age in phase 2/3 trials, but that is yet to be approved. As of now, only three vaccines are available for the 12-18 age bracket, those developed by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, and another by Zydus which was cleared by India in August.
The formal clearance to Covaxin for younger children brings in another layer of protection against Covid-19. This is crucial at a time when schools and colleges are opening up, and there is a discernible rise in the number of infections amongst children, even those below 10 years of age. As reported by this newspaper, the proportion of children in the new infections has been much higher in July and August this year, compared to any time earlier in the pandemic. This is not surprising given the fact that a large proportion of the adult population could have developed some immunity, either because of a prior infection, or due to vaccination. Reassuringly, there is no perceptible rise in serious cases amongst children.
There are still about 24-25 crore people in India above the age of 18 who are yet to get a single dose. Among them are the elderly and the sick, and those in remote areas where access to vaccines is not easy. Among those who have received the first dose, less than 30 per cent are fully vaccinated. The exercise to vaccinate children must not slow down vaccinations in this group, which must continue to remain the priority. Bharat Biotech is yet to release the data from phase 2/3 trials on the basis of which it has received the recommendation for approval for use among children. While the company says it would soon publish the results in a journal, it would have been better if it had made the results public before the approval — it would help build confidence among the public. Covaxin’s application for emergency use authorisation from the World Health Organisation has been pending for a long time now. Proactive disclosure of relevant trial data can help in clearing such bottlenecks.
Speaking at the 28th Foundation Day of the National Human Rights Commission, Tuesday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of human rights in ways that could potentially take the conversation further and deeper — but also in ways that run into familiar dead ends. The prime minister was right to point out that there is a political lens through which rights are viewed, but he made it sound like an accusation more dire than it deserves to be. Of course, there is a politics of human rights and, as the PM said, views can be and are “selective”. There are “my human rights”, versus “your human rights”, vantage points matter. That is in the order of political things. But to say that “selective outrage” over human rights is the biggest violation, that it hurts the country’s image and is “dangerous” for democracy, is surely to oversay it. This is still a country where, all too often, basic individual freedoms and rights are unprotected, and violated by a state that is excessively powerful and also armed with impunity — Lakhimpur Kheri is a reminder that the right to protest safely and the right to justice can be put to the test. But more significantly, perhaps, it is what the PM said about basic needs, his government’s achievements in delivery of goods and services that meet those needs, and the relationship between needs and rights, that opens a conversation, while pointing to the dead-ends.
In a capacious democracy, it would be narrowing the room for discussion severely to pose “basic needs” and “human rights” as separate from each other, or sequential, or in conflict — not as essential partners. Links need to be drawn and acknowledged — between meeting basic needs and asserting basic rights, between needs and development, between human rights and development. While doing this, it is important to see the people not as beneficiaries, but as those who are entitled to both the benefits of development and freedoms, economic, social and political. Moreover, the latter must be seen not as a means of achieving development but as a direct good in their own right. In this context, the PM’s emphasis on the delivery by his government of goods — he gave the example of Ujjwala gas cylinders, among others — is well taken. Indeed, the effect of the success of several of the government’s flagship schemes, which are essentially non-discriminatory in their targeting and their reach, cannot be underestimated in persuading voters, and also empowering them. But the PM’s stress on human rights mattering only when basic needs are fulfilled is problematic, in as much as it sees the two as disparate and divisible, and as counting for more and less.
The PM’s party’s own slogan seems to urge a more encompassing view. “Sabka saath, sabka vikas” now has “sabka vishwas” added to it. For earning the people’s trust, the need for the gas cylinder cannot be, it must not be, walled off from the right to justice. And special steps, beyond Direct Benefit Transfer, need to be taken to ensure that “sabka” translates into everyone, including the minorities, as well as the voiceless and the poor.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi completed 20 years in public service as head of a government at the state and national level on October 7, 2021. A gifted individual of humble origin, who rose to high office by dint of hard work and sacrifice, he epitomises the aspirations of the common citizen. As chief minister, Modi injected transparency in governance. He had a global vision for his state and reached out to invite investments and best practices from around the world.
As consul-general of India in Sydney, the author received an invitation to attend the 2007 Vibrant Gujarat Summit at which Chief Minister Modi, in keeping with his usual practice, personally interacted with many of the participants, encouraging them to promote Brand Gujarat globally. During incidents of assault on Indian students in Australia in 2007-2008, Modi was the only chief minister who took personal interest in the welfare of students from Gujarat.
It was not uncommon for state government officials to receive calls from the chief minister for one-on-one discussions. They were empowered and encouraged to take decisions but also made more accountable. A patient listener, he never permitted hierarchy and red tape to stymie good ideas.
When Modi moved to New Delhi, he brought with him the same dynamism and qualities that defined his long and successful innings as chief minister. As Prime Minister, he remains down to earth, with genuine compassion for the common man. An administrator with a clear vision, he has demonstrated a pragmatic problem-solving approach in dealing with the most intractable of issues.
In personal interactions, he often startles visitors with his capacity to recall the minutest details of past interactions. He puts visitors at ease with affectionate and encouraging words.
The mandate given by him to the author on his appointment as ambassador of India to Japan was brief and to the point: To realise the fullest potential of India-Japan relations in the shortest time. His personal investment in deepening this strategic partnership has resulted in a huge upswing in India’s ties with Japan.
A key feature of the Modi government is zero tolerance for terrorism. This is unsurprising, given his long stint as chief minister of Gujarat, a border state that has often been targeted by Pakistan-sponsored organised crime and terrorism.
As PM, he has devoted his considerable energies to the challenge of achieving inclusive growth. His clarion call for Atmanirbhar Bharat, including in the defence sector, is aimed at equipping India with the necessary means to build a secure future.
Today, India’s choices at home and externally are deeply tessellated. There is a visible expansion in India’s global engagement, including with our neighbours such as Nepal and Sri Lanka who had not received a prime ministerial visit from India in decades.
Diplomacy under PM Modi is driven by the philosophy of vasudhaiva kutumbakam (the world is one family), most recently exemplified in the Vaccine Maitri programme and the neighbourhood first policy.
Today, India has ensured a role for itself on the global stage. Personal diplomacy at the highest levels has resulted in mutually beneficial cooperation, including with many OIC countries.
On matters of personal probity, the Prime Minister has few peers. The smallest gift received in his official capacity is auctioned, with proceeds going to worthy causes.
The work ethic in his government is different. Even young officials often find it difficult to match the indefatigable Prime Minister. Foreign visits are turbo-charged with back-to-back meetings. It is not unusual for refuelling stops, even at night, to be utilised to conduct official business.
Perhaps, no other global leader anywhere in the world has paid as much attention to the protection of national heritage. The return of India’s stolen antiquities is a recurrent theme during his visits.
Among several other attributes of diplomacy in the Modi era is the resurgence of indigenous strategic culture, marking a fuller appreciation of the rich contributions of Kautilya and Thiruvalluvar, as against a blind worship of Clausewitz and Metternich. Whether at the United Nations or national parliaments around the world, Hindi, yoga and Ayurveda are manifestations of India’s growing soft power. A foil to authoritarianism, democratic India advocates the Gandhian teachings of peace and non-violence. At the same time, India today has demonstrated the resolve and capacity for robust action in the face of security threats.
Perhaps, now more than ever before, events such as Vibrant Gujarat, the Kumbh Mela, the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas and the Global Entrepreneurship Summit have provided opportunities to states to actively participate in shaping India’s foreign and economic engagement.
The high standards of public service set at the top have gradually become a new norm. Indian embassies, too, are more focussed on promoting India’s economic objectives and meeting the diaspora’s expectations.
Back home, the lateral induction of talent has breached the walls of long-entrenched interests and helped overcome the stasis and mediocrity in government departments.
As he completes 20 years of service to the nation, PM Modi can draw satisfaction from achievements in diverse sectors, whether renewable energy or sports, to cite a few. Digital empowerment of the common citizen and gender equality, including in the armed forces, are particularly progressive steps.
Notably, when leaving Gujarat for Delhi in 2014, Modi donated his personal savings to the cause of education of the daughters of the lowest rungs of the state secretariat employees. It reflected a commitment to the next generation of Indians.
This is the time of the year when Navaratri (or Navaratra) celebrations take place throughout the country. Navaratri simply means nine nights. The timing of the festival is decided according to lunar tithis and these don’t exactly correspond to solar days. The nine nights (days) are from Pratipada (first lunar day) to Navami (ninth lunar day), though celebrations can also spill over to Dashami (tenth lunar day).
There is Shukla paksha (the lunar fortnight when the moon waxes) and Krishna paksha (the lunar fortnight when the moon wanes). Typically, Krishna paksha is for pitris (ancestor/manes). Devas and Devis will not be worshipped during Krishna paksha, only during Shukla paksha. Since every month will have a Shukla paksha cycle from Pratipada to Purnima (day/night of full moon), in the course of the year, we will have 12 such Navaratri cycles. From the point of view of worshipping Devi, all 12 are not equally important. There are four that are specific to worshipping Devi — Sharada/Ashvina Navaratri, Vasanta/Chaitra Navaratri, Magha Navaratri and Ashada Navaratri. Right now, we are in the middle of Sharada/Ashvina Navratri. Most people I know have heard of Vasanta/Chaitra Navaratri, but have never heard of Magha and Ashada Navaratris. That is because the worship undertaken during Magha and Ashada Navaratri is secret, not public, and these are known as Gupta Navaratris.
There is an ancient tradition of Devi worship in India, going back much before what is perceived as recorded history. Regardless of which part of the country we are in, Navaratri is associated with Devi worship. The form differs. As texts go, one should mention ‘Devi Suktam’. There are several such Devi Suktams from different texts: (1) ‘Devi Suktam’ (Rig Veda); (2) ‘Shri Suktam’ (Rig Veda); (3) ‘Devi Suktam’ (from the tantra texts); (4) ‘Durga Suktam’ (Taittiriya Aranyaka); and (5) ‘Ratri Suktam’ or ‘Devi Stotram’ (from Durga Saptashati).
Apart from the ones from the Rig Veda, the others find their origin in a section of the Markandeya Purana known as ‘Devi Mahatmya’ or ‘Chandi’. For Devi worship, the Markandeya Purana is the most important in the Itihasa-Purana corpus. This does not mean that stories about Shiva and Parvati do not occur elsewhere in the Itihasa-Purana corpus. Not only does the Mahabharata mention both, the ‘Anushasana Parva’ of the Mahabharata describes an incident where Uma tells Shiva about the dharma of women. The Valmiki Ramayana has several references to Shiva and Parvati stories. Other than the Markandeya Purana and the Devi Bhagavata Purana, one should mention the Linga and Skanda Puranas from the Itihasa-Purana corpus. The ‘Lalita Sahasranama’, which gives us 1,000 names of Lalita, a manifestation of Devi, is from the Brahmanda Purana.
Devi is worshipped in many forms, such as Nava Durga or the nine forms of Durga — Shailaputri, Brahmacharini, Chandraghanta, Kushmanda, Skandamata, Katyayani, Kalaratri, Mahagauri and Siddhidhatri. Especially in the tantra forms of worship, she is worshipped as the 10 Mahavidyas — Kali, Tara, Tripurasundari (or Shodashi), Bhuvaneshvari, Tripurabhairavi, Chhinnamasta, Dhumavati, Bagalamukhi, Matangi and Kamala. There is local worship of Devi, often specific to certain temples, at other times of the year. In the Panchayatana Puja (worship of five Murtis), it is customary for Devi to be worshipped along with Shiva, Vishnu, Surya and the specific ishta devata. If it is specific to Devi’s worship during Navaratri and the stories connected with the asura Mahishasura, the Markandeya Purana is the most important. This tells us the story of King Suratha and the Vaishya Samadhi. Reduced to a miserable state, they are advised by Rishi Sumedha to worship Devi. To understand Devi’s worship at the time of Navaratri, one should also consider the Devi Bhagavata Purana, also known as the Devi Bhagavatam. The seventh skandha from this text has the famous ‘Devi Gita’. Since one has mentioned ‘Devi Gita’, one should mention the Devi Upanishad. There are also other Puranas like the Kalika Purana and Chandi Purana.
In Bengal, at this time of the year, Devi worship is equated with Durga worship. Generations have grown up with the belief that Mahalaya signifies the onset of Durga Puja. Historically, Mahalaya has nothing to do with Durga Puja. Mahalaya signifies the beginning of Shukla paksha. Today, every Bengali thinks Durga Puja happens on saptami, ashtami and navami. That’s not true either. This is because of the standardisation brought about by community-driven Pujas.
Texts speak of seven different kalpas (modes) of worshipping Durga. (1) Starting on the Krishna paksha navami that precedes Mahalaya in the month of Bhadra and concluding on the Shukla paksha navami in the month of Ashvina, lasting for 15 days; (2) Starting on the Shukla paksha Pratipada and concluding on navami, lasting for nine days; (3) Beginning on shashti and concluding on navami, lasting for four days; (4) Starting on saptami and ending on navami, for a period of three days; (5) Beginning on ashtami and ending on navami, for a period of two days; (6) Only on ashtami; (7) Only on navami.
When non-community-driven Durga Pujas occur, a practice fast dying out, the other six modes are still followed. But because of the standardisation brought about by community Durga Pujas, most have been reduced to (4). If you want to read more about these other modes, I recommend the work of Raghunandana Bhattacharya, from the 16th century. He was known as Smarta Raghunandana and wrote copiously on several topics. For Durga Puja purposes, the relevant texts are Durgotsav Tattva, Durgapuja Tattva and Kritya Tattva. Raghunandan Bhattacharya wasn’t the only one who wrote about worshipping Durga. For example, before him, there was Acharya Shulapani.
In a bid to protect the identities of those involved in POSH (prevention of sexual harassment) trials, the Bombay High Court, in a recent judgment, has set out guidelines that appear to be prohibitive and may become a dangerous precedent for all lower courts in the states of Goa and Maharashtra and could be relied upon by other courts in the country. The guidelines laid down by Justice Gautam Patel on September 24 (in P v. A & Ors) prohibit the disclosure of the identities of the victim, accused and witnesses, and mandate that all such court hearings be held in-camera or in Judges’ Chambers, with only the court stenographer, plaintiff, defendant and their lawyers being present. Even court orders and judgments will not be delivered in open court. Parties to POSH trials are prohibited from disclosing any information relating to such trials (including the final order/judgment) to the media or publicising the same via social media, without securing permission from the Court. Breach of these conditions will be contempt of court. Judgments in POSH cases will no longer be published or uploaded for public consumption without permission of the court, and, even then, publication of only a fully anonymised version can be allowed. For any lawyer to access this judgment, a court order will have to be obtained.
The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act) mandates that government and private organisations redress complaints of sexual harassment at the workplace in a manner that is simpler and quicker than the judicial process.
Especially in this post-pandemic scenario that forced the Indian judicial system to evolve and allow virtual court proceedings, which in turn has increased access to justice and also brought much needed transparency into an increasingly opaque (and often criticized) judicial process, it is difficult to understand the rationale behind such guidelines, which mandate physical attendance. Why would courts need to dispense with any possibility of hybrid or virtual hearings in order to keep proceedings confidential? Such requirements will again cause further delays in an already slow judicial system, and discourage victims from pursuing trials that require them to travel appear in person for every court hearing.
Additionally, the need for confidentiality has also been stretched far more than necessary. Identities of victims/survivors of child sexual abuse and rape are required to be kept confidential from the media, unless they exercise their rights under S.228A(ii)(b) of the Indian Penal Code. This is done to prevent victims from being ostracized by society. If this same privilege is extended to complainants and witnesses in POSH cases, that would be beneficial because there is reasonable expectation of retaliation at the workplace. It is for this reason that S.16 of the POSH Act prohibits members of the internal committee and employers from revealing identities of those involved in POSH inquiries. However, unlike the blanket ban imposed by these guidelines, the POSH Act does not expressly prohibit complainants and respondents from themselves revealing this information.
Moreover, the POSH Act allows publication of the justice secured to a victim, which must also be revealed by every organisation in their annual report (without identifying the parties), in order to let the public know about the nature of action taken by employers against those who indulge in sexual harassment.
Also, extending this veil of confidentiality to the respondent’s identity is a privilege that has not been given to those accused under any other laws. If the reasoning is to protect the accused from the label attached to an alleged sexual harasser, then it is unfathomable why the Court would give such specific guidelines for proceedings in trials relating only to sexual harassment at workplaces. This blanket ban on revealing any information relating to POSH cases, including the identity of those found guilty of sexual harassment could potentially result in habitual offenders hiding behind this veil of confidentiality and prevent the public from learning about the actions of powerful employers accused of protecting perpetrators.
While keeping identities confidential from the media until the verdict has been arrived at may be reasonable, not allowing these judgments to be published without court approval, and restricting access to such information goes against the need for transparency and accountability in the judicial process. In fact, since the Indian judicial system follows the principles of Common Law, Internal and local committees rely on case law to interpret the POSH Act and seek clarity on how to apply these legal provisions. Court judgments are essential to this process and for the evolution of law. By allowing only advocates-on-record to access these judgments after seeking the court’s permission, these guidelines prevent access to information that would otherwise assist in better resolution of sexual harassment complaints. How can lawyers be expected to ask for an order without knowing the facts of a case and the relevance of that judgment to future cases?
The reality of sexual harassment is that it goes unnoticed and unspoken about in a majority of cases. It takes a lot of courage to raise your voice against a powerful perpetrator, especially when you believe that you may be the only victim. The #MeToo movement has shown us how one voice encourages many others to speak up, bringing to light a truth that is hard for society to accept. A court judgment like this could in effect lead to the silencing of many such future voices, without doing anything much to prevent future sexual harassment.
To imitate and to conform — do what others around us are doing — are common and very powerful human tendencies. Scientists ascribe the evolutionary success of these traits to benefits accruing to individuals (and hence the species), not least among them that the world is complex, and every individual cannot figure it all out, learn everything ab initio. Particularly in areas outside our expertise, it is efficient to follow what others are doing, like choosing the right subject to study at college, or more simply, the path to a railway station in Mumbai (I found the way to Churchgate by “following the herd”) or the queue for autos.
This comes with its own pitfalls, though. In financial markets, “herd behaviour” is a warning sign: When markets are doing well, people invest for no other reason than their neighbours having become wealthier (and vice versa). In the launch of a new mutual fund, for example, money flowed in from 93 per cent of India’s PIN codes. Even as we celebrate the deeper penetration of equity ownership and broader participation in wealth creation, it is reasonable to assume that a large part of this new capital is not as well informed as it should be: Even financial newspapers reach a small fraction of India’s PIN codes.
There is another human trait that affects markets — success increases risk appetite. If someone’s financial investments work, they are very likely to invest more, and ignore safety measures. The current rise of the Nifty is the highest without even a 10 per cent correction since 1992. This unbroken run itself is likely to have triggered larger and riskier investments, which are further pushing up stock prices.
Herd behaviour and risk-appetite-accentuation do not just affect new and amateur investors — they affect everyone. Similar frothy trends are visible in the private funding markets, where investors are assumed to be more sophisticated, and the source of funds is mostly institutional.
Theoretically, an economy India’s size is capable of absorbing the $52 billion of PE funding seen over the last 12 months, but in practice, such a rapid surge creates allocation inefficiency. As investors rush to deploy ever-larger sums of money, they appear to be running out of companies to invest in that can productively deploy this capital. The result is companies’ valuations rising manifold within months and small firms getting more capital inflows than they can deploy, often resulting in wasteful business plans.
Just to be clear, unlike some “pie-in-the-sky” businesses that got financed in the first funding-frenzy two decades back, most of these are real business opportunities, catalysed by momentous changes. Better physical infrastructure (rural roads, electrification, phone penetration, data access), several layers of innovation (universal bank account access, surging digital payments on the “India Stack”), 45 lakh software developers (largest in the world), maturing industries (for example, as research budgets of Indian pharmaceutical manufacturers have grown 10 times in the last 15 years, the ecosystem can take on more challenging projects now, versus just generic filings a decade back) and strong medium-term economic growth prospects create fertile ground for private equity investments.
For example, investors with patient capital (knowing that the businesses will not make money for several years) are now betting on and financing a faster transition to electric vehicles in both two-wheelers and cars than was earlier anticipated. In financial services, innovative methods of lending, insurance underwriting and wealth management are being experimented with, which are likely to only expand the market meaningfully. An army of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) firms have been funded in the hope of revolutionising the development and distribution of software. There are also new-age distribution and logistics companies, education technology firms, and branded consumer goods suppliers, in addition to “normal” e-commerce, gaming and food-delivery startups.
Earlier this year, we at Credit Suisse listed 100 unicorns in India — unlisted companies with a value exceeding one billion dollars. We had not expected to find as many, and the feedback after the publication of our report suggests we missed quite a few more. We excluded private firms that belonged to established business houses, as we mapped the rapid transformation of India’s corporate landscape. Two-thirds of these firms had started after 2005, an extraordinary episode of new companies scaling up in what has traditionally been a slow process. India has never lacked entrepreneurs (even in the 1980s, new companies formed at a rapid pace), but lacked risk capital given the low per capita wealth.
Growth in private equity changed that. As savers like pension and insurance funds in the developed world responded to record-low interest rates by allocating more to PE as an asset class, private funding markets have grown rapidly in the last 15 years globally. In India, PE funding has exceeded public-market fund-raising every year in the past decade; even this year, a record year for initial public offerings (IPOs), PE funding is three times more than the funds raised in IPOs so far, touching $40 billion. While earlier, only a few business groups could muster sizeable amounts of risk capital to establish new businesses and disrupt old ones, entrepreneurs can now lay hands on hundreds of millions of dollars if the idea makes sense.
However, we believe there can be too much of a good thing in the short run — the reason business and market cycles exist. This is not uncommon in history. For example, when the Americas were emerging markets in the early 19th century, and savings from European countries were flowing in, there were repeated cycles of boom and bust. In fact, one adventurer in the 1820s even raised funds for a country that did not exist. Such outright fraud may be difficult to engineer today, but when investors rush to deploy funds, the risk of fraud rises — inadequate disclosures and weak due diligence are compounded by incentives to misrepresent financial data. The discovery of any such frauds would likely freeze funding for the industry for a few quarters.
For now, this flow of funds is a welcome booster for the economy as it recovers from the scars of the pandemic-driven lockdowns. As these firms scale, they will spend on hiring people (like software developers, teachers and delivery personnel), setting up infrastructure (data centres as well as physical warehouses), discounts or advertising — nearly all of it adding to the economy. While valuations can be volatile in the near term, we believe we are in the early stages of this reshaping of India’s corporate landscape.
A message floating around on WhatsApp groups is demanding that a “taxpayers’ union” should be set up and consulted by the government. An income tax officer has apparently made the suggestion, but this is difficult to believe, as it is rooted in an ignorance of facts and a poor understanding of political economy. Yet, the idea is being greeted with exclamations of enthusiasm by PLUs (people like us) of the middle class, who are convinced that their hard-earned taxes are being squandered on the undeserving poor through “populist” programmes announced before elections.
Underlying the proposal is the basic fallacy that income taxpayers are the main funders of government. Today, less than one-third of the combined spending of state and central governments in India is raised through income tax. It’s the taxes on commodities that meet more than half the expenditure of the government and these taxes are paid by all citizens, rich and poor; by those who are accused of getting “freebies” as well as by the middle class, which believes that they are being fleeced to pander to politically favoured groups. The rest of the spending comes from borrowings, grants, disinvestments and various non-tax revenues.
Besides, taxpayers already have a say in the government’s spending decisions. We do have a “taxpayers’ union” today. It consists of all the voters (including those who pay income tax) who elect legislators, who then approve government budgets after lengthy debate in state assemblies and Parliament. Are we now asking for an exclusive veto power over spending decisions for income taxpayers, who pay only one-third of the bill?
Beyond these fundamental flaws, there is an additional question: Which government programme would you call a “freebie”? From the sense of grievance felt by some income taxpayers, it appears that any special financial consideration given to a favoured group is a handout or “freebie”. The term “subsidy” has a specific meaning in economic parlance, but it is full of value judgement when it is used in popular debates. It has now become a loose synonym for profligacy, favouritism and injustice. What income taxpayers resent is apparently preferential payouts from the budget to a select group, and favourable treatment towards powerful lobbies.
Governments use different methods to target benefits. They spend more on some citizens and reduce prices on items needed by the poor. What most of us forget, however, is that they also demand lower taxes from different taxpayer groups. The income tax code has as many exemptions and special dispensations aimed at different professions for promoting various kinds of economic activity as the expenditure budget. A tax deduction is a dole just like any budgeted subsidy, when it is meant only for a select category of citizens. The standard deduction, which is treated as a right by the middle-class taxpayer, can be claimed only by the salaried — in the eyes of businessmen and farmers, it is another subsidy. The list of such tax benefits is legion. In the 1990s, they were compiled and published as a budget annexure called “Tax Expenditures”. Disgruntled income taxpayers should consult this document to discover the extent to which other citizens’ groups subsidise them.
Cooking gas and foodgrains are priced below market rates for poor families — these account for the big subsidy ticket of the central government. But the free power and water supplied in states like Delhi are available to all householders. In fact, Delhi has a higher free consumption slab than other states. Nonetheless, its resource conservation level is much better because this benefit is tied to mandatory metering. The state has also met its costs through better governance without raising taxes. Cheap power given only to farmers to run diesel generator sets is a subsidy, higher limits for free consumption for all consumers is hardly one.
We cannot complain about “freebies” without asking ourselves what we want from any government. Even selfish individuals want to live in a country full of educated and healthy people, since education and health can make citizens productive and efficient and raise the growth rates for GDP and per capita income. Like any other nation, we must together decide the minimum level of public services that we want for our country and demand sufficient numbers of good quality schools and clinics from our governments. Money spent from the budget on free schooling and healthcare is not a “freebie” when these facilities are available to everyone. And it is certainly a bonus when it comes without additional taxation as in Delhi.
A programme that demonstrates the confused thinking on subsidies is the Delhi scheme for free public transport for women. The debate was acrimonious but not always logical. The decision was perfectly constitutional and legal. It was taken by a duly elected government, which enjoyed a stupendous majority of 67 out of 70 seats in the Assembly and had been voted in with the support of 54 per cent of the electorate — a rare occurrence in a country like India which uses the first-past-the-post system. The decision also met every constitutional requirement, cabinet approval and legislative clearance before it became law. This subsidy benefits women, who are a majority of the voters. It empowers them and increases their participation in the workforce — these are the stated goals of all governments. It is environment-friendly as it encourages public transport and reduces pollution and congestion. It is user-friendly (no IDs are needed) and cheating is almost impossible. And it has been accomplished without higher taxes. What’s not to like about the programme? Those who want the money to be spent in other ways should lobby for a fresh debate in the Assembly.
Let us also launch a debate on every special budgetary dispensation and what we expect from our governments. And let us do this objectively and without bias, accepting the will of the people and democratic political processes and not letting semantics cloud our judgement.
Yesterday did not just see FM Nirmala Sitharaman call the Lakhimpur Kheri violence “absolutely condemnable”, becoming the first of Ajay Mishra Teni’s ministerial colleagues to do so. It also saw UP law minister Brijesh Pathak visit the area. While Pathak only visited the families of BJP worker Shubam Mishra and Teni’s driver Hari Om Mishra, he is the first senior BJP leader to do so — albeit ten days after the incident. Are these signs that the opposition’s call for Teni’s sacking is getting closer to being heeded?
Even on the police front, after Teni’s son Ashish appeared to be treated with kids’ gloves in the early days, the investigation seems to be proceeding as per norms. Six persons in total have been arrested by now. The opposition can certainly claim that it is the pressure put by them that is making the difference here. But we know from the past record of highly politicised cases that developments in this case too will need close scrutiny over the long haul, to make sure justice is not perverted. Ideally of course the criminal case and the politics should walk independent paths. But their deep entanglement is undeniable reality.
Bharat Biotech is on the threshold of becoming the second Indian vaccine maker to receive an emergency use approval in the domestic market for a children’s Covid vaccine. The company’s vaccine, Covaxin, is already in use in the national programme. It’s supplied about 111 million doses, or 11.49% of the overall Covid vaccination coverage. The company’s vaccine for children has received a conditional approval from an expert committee of the drug regulator. The next steps will have to be a final approval and a clearance from the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation to be included in the national programme.
Earlier, Zydus Cadila’s vaccine had been cleared for children above 12. Covaxin, if it gets emergency use clearance, will span the age group 2-18. These developments are timely. India’s Covid vaccination programme has now ensured about 29.2% of the adult population is fully vaccinated. The vaccination rollout prioritised demographics at greater risk. Now, there needs to be a parallel push to vaccinate children. WHO data showed that between December 30, 2019 and September 6, 2021 children up to the age of 15 made up 8% of global cases. Therefore, the Covid containment strategy needs to bring this demographic under a protective umbrella.
That said, the absence of an emergency approval from WHO till date for Covaxin is mystifying. Two vaccines developed by China’s Sinovac and Sinopharm using the same inactivated vaccine platform have got this approval. WHO approval is a prerequisite for other benefits. It opens the door to vaccine passports and also export opportunities. Bharat Biotech needs to get past this hurdle at the earliest by satisfying WHO’s data requirements. Till it happens, it inconveniences millions of Indians who have been vaccinated with Covaxin and may now need to travel for work or to study.
India’s cumulative vaccine coverage is fast approaching the billion doses mark. The ramp-up in production, mainly of Covishield, has helped speed up the pace of vaccination over the last two months. If Covaxin manufacturing is also scaled up faster, it will aid complete normalisation of social interaction in a few months. Indian science has reason to be proud of being one of few countries to develop its own Covid vaccine. The attendant takeaway is that subsequent development and regulatory approvals need a much higher standard of recording data. Drugs and vaccines are an area where India is globally competitive. The stakeholders need to build on this base.
The 1993 law that brought the National Human Rights Commission as well as the State Human Rights Commissions into being is crystal clear about their role: Inquire into violations of human rights or negligence in prevention of such violations by a public servant, and intervene in legal proceedings for the same. This is how regulatory checks on power work in a democracy, with one institution ensuring accountability of the other. It is against this backdrop that some of chairperson Justice Arun Mishra’s comments on NHRC’s foundation day cause a measure of disquiet, in that he spoke more for the government than for the organisation’s core function.
To illustrate, he condemned the “new norm” of India being falsely accused of human rights violations at the behest of “international forces” and praised GoI for ushering in a “new age” of peace in Jammu & Kashmir. Other arms of government have the competence to sort out international conspiracies, if any, NHRC doesn’t. Its work is incredibly weighty but decidedly domestic. As for J&K and “peace”, that judgment is to be, again, made by many other stakeholders, including the media and voters. That’s not NHRC’s remit. This position holds even if one agrees with the nullification of Articles 370 and 35A, as this newspaper does. What is NHRC’s job is what Justice Mishra referred to in other parts of his speech – citizens needing protection from false cases, instant justice and encounters.
This public body has been called a “toothless tiger” by the Supreme Court and a cynical argument could be that human right violations are so endemic in India, what can NHRC do after all? But the right approach is to push on nonetheless. Last year it memorably stood up for migrant workers. That’s the kind of work NHRC should do – and talk about.
Analysis of India's information technology majors tends to focus on financial results and how these match up vis-a-vis the guidance. This is useful, but only up to a point. A more useful guide to how these companies are likely to fare in the future is to see how, on the one hand, the demand for IT services is shaping up globally, and, on the other, how the companies are gearing up for future challenges. You can get hold of new capability by innovating in-house, intensive training of manpower and acquiring software tools or companies that have special skills/knowhow. On such counts, Indian IT faces a relatively bright future.
The pandemic has only accelerated the strong ongoing trend towards digitalisation. Competition makes it imperative that all companies in a field follow the pioneer in the sector in going digital. Certain levels of automation will take place in basic services, but that automation also needs to be carried out by someone. The demand for IT services will be huge, across the world, at different levels of sophistication. Are Indian companies gearing up to increase their level of competence and offer consulting-led solutions? All of them are acquiring a variety of companies abroad, big and small, all geared to acquire new competencies. Wipro and Infosys are seeing attrition close to 20%. That means other IT majors are luring away talent. An active hunt for talent suggests a frenetic manpower upgrade. In conjunction with strong hiring by the IT majors, this is good news. TCS sees low employee churn. Either its employees lack the skills other companies seek or TCS keeps its staff happy.
Better schooling and better engineering colleges will determine the future of Indian IT, apart from the companies' own vision and drive.
The RBI's move to grant a small finance bank (SFB) licence to the consortium of Centrum Financial Services and BharatPe, the digital payments platform, is welcome. The bank, named Unity Small Finance Bank, will now take over the assets and liabilities of the troubled Punjab and Maharashtra Cooperative Bank, providing relief to depositors. India needs more competing banks and innovative kinds of banking to extend the reach of formal finance to every section of society. Banks provide credit services, while fintech firms are capable of mining data from multiple sources to assess the creditworthiness of the borrower and viability. When the two work together, it can transform finance.
Banks have been slow to leverage digitalisation and data, while fintech firms collect data from multiple sources on their customers, markets and their finances, and deploy analytics, machine learning, artificial intelligence and algorithms to derive intelligence and insights. The new SFB will also open up the services native to new-age digital banks. The experience of China's ecommerce giant Alibaba and Ant Financial Services that was spun out of it offers learnings on the power of data and digitalisation to bring in new services to small businesses. Alibaba created an SME lending business, using the volumes of transaction data generated by many small businesses on its platform, and later bundled its lending operation with Alipay to create Ant Financial Services. Its ecommerce sales generate different kinds of real-time data (such as company turnover, supplier volume and sales, customer profiles and so on). Ant could analyse all the behavioural data of borrowers in real time and process small loan applications within minutes.
But Ant feasted on captive data, and Chinese regulators have now clamped down on that model. India has taken a step forward and introduced a consent layer on top of the data so that the data-subject can share its data from multiple touch points with select bodies, who can process it to take decisions. Get going, Indian fintech!
In the two months since the Taliban captured Kabul, India’s Afghanistan policy has remained reactive and defensive. External affairs minister S Jaishankar conceded as much at a media event on October 8. He said, “We are responding to the situation as you go along. But beyond that, it is hard to take a very definitive position because the situation on the ground doesn’t allow for it”. The minister added, “Things are far from settled in Kabul”.
That is true. Nevertheless, one definite position has emerged. Despite internal fissures, the Taliban is and will remain in control of Afghanistan. That demands anticipation and a proactive policy to safeguard Indian interests. Such a policy must shun both adventurism and unrealistic approaches, and rely on a deep and independent understanding of issues, countries and regions.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi spelt out India’s current Afghan approach, and its hopes, during his remarks at the G20 extraordinary virtual summit on Afghanistan on October 12. While doing so, Modi recalled the close connections of the Afghan and Indian people, and India’s contribution to Afghanistan’s development during the past two decades. In keeping with these sentiments, would it not be appropriate for India to announce a large measure of humanitarian assistance for the Afghan people and route it, for the time being, through international aid agencies? That will be in keeping with the international consensus (including the G20 one) on Afghanistan’s dire need for humanitarian assistance. It will also give additional credibility to Modi’s emphasis on India’s commitment to the welfare of the Afghan people.
One potent form of assistance is to repeat the commitment made in 2002 to Afghanistan — give it one million tonnes of wheat. This can be given to the World Food Programme to be transported via the land route through Pakistan, and distributed directly to the Afghan people. In 2002, Pakistan did not allow the wheat to go through its territory for frivolous reasons though the then Afghan leader, Hamid Karzai, requested Islamabad to do so. Let Pakistan dare to trot out the same reasons now and show its true colours to the Afghan people.
In his G20 remarks, Modi demanded that Afghanistan should be prevented from becoming a source of “radicalisation and terror”. This is one issue on which there is generally an international consensus, though different countries are focused on preventing terrorist groups hostile to them from gaining a base in Afghanistan. Apart from the demand that the Taliban shun terrorist groups, there is actually an absence of common views on the nitty-gritty of the two other demands being made by the group — inclusive government and respect for women and minority rights.
Thus, while Modi called on the international community to “forge a unified international response without which it would be difficult to bring about the desired change in Afghanistan”, Indian policymakers would know that China and Russia are basically pursuing a different path. They abstained in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) from supporting Resolution 2593. Besides, neither Xi Jinping nor Vladimir Putin participated in the G20 Afghanistan summit, while Modi, Joe Biden and other Western leaders did. The group also failed to issue a joint statement. Instead, Italy issued a Chair’s summary.
In the absence of any certainty that the major powers will act together on Afghanistan, it is essential for India to follow an independent policy in keeping with its national interest. Importantly, it should be perceived by Afghanistan and the region to be doing so. India cannot allow Pakistan and China to have an uncontested field in Afghanistan. Despite the close connection of the Taliban and Pakistan, there is space available for Indian diplomacy. Reports are also emerging from Kabul that sections of the Taliban would like to maintain an engagement with India. It is possible that, at a subterranean level, some Indian interaction is being maintained with the Taliban. That is how States can and should act.
There is a need to build on the engagement that began in Doha when the Indian ambassador was authorised to receive Afghanistan’s new interim deputy foreign minister, Abbas Stanikzai. Pakistan will, both directly and through some Taliban proxies, seek to provoke the Modi government through references to the sacking of the Somnath temple by Mahmud of Ghazni and vandalisation of gurudwaras. While condemning these comments and acts, India should be aware that Pakistan wishes to prevent any formal Indian contacts with the Taliban, leave alone an effective Indian return to the Afghan space.
India took the correct decision in withdrawing the embassy in August but it is now time to send a small team back to Kabul. This would not imply recognition. Indeed, no country has done so but that has not prevented them from engaging the Taliban. Of course, full guarantees will have to be taken, invoking Pashtunwali, about the security of Indian personnel placed in Kabul. As part of the process of opening up, the concerns of the Afghan people, including their need to visit India, has to be focused on.
This is a time to shed inhibition and nostalgia and move ahead with realistic approaches on Afghanistan.
Vivek Katju is a retired diplomat who has served as India’s ambassador to AfghanistanThe views expressed are personal
Former Infosys chief executive officer, SD Shibulal’s appointment as the chief of a three-member task force aimed at bringing bureaucratic reforms in India should be seen as a step in the right direction. The government can make good use of Infosys co-founder’s vast entrepreneurial experience and operational expertise to transform capacity-building in the bureaucracy through its Mission Karmayogi programme — a capacity-building scheme for civil servants aimed at upgrading the post-recruitment training mechanism of officers and employees at all levels.
Given the bureaucracy’s proclivity to resist any change in the status quo, there are already murmurs and concerns about this. But the argument that corporate management cannot bring desired results in public administration seems a bit stretched.
One may argue that, unlike a corporate entity, governments don’t work to make a profit. This is true, but more than the end goal, we must consider the factors that drive profitability. It’s about increasing productivity, efficiency and ensuring that the benefits of the government’s welfare schemes reach every deserving person in the country.
It is undeniable that the circumstances under which a bureaucrat works are far more complex and challenging than what a private sector executive faces. In the absence of bureaucratic independence, civil servants are often left with little choice but to chase the political goals and ambitions of the ruling party. And those not toeing the line face frequent transfers or, worse, harassment. So, the power to transfer has become an instrument to bring the bureaucrats to heel, and it works because authority sits with the position, not the person.
In 2013, the Supreme Court issued directives to the central and state government to create an independent civil service board at the Centre and in the states to provide fixed tenure in postings to civil servants and advise them in matters of posting, transfer and disciplinary actions. Subsequently, state governments constituted their respective CSBs headed by cabinet secretaries who were required to submit a quarterly report to the central government stating the details and reasons of transfers before the minimum specified tenure. Even if the Centre would disagree with the state, it’s least likely to pursue the case to avoid upsetting the tacit political understanding between the two tiers of government. Suffice to say, the reforms so far have not brought the desired results.
There is a crying need for reforms such as a transparent and result-driven appraisal system, rules that make decision-making easier, better interdepartmental coordination, among others.
This, in addition to the requirement to work in tandem with the judiciary, investigative agencies and other entities under a predefined set of rules and regulations, doesn’t make things easier for civil servants. As a result, governance suffers from innumerable operational efficiencies, which in turn lowers productivity, slows innovation, and stifles growth.
Again, there is no denying that the political environment encourages pliability and corruption, but we cannot just expect a sudden overhaul of the system. So, rather than apportioning the blame, we need to analyse and put our best foot forward.
And in this case, introducing corporate management in bureaucracy seems to be the most reasonable step. Unlike the present bureaucratic system, corporate management is performance-centric, KPI driven and demands greater accountability. Appraisals and rewards are driven by performance parameters and competencies and not just tenure.
The major goal of the Karmyogi programme is to enhance citizen experience for government services and improve the availability of a competent workforce. As part of the programme, a civil servant will be empowered with specific role-competencies to ensure efficient service delivery of the highest quality standards. This is precisely what corporate managers seek to achieve. They invest in talent management, creating competency-driven leadership roles and work towards a common organisational goal.
We have many competent IAS officers who have made it through a gruelling entrance test and rigorous training. However, a rapidly changing environment, new technologies, and rising citizen expectations have seen some of them struggle to equip themselves with skills to handle complex issues such as health, energy, and environment. What we need here are domain experts. We should not shy away from bringing in experts laterally into the IAS, a step that the government has taken.
A major bureaucratic overhaul may have eerie similarities with electoral reforms undertaken by former chief election commissioner, TN Seshan. Seshan – a career bureaucrat - not only redefined the role of the election commission, which was till then regarded as a toothless agency, he also changed the way elections take place in our country. With the introduction of corporate governance in bureaucracy, Prime Minister Narendra Modi would do well to leave behind a legacy that could truly define his tenure.
Lloyd Mathias is a business strategist and an independent director
The Social Media Animal Cruelty Coalition (SMACC), formed by Asia for Animals coalition, recently released a report documenting horrific cases of animal abuse online.
Over 13 months, SMACC recorded 5,840 videos on three main platforms — YouTube, TikTok, and Facebook — showing extreme acts of violence against birds, companion animals such as dogs and cats, wild boar and pigs, snakes and primates. The forms of abuse included fake rescues, prolonged death, mutilation, hunting, eating of live animals, animals abused for entertainment, and mental and physical torture.
What drives a young person to commit such acts of cruelty, and in full public view on social media? The videos documented by SMACC were aimed at gaining viewership, likes, and engagement on social media.
Collectively, the videos had — at the time of publication of the report — been viewed 5,347,809,262 times. SMACC’s member organisation, World Animal Protection (WAP), has an ongoing investigation analysing the sentiments behind such cruelty content and its supporters.
The socio-psychological link
The instant gratification that social media provides to creators of such content in terms of likes and engagement, and the easy accessibility of such cruel acts online, is further encouraged by the refusal of prominent social media platforms to take a stand against such content.
But what of the psychological ramifications of cruelty against animals — both on perpetrators and viewers? According to the report, Dr Mary Lou Randour, psychologist and senior adviser for animal cruelty programmes at the Animal Welfare Institute, stated, “Witnessing violence of any type, particularly animal abuse, is a traumatic event for a child, as it changes how the brain develops. Exposure to violence at a young age can alter neurons, the building blocks of the brain, negatively affecting capacity for emotional regulation, physical health, cognitive capacity, and behavior control.”
Research has repeatedly shown that exposure to animal cruelty has the effect of normalising cruelty, leading to not just reduced empathy, but also greater tolerance to aggression. Malcolm Plant, founder of the Making the Link Project at Teesside University, has conducted some of the seminal research on the subject in his study, “It’s a Dog’s Life.”
The study found that such abuse is cyclical.
For example, it found that individuals who had been exposed to domestic abuse were also found to have committed cruelty against animals. The study identified cases of “adolescent males who had experienced domestic abuse, and who either showed displaced aggression against stray animals or progressed to commit violence against family members, leading to concerns that it creates a ‘societal cycle of abuse’ especially when the individual has their own family.”
A gateway crime
The researcher noted, “it’s highly likely that an animal abuser will also be abusing humans. We found not only have most animal abusers been exposed to violence and abuse, but that this has resulted in reduced empathy and a normalisation of aggression.”
In the United Kingdom (UK), ministry of justice figures indicate that hundreds of sex offenders and people convicted of violently attacking others were also found to be guilty of animal abuse.
All these findings point to the serious attention that any case of animal abuse must receive.
In India, the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations (FIAPO)’s study, In Their Own Right: Calling for Parity in Law for Animal Victims of Crimes, documented more than 500,000 cases of cruelty against animals between 2010 and 2020. These were reported figures, and the real estimate is likely to be much higher.
The way forward
Findings like these must be a wake-up call for the law and order administration. All schools and colleges must mandate “compassion education” aimed at building empathy towards animals from childhood. This will reduce much of the othering of animals that often leads to cruelty, and also encourage critical thinking in children, allowing them to perceive animals as sentient beings that feel, learn, and hurt.
Social media platforms need to be held accountable for allowing content that shows the abuse of animals. The SMACC report makes specific recommendations for social media platforms to define animal cruelty, implement robust monitoring systems to detect and remove such content, and stop incentives such as payments to people who upload such content. There needs to be a strong anti-cyber-cruelty cell that cracks down not just on such abuse but also on any illegal use or abuse of animals.
Animal cruelty needs to be stopped, for its own sake. However, the link that is emerging between animal cruelty and acts of greater aggression such as rape, assault, or murder might finally be the motivation that the authorities need to take animal abuse seriously.
Bharati Ramachandran is the CEO, the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations (FIAPO), India’s apex animal rights body
Fifteen years ago, I wrote a book called The J Curve: A New Way to Understand Why Nations Rise and Fall. My aim was to help readers understand why some emerging market countries continue to emerge, while others face major political unrest.
With all the divisiveness and dysfunction in today’s United States (US), it’s now time to use this tool to take a long, hard look at what’s happening inside the world’s superpower.
The J curve describes the relationship between a country’s openness (both the openness of its political processes and the free movement of people, goods, and information within and across its borders) and its stability (the ability of its institutions to absorb shock).
Countries on the left side of the curve are stable because they’re closed. There is little or no real competition within their political systems. North Korea, Cuba, and the Gulf monarchies are some examples. Those countries don’t reach the same level of long-term political stability that can be achieved by truly open countries, such as Germany, Canada, Japan, and dozens of other democracies. Those countries are on the right side of the curve.
A country that shifts from left to right — from closed to much more open — must pass through a period of instability, the dip in the J curve. That’s what happened, for example, when Mikhail Gorbachev tried to open up the Soviet Union, or when South Africa began to relax apartheid. Some countries make the transition. Others fall apart.
But it’s also possible to move from right to left. Despite Donald Trump’s refusal to acknowledge defeat in the 2020 election, the failed insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, and the refusal of many Americans to accept that Joe Biden really won the election, the US remains a mature democracy on the right side of the curve.
At no point during that period was the US on the brink of dictatorship. Its institutions proved their ability to absorb shocks. The military chain-of-command remains politically neutral. American courts have resolved election disputes according to law.
But the US has become both less open and less resilient in recent years as the legitimacy of other institutions begins to erode. Confidence in election results — the most basic element of democracy — has taken a big hit. Plausible charges of Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election, Trump’s baseless charges that three million people voted illegally for Hillary Clinton in that election, and the equally false charge that voter fraud deprived him of victory in 2020 — all of it amplified by deceptive information in traditional and social media — have done more to undermine confidence in the integrity of national elections than any event in more than 140 years.
Congress has long been unpopular, but hyper-partisan rhetoric and predictable party-line voting on important legislation further undermine confidence that Congress can, and will, act on behalf of the American people as a whole.
So do partisan bids within state governments to redraw congressional boundaries in ways that overrepresent the voters of one party at the expense of the other. The need for lawmakers to constantly raise money and the lack of transparency about where their funding comes from don’t help.
The flow of former lawmakers into jobs as corporate lobbyists stokes public cynicism, and for good reason. Extreme political polarisation has sown doubts about the credibility of any congressional effort to oversee the executive branch of government or its own members. The chronic failure of Congress to enact significant legislation has also effectively ceded power to the executive branch, as presidents Barack Obama, Trump, and Biden have all issued historically large numbers of sweeping executive orders.
Finally, there is the growing lack of public respect for the media. In any open society, honest and skillful journalists can hold public figures accountable. Unfortunately, the polarisation that infects US politics is reflected in the marketplace of ideas. The drive for market share that’s divided into ideological segments strips reporting of its credibility for millions of Americans, who now consider them to be the information wings of the parties with which most of their reporting aligns. Social media then amplifies partisan divides by disseminating disinformation that doesn’t meet the standards of credibility in mainstream media — until the disinformation becomes news that mainstream reporters ask public officials to comment on.
For all these reasons, America’s J curve looks different from it did 30 years ago.
On the one hand, not only have US institutions proven their endurance through the Trump turmoil, but US wealth and technological advantages relative to most of the rest of the world, including its allies, have grown. These positives increase American stability at every level of openness. But the US is becoming a more polarised society, which creates a higher degree of political paralysis, pushing the country down the right side of the curve.
The US is hardly the only country plagued with a bitterly divided electorate, public cynicism about politicians, wealth inequality, partisan journalism, and structural racism. But among the world’s wealthy democracies, these problems are greatest in the US.
And when the most powerful and influential nation on earth becomes more divided and dysfunctional, that makes the lack of global leadership much worse. The US needs to turn around its fall on the J curve quickly, or all of us will experience the consequences.
Ian Bremmer is the president of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media and author of Us vs. Them: The Failure of Globalism
It has been a year since Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi’s Mann Ki Baat on toys stirred up a fragmented industry that was highly dependent on China for survival.
His call for “vocal-for-local” signalled a focus on toys for the domestic market, urging businesses to look at India’s history in traditional toys for inspiration. His subsequent address to the industry at the first Toycathon-2021 in June was a further boost to the “toyconomy”, bringing in export opportunities to India’s toy story.
Even though India’s shot at the global toy market predates the PM’s initiative, it brought about a flurry of expressions of intent and spate of actions from various quarters. The present momentum has the potential to reap a globally competitive industry creating millions of job opportunities in this labour-incentive sector.
Yet, a lot of potential remains unlocked, without a focused end-game strategy, with key low hanging fruit not being harvested.
The China story
Of the $100 billion-odd global toy market, India accounts for just $1.5 billion annually. About 80% of this is met through imports, mostly from China. Of the global sourcing value of $30-40 billion, China’s contract manufacturers have almost 70% of the pie, with Vietnam accounting for the lion’s share of the balance. Mexico and India are upcoming challengers to this equation. Some brands have legacy manufacturing in Indonesia and Malaysia, and tactical sourcing in Turkey, Brazil and east Europe.
It took over three decades for China to reach this pinnacle, as it built mega ecosystems to cater to the entire supply chain for manufacturing toys.
China’s toy and gift capital, the Chenghai district in Shantou city, Guangdong province, is one such ecosystem. Spread across 345 square km, Chenghai hosts over 5,000 units that are said to account for 30% of the world’s toys. Other major production centres in the Guangdong province include Shenzhen, Dongguan, Guangzhou, and Foshan cities.
December 18, 1978, marks an important transition in China’s history and the start of the Boluan Fanzheng period during which it opened up its economy. It ushered in industry-favourable policies to attract global supply chains and talents to China. The toy industry, which was then largely based out of Hong Kong, moved out en masse to China.
Within a decade, Hong Kong reinvented itself to be a design and development centre. Large American and European brands set up their sourcing offices in Hong Kong, which to date, are the all-powerful deciders of the fate of sourcing supply chains.
Hong Kong industrialists and brands transferred manufacturing technology to the China factories that churned out toys at a fraction of the cost in the United States (US) or Europe. It was a win-win game for all partners in the chain.
Apart from building scale, Chinese manufacturers moved up the value-chain, adding technological capabilities and expertise to encapsulate the entire supply chain.
The potential in India
However, change is the essence of progress, and as China moved towards becoming a developed nation, the cost advantage it long enjoyed was waning. Vietnam surged due to its proximity to China and capital inflows.
However, with a limited labour pool and the simultaneous influx of many industries into Vietnam, the country’s long-term prospects in the toy industry remain limited. Chinese entrepreneurs are moving on to the production of high value, high technology toys.
This is where India can step in.
India’s demographic advantage is its greatest asset, with labour rates being a third of China’s and half of Vietnam’s. This needs to be bolstered with proper skill development and labour policies in consonance with growth mindsets as opposed to archaic socialist mindsets.
However, some critical parts of the supply chain continue to reside in China. The big brands, with their outsourcing overdrive, do not have any manufacturing capabilities to transfer. India must use its engineering and entrepreneurship skills to develop these supply chains.
Industry associations and governments must create linkages with global networks to influence decision-making. This will have to be backed with flawless service delivery creating a positive flywheel.
The role of the State in nourishing this is paramount in creating a global level playing field through equitable incentives and targeted force multipliers such as exports.
Despite progress, the speed of administrative decision-making and the quality of basic physical infrastructure remain key concerns for India. Further, entrepreneurship in India, which has been traditionally skewed towards the software industry, small-to-midsize manufacturing, and trading, needs to realign towards mass manufacturing.
Toy making is not child’s play: Focus on scale
Compared to the 5,000-plus units in just China’s Chenghai district, India boasts of just about 4,000 units, mostly in the unorganised sector. This fragmented nature of the Indian toy sector works against it.
That toy making is only a small-scale, cottage industry-oriented activity is a myth. Scale economics play a big role in not only attracting global original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and brands, but also building a sustainable domestic market supply.
Further, toy making is not child’s play. It is a confluence of art and science, demanding high and nuanced low-cost precision engineering, and technical skills, along with experienced aesthetic sensibilities.
Though entry barriers may seem low, the confluence of low-cost engineering with the supply chain, continuous technology upgrades, product development capabilities, design and tool-making capabilities, skilled labour force and State focus, need to fall in place together for the industry to fire at a global scale.
China’s ecosystem is a networked environment, where expertise and scale have been built by various partners as a focused part of the supply chain. India needs to adapt and configure mid-sized integrated ecosystems to quickly get capabilities in place.
The ripple effect of toy clusters
There is a likelihood that multiple toy clusters will be announced. But building an ecosystem in the clusters is a tall order, and would require a purposeful long-term approach.
The Koppal toy cluster — India’s first modern toy cluster — coming up in north Karnataka is one such ecosystem building an entire value chain of capabilities. With co-located global scale assembly and pack out capacities, a 400-acre toy unit is on its way — a mini-Chenghai, if you will.
With the projected investment of ₹7,000 crore over the next decade, the 400-plus acre integrated manufacturing ecosystem will provide end-to-end Toy development and manufacturing capabilities. It will house over 100 large and small manufacturing units in the special economic zones (SEZs) for exports, and domestic tariff area (DTA) for the domestic market. It will provide direct employment to over 25,000 people.
India’s toy story can support more toy clusters provided they do not get into a mix of land hoarding and real estate play, under the guise of manufacturing.
It will be an uphill task for the industry to develop such citadels of excellence without the right policy support and incentive mechanism. For instance, while the Government of India has rolled out the National Toy Action Plan, the proposals need specifics on each element of the toy manufacturing value chain.
Likewise, the much-talked-about Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, despite being available to 13-plus sectors, does not cover the toy industry. Export incentives such as the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) have been withdrawn with no viable alternatives in place.
Stop toying around
Toy representation continues to be a subpart of the sports goods industry and therefore lacks any focus in decision making. Policy skew towards traditional and low-capacity manufacturing will not create scale economics for India to emerge as a global force.
Additionally, carte blanche import duties are not a panacea for domestic manufacturing. The critical raw material supply chain is starved, and toys that complement our capacities lose out on an economic commercial opportunity.
The traditional and modern toy factories need to coexist in the value chain. Traditional manufacturers could very well occupy low-volume, higher-margin speciality toys, whereas the large ones could be taking on the world.
The key to “homegrown” toys is not just about traditional manufacturing, but creating home brands such as Chota Bheem and exploring that intellectual property to create world-class toys in modern toy factories.
The toy sector has a huge potential to create jobs. For every $10 million generated in revenues, the industry has the potential to create 1,000 direct jobs, not including the downstream employment. With the right policy support, a $2-3 billion capacity is achievable within a short period. This will lead to a whopping 2-3 million jobs. To put this in perspective, the entire Indian information technology (IT) industry employs only 4.6 million people.
A focus on developing India’s toy sector at a faster pace, with the right policies, infrastructure, and entrepreneurship, can transform India’s economy and social footprint.
Amit Chakraborty is president, Toys Business Segment, Aequs
At the 28th foundation day of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi critiqued what he saw as the selective and political use of human rights, and said this harmed democracy and tarnished the nation’s image. He traced the idea of human rights to the freedom movement, and outlined his government’s steps, particularly with regard to welfare delivery, as aiding the rights of marginalised. For his part, the NHRC chair, Justice (retired) Arun Mishra, echoed the PM’s critique of selective deployment of the idea of human rights, claimed terrorists must not be defended in the name of rights, and hailed the government, especially home minister Amit Shah, for steps in Jammu and Kashmir and Northeast.
It is important to go back to first principles. One, indeed, there must be no selective application of human rights — the right to life, liberty, equality, dignity, religion, privacy, free speech, free movement, free association, among others, must apply to all citizens, irrespective of caste, religion, region, gender or any other criteria, subject to reasonable restrictions as constitutionally stipulated. Two, it is the job of the State to protect and preserve these rights for all, and it is the job of human rights organisations to critique the violation of these rights, be it by the State or a political party or a vigilante group or a terror outfit. Three, given the fact that the State is the only actor which has a legitimate monopoly over force, there is a tendency for its coercive arms to exercise these powers beyond what the rule of law permits. It is, then, natural that the State will have a somewhat adversarial relationship with human rights groups. Indeed, this distance is important, and human rights commissions should never lose sight of the fact that their primary job is to comfort the afflicted and hold governments accountable. And four, all rights — political and civil rights, and social and economic rights — are crucial.
Given this framework, Indian democracy would be best served if the executive, political parties, activist organisations, and human rights bodies internalise that rights must apply to all, that violation of rights by any actor is wrong, that the State has a special responsibility to protect rights and must be challenged when it fails to do so, and that socioeconomic progress and political liberty are both important.
A sub-committee of the Commission for Air Quality Management in Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR) and adjoining areas has recommended that all “poor” and some “very poor” protocols of the Graded Response Action Plan (Grap) be activated from October 15, this newspaper reported on Thursday. The Grap curbs include bans on diesel generators and coal-fired ovens. Routine mechanised sweeping should also begin, the panel advised. Every year, NCR plunges into severe air pollution in the days leading to winter. Stubble burning has already been spotted in parts of Pakistan, Punjab, and Haryana earlier this month.
These steps have been advised when the air quality index is expected to remain in the “satisfactory” to “moderate” category. Both the central and Delhi governments have assured citizens that they are taking measures to tackle the pollution challenge. While the Centre has been talking to Delhi’s neighbouring states about introducing mitigation measures to control stubble burning, Delhi released a 10-point winter action plan and three-step plan for citizens to do their bit for clean air.
Such steps are welcome, but it is essential to remember that air pollution is not restricted to state borders. Therefore, it is imperative that similar Grap measures are implemented in bordering states. Also, some steps can be year-round measures, instead of emergency responses. These could include cracking down on open garbage burning, increasing the frequency of public transport, and fixing the parking issue to reduce fuel use, traffic, and pollution. These steps can ensure cleaner air through the year, and encourage environment-positive behaviour in citizens.