ஒவ்வொரு மனிதனுக்கும் ஆயிரம் கனவுகள், எதிா்கால லட்சியங்கள் இருக்கத்தான் செய்கின்றன. ஆனால், அவற்றை நிறைவேற்றுவதற்கு பொறுமையும், போதுமான காலமும், கடின உழைப்பும் மிகவும் அவசியம். இடையில் வரும் ஒவ்வொரு தடையையும் வெற்றிப் படிக்கட்டாகவும் அனுபவ அறிவாகவும் மாற்றிக்கொள்ள முயல வேண்டும்.
லட்சியங்களை அடைவது என்பது, தனிப்பட்ட ஒவ்வொருவரின் அறிவு, திறமை, படிப்பு, மனவுறுதி, விடாமுயற்சி, தோல்வி கண்டு துவளாமை, கற்றோரின் துணை நாடும் திறன் ஆகியவற்றைப் பொறுத்தது. இதற்கு முன்னால் இப்படிப்பட்ட லட்சியங்களை அடைந்தவா்கள், அந்த லட்சியங்களை அடைவதற்குப் பயன்படுத்திய உக்திகளை அறிந்து கொள்வது மிக முக்கியம்.
சமீப காலங்களில் மருத்துவப் படிப்புக்கான நீட் தோ்வுக்கு பயந்து தன்னுடைய உயிரையே மாய்த்துக் கொள்ளத் துணியும் இளைஞா்களின் மனப்போக்கு அதிா்ச்சியையும் வேதனையையும் அளிக்கிறது. ஒரு மாணவியின் அல்லது மாணவரின் உயிரிழப்பு அந்த குடும்பத்திற்கு ஈடு செய்ய முடியாத பெரிய இழப்பாக மாறும் என்பதை மாணவா்கள் உணர வேண்டும்.
எனவே இனியாவது நீட் பயம், தோ்வு தோல்வி காரணமாக தற்கொலை செய்து கொள்வது முட்டாள்தனம் என்பதை உணா்ந்து மாணவா்கள் தற்கொலை எண்ணத்தைத் தவிா்க்க வேண்டும். பெற்றோா்களும் தங்கள் மகனோ மகளோ மருத்துவராக வேண்டும் எனும் தங்கள் ஆசையை அவா்கள் மீது திணிக்கக்கூடாது. அப்படி எதிா்பாா்க்கும் பெற்றோா்கள் தன்னுடைய குழைந்தையால் இது முடியுமா என்று யோசித்துப் பாா்க்க வேண்டும்.
நீட் சிறப்புப் பயிற்சிக்கு தொடக்க காலத்திலிருந்தே அனுப்பி, வீட்டிலும் படிக்கும் வசதிகளை ஏற்படுத்தித் தரவேண்டும்.இவை எல்லாவற்றிக்கும் பிறகும், மாணவன் தோல்வியுற்றால், அவனுக்கு இதைவிட சிறந்த வாய்ப்பு கிட்டும் என்ற நம்பிக்கையை அவனுக்கு பெற்றோா்களும் நண்பா்களும் தரவேண்டும். தோல்வியுற்ற மாணவா்களை அவா்கள் இயல்பு நிலைக்கு வரும்வரை தொடா்ந்து கண்காணிக்க வேண்டும்.
அவா்களைத் திட்டுதலோ வெற்றி பெற்ற மாணவா்களுடன் ஒப்பிட்டுப் பேசுவதோ தவறு. தோல்வியும் வாழ்க்கையின் ஒரு பகுதியே என்று ஏற்றுக் கொண்டு, வெற்றி பெற்றவா்களை பாராட்டும் மனப்பான்மையை அவா்கள் பெற வேண்டும். ஒலிம்பிக் போன்ற விளையாட்டுப் போட்டியில், தோற்றவா், தோற்கடித்த வீரரைத் தழுவி பாராட்டுவதில்லையா? அதுபோல் செயல்பட வேண்டும்.
நீட் தோ்வுக்கு விண்ணப்பித்து விட்டால் மட்டும் போதாது. அது அந்த மாணவனின் வாழ்க்கை லட்சியமாக மாறவேண்டும். தன் லட்சியத்தை ஒரு வெள்ளைத்தாளில் எழுதி வைத்துக் கொண்டு அதை எவ்வாறு செயல்படுத்தப் போகிறோம் என்றும் எழுதித் திட்டமிட வேண்டும்.
திட்டத்தை செயல்படுத்த தேவைப்படும் தேவையானவை எவை, அவை எங்கு கிடைக்கும், யாருடைய உதவி இதற்கு தேவைப்படும், அவருடைய உதவியை நாடுவது எப்படி இவற்றை நன்கு சிந்திக்க வேண்டும். இதுவே லட்சியத்தை சென்றடைவதற்கு தேவைப்படும் அடிப்படையாகும்.
பழைய வினாக்களை எடுத்துப் பாா்த்து அதற்கான விடைகளை அமைதியான சூழலில் சுய விருப்பத்துடன் எழுதி சுயமதிப்பீடு செய்து கொண்டாலே நீட் போன்ற போட்டித் தோ்வுகளை எதிா்கொள்வதற்கான நம்பிக்கை ஏற்படும். அவ்வாறான மாணவா்களுக்கு பள்ளிப் படிப்புசாா்ந்த பிரச்னைகளும், குடும்ப உறவுகளின் நெருக்கடிகளும், பொருளாதார நெருக்கடிகளும் தடைக்கற்களாக மாறலாம். எனவேதான் நீட் லட்சியத்தை சென்றடைவதற்கான செயல்பாடுகளை தள்ளிப் போட்டுக் கொண்டே செல்கிறாா்கள்.
சிலா் தொடக்கத்தில் வரும் பிரச்னைகளை பாா்த்து, பாதி வழியிலேயே தனது நீட் லட்சியத்தை கைவிட்டு விடுகிறாா்கள். தடைகளை உடைத்தெறிந்து லட்சியத்தை சென்றடைய அவா்களுக்கு தனி மன உறுதி வேண்டும். லட்சியத்தை அடைய முற்படும்போது அதை சிறு சிறு பிரிவுகளாக பிரித்துக் கொண்டு ஒவ்வொரு சிறு பிரிவு லட்சியத்தையும் அடைந்தபிறகு, அடுத்த நிலைக்கு செல்வது நல்லது.
லட்சியத்தை அடைய முயல்பவா்கள் சோம்பேறிகளாக இருக்க கூடாது. படிப்பதற்கு கால நேரம் பாா்க்க பாா்க்கக்கூடாது. மற்றவா் உதவியை கேட்க தயங்கக்கூடாது. அன்றாடம் குறிப்பிட்ட நேரத்தை லட்சியத்தை அடைவதற்கான பயிற்சிக்கு செலவிட வேண்டும். உழைப்பின்றி ஊதியம் இல்லை என்பதை உணா்ந்து கடினமாக உழைக்க வேண்டும்.
நீட், அகில இந்திய அளவிலான மருத்துவ படிப்புக்கான தோ்வு. எனவே அந்த படிப்புக்கான திறமையையும் அறிவையும் மாணவா்களிடையே அரசு எதிா்பாா்ப்பது சமுதாயத்திற்கு நல்ல மருத்துவா்களை கொடுப்பதற்காகவே என்பதை ஒவ்வொரு மாணவனும் உணர வேண்டும்.
மாணவா்களைப் பொறுத்தவரை மருத்துவராக வரவேண்டியது என்பது அவா்களது லட்சியம். அகில இந்திய அளவில் நடைபெறும் ஒரு போட்டித் தோ்வுக்கு தங்களைத் தகுதிப்படுத்திக் கொள்வதற்கான முன்னேற்பாடுகளை அவா்கள் செய்துகொள்ள வேண்டியது அவசியம்.
தயாா் நிலையில் இல்லாத மாணவா்களால் தோ்வைத் திறம்பட எழுத முடியாது. எனவே, அவா்கள் வெற்றி பெற முடியாது. இதுதான் எதாா்த்தம். தோல்விகளைக் கண்டு துவண்டு விட்டால், அவா்களால் லட்சியத்தின் அருகில் கூட செல்ல முடியாது. மருத்துவப் படிப்பு இல்லை என்றால் என்ன? மற்ற படிப்புகளுக்கு இவா்கள் முயற்சி செய்யலாமே? மருத்துவராகி சம்பாதிப்பதை விட அதிகமாக பணம் ஈட்டும் படிப்புகளும் இருக்கின்றன.
எனவே, இன்றைய இளைஞா்கள் வேலைவாய்ப்பினைப் பெறுவதற்கு மருத்துவம் தவிரவும், பல துறைகள் உள்ளன என்பதைப் புரிந்துகொள்ள வேண்டும். அவற்றில் ஒரு துறையைத் தோ்ந்தெடுத்து அதில் அடிப்படைத் திறனை வளா்த்துக் கொள்வதோடு, தொடா் பயிற்சியும் மேற்கொண்டால் நிச்சயமாக வெற்றி பெறலாம். எனவே, தோல்வியில் கலங்காமல், மீண்டும் முயன்று வெற்றியை நோக்கி முன்னேற மாணவா்கள் தயாராக வேண்டும்.
இந்தியா முழுவதிலும் நிகழும் சாலை விபத்துகள் குறித்து உலக வங்கி ஆய்வு மேற்கொண்டு, அந்த ஆய்வு முடிவை ஓா் அறிக்கையாக வெளியிட்டது. அந்த அறிக்கையை வெளியிட்டுப் பேசிய மத்திய சாலை போக்குவரத்து - நெடுஞ்சாலைத்துறை அமைச்சா் நிதின் கட்கரி, ‘இந்தியாவில் நிகழும் சாலை விபத்துகள் கரோனா பெருந்தொற்றை விட ஆபத்தனாவை’ எனக் குறிப்பிட்டாா்.
சாலை விபத்துகளால் மனித உயிா்கள் பலியாவது மட்டுமல்ல, ஆண்டுதோறும் 4.5 லட்சத்திற்கும் மேற்பட்டவா்களுக்கு கடுமையான காயங்கள், உறுப்பு இழப்பு, மனநல பாதிப்பு போன்றவையும் ஏற்பட்டுள்ளன. அதனால்தான், சாலை விபத்துகள் கரோனா பெருந்தொற்றைவிட ஆபத்தானவை எனக் கூறியுள்ளாா் மத்திய அமைச்சா்.
இந்தியா அதிா்ச்சியடையும் விதத்திலான பல தகவல்கள் உலக வங்கியின் ஆய்வு அறிக்கையில் இடம் பெற்றுள்ளன. உலக நாடுகளில் பயன்பாட்டில் இருந்துவரும் மோட்டாா் வாகனங்களின் எண்ணிக்கையில் ஒரு சதவீத வாகனங்கள் இந்தியாவில் உள்ளன. ஆனால், உலக நாடுகளில் சாலை விபத்துகளால் நிகழும் இறப்புகளில் 11 சதவீத இறப்புகள் இந்தியாவில் நிகழ்கின்றன என்பதை அந்த ஆய்வு வெளிப்படுத்துகிறது.
இந்தியாவில் சாலை விபத்தால் நிகழும் ஒவ்வொரு மரணத்தாலும் சமுதாயம் எதிா்கொள்ளும் இழப்பு ரூ.91.16 லட்சம் என்றும், சாலை விபத்தால் ஏற்படும் ஒவ்வொரு கொடுங்காயத்தாலும் சமுதாயத்திற்கு ஏற்படும் இழப்பு ரூ.3.64 லட்சம் என்றும் உலக வங்கியின் அறிக்கை குறிப்பிடுகிறது.
சாலை விபத்துகளால் இந்தியாவில் உயிரிழப்பவா்களில் 70 சதவீதத்திற்கும் மேற்பட்டவா்கள் 18 முதல் 45 வயது உடையவா்கள் என்றும், இதன் விளைவாக மொத்த உள்நாட்டு உற்பத்தியில் (ஜி.டி.பி) 7.5 சதவீத இழப்பை ஆண்டுதோறும் இந்தியப் பொருளாதாரம் எதிா்கொள்கிறது என்றும் இந்த இழப்பின் மதிப்பு சுமாா் ரூ.12.9 லட்சம் கோடிகள் என்றும் உலக வங்கியின் ஆய்வறிக்கை சுட்டிக்காட்டுகிறது.
பொருளாதாரத்தில் பின்தங்கிய பிரிவினரும் நடுத்தர பொருளாதாரப் பிரிவினரும்தான் இந்திய சாலைகளில் நிகழும் விபத்துகளில் அதிகம் உயிரிழக்கின்றனா் என்றும், சாலை விபத்துகளில் உயிரிழப்பவா்களில் 50 சதவீதத்திற்கும் அதிகமானவா்கள் நடந்து செல்வோா், சைக்கிளில் செல்வோா், மோட்டாா் சைக்கிளில் பயணிப்பவா்கள் என்றும் உலக வங்கியின் அறிக்கை தெரிவிக்கிறது.
உலக நாடுகளிலேயே சாலை விபத்துகளால் அதிக உயிரிழப்பை எதிா்கொள்ளும் நாடாக இந்தியா இருந்து வருகிறது என்றும், இந்திய மாநிலங்களில் தமிழ்நாட்டில்தான் அதிக எண்ணிக்கையில் சாலை விபத்துகள் நிகழ்கின்றன என்றும் புள்ளிவிவரங்கள் கூறுகின்றன.
சாலை விபத்துகளால் கொடுங்காயம் அடைந்தவா்களில், சிகிச்சை பலனின்றி இறப்பவா்களில் மூன்றில் இரண்டு போ் பொருளாதாரத்தில் பின்தங்கிய பிரிவினா் என்றும், ‘பணமில்லா சிகிச்சை’ (கேஷ்லெஸ் ட்ரீட்மென்ட்) என்ற அரசின் மருத்துவ உதவித்திட்டம் அவா்களுக்கு உரிய நேரத்தில் கிடைப்பதில்லை என்றும் உலக வங்கியின் ஆய்வு சுட்டிக்காட்டுகிறது.
சாலை விபத்துகளால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டவா்களுக்கு அரசின் சாா்பாக மாவட்ட ஆட்சியா் வழங்கும் விபத்து நிவாரணத்தொகையும் காலம் கடந்தே வழங்கப்படுவதால் அந்த நிவாரணத்தொகை விபத்தால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டவா்களின் மருத்துவச் செலவுகளுக்குப் பயன்படுவதில்லை.
கடந்த 20 ஆண்டுகளில் இந்திய சாலைகளில் வாகனங்களின் எண்ணிக்கை நான்கு மடங்கு அதிகரித்துள்ளது என்றும், இந்தியாவில் உள்ள அனைத்து வகையான வாகனங்களில் 73 சதவீதம் மோட்டாா் சைக்கிள், ஸ்கூட்டா், மொபெட் போன்ற இருசக்கர மோட்டாா் வாகனங்கள் என்றும், 13 சதவீதம் காா், டாக்ஸி, ஜீப் போன்ற நான்கு சக்கர மோட்டாா் வாகனங்கள் என்றும் ஆய்வு வெளிப்படுத்துகிறது.
இந்தியாவில் தொடா்ந்து அதிகரித்துவரும் மோட்டாா் வாகனங்களால் ஏற்படும் சாலை விபத்துகள், அவற்றால் ஏற்படும் உயிரிழப்புகள், பொருளாதார இழப்பு ஆகியவை ஒரு பக்கம் இருக்க, மோட்டாா் வாகனங்கள் வெளியிடும் புகை காற்று மாசு கணிசமான அளவுக்கு அதிகரிக்கக் காரணமாக உள்ளது என சிகாகோ பல்கலைக்கழகம் அண்மையில் இந்தியாவில் நடத்திய ஆய்வில் தெரியவந்துள்ளது. மாசு நிறைந்த காற்றை சுவாசிப்பதால் 40 சதவீத இந்தியா்களின் ஆயுட்காலம் 9 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு மேல் குறைய வாய்ப்புள்ளது என்றும் இந்த ஆய்வில் கண்டறியப்பட்டுள்ளது.
காற்று மாசு மிக அதிகமாக உள்ள உலக நாடுகளின் பட்டியலில், வங்கதேசம், பாகிஸ்தான் ஆகிய இரண்டு நாடுகளுக்கு அடுத்ததாக, மூன்றாவது இடத்தை இந்தியா பிடித்துள்ளது. அதுமட்டுமன்றி, உலக நாடுகளில் காற்று மாசு மிக அதிகமாக உள்ள முப்பது நகரங்களில் 21 நகரங்கள் இந்தியாவில் உள்ளன என்று தெரியவந்துள்ளது. இது இந்தியாவின் காற்றுவெளி தொடா்ந்து மாசு அடைந்து வருவதை வெளிப்படுத்துகிறது.
இந்தியாவில் ஆண்டுதோறும் 20 லட்சம் போ் காற்று மாசு காரணமாக அகால மரணம் அடைகின்றனா் என்றும், இந்திய காற்று வெளியை மாசுபடுத்தும் காரணிகளில் 27 சதவீதம் மோட்டாா் வாகனங்கள் வெளியிடும் புகை என்றும், காா், ஜீப் உள்ளிட்ட நான்கு சக்கர வாகனங்களைக் காட்டிலும் மோட்டாா் சைக்கிள், ஸ்கூட்டா் உள்ளிட்ட இருசக்கர மோட்டாா் வாகனங்கள் வெளியிடும் புகை காற்று மண்டலத்தை அதிக அளவில் மாசுபடுத்துகிறது என்றும் புதுதில்லியில் உள்ள அறிவியல் - சுற்றுச்சூழலுக்கான ஆய்வு மையம் கண்டறிந்துள்ளது.
வாகன விபத்துகள் ஏற்படுத்தும் உயிரிழப்புகள், வாகனங்கள் வெளியிடும் புகையால் மாசு அடையும் காற்று மண்டலம் ஏற்படுத்தும் அகால மரணங்கள் - இவையெல்லாம் இந்தியாவிற்கு ஒரு சவாலாகவே இருந்து வருகின்றன. 2025-ஆம் ஆண்டுக்குள் வாகன விபத்துகளால் நிகழும் உயிரிழப்புகளை 50 சதவீதமாகக் குறைக்க வேண்டும் என்ற இலக்கை இந்திய அரசு நிா்ணயித்துள்ளது.
நம் நாட்டில், போக்குவரத்து விதிகளைக் கடைப்பிடிப்பதில் மோட்டாா் வாகன ஓட்டுநா்களின் செயல்பாடுகள் திருப்தி அடையும் விதத்தில் இல்லை என்பதே கசப்பான உண்மை.
ஆண்டு ஒன்றுக்கு ஒன்றரை லட்சம் போ் சாலை விபத்துகளில் உயிரிழக்கின்ற நம் நாட்டில், மூன்றில் ஒருவா் தகுந்த நேரத்தில் முதலுதவி அளிக்கப்பட்டு காப்பாற்றப்படாததால் உயிரிழக்கின்றாா். காயம்பட்ட நபருக்கு முதலுதவி கூட செய்ய மனமின்றி, வழக்கிலிருந்து தன்னைக் காப்பாற்றிக் கொள்ள சம்பவ இடத்திலிருந்து தப்பி ஓடிவிடும் ‘ஹிட் அண்ட் ரன்’ மனநிலை நம் நாட்டு ஓட்டுநா்களிடம் மிகுந்திருப்பதைக் காண முடிகிறது.
சாலை விதிகளை மீறுவதில் படித்தவா், படிக்காதவா்; இளைஞா், முதியவா்; ஆண், பெண் என்ற வேறுபாட்டை நம் நாட்டில் காணமுடிவதில்லை. அதிக வேகமாக வாகனம் ஓட்டுதல், மது அருந்திவிட்டும், கைப்பேசியில் பேசிக்கொண்டும் வாகனம் ஓட்டுதல், முறையான ஓட்டுநா் உரிமம் இன்றி வாகனம் ஓட்டுதல், தங்களின் மகிழ்ச்சியை வெளிப்படுத்த சாலை விதிகளை மீறி வாகனம் ஓட்டுதல் போன்றவை தினசரி நிகழ்வுகளாக நம்நாட்டில் இருக்கும்பொழுது, சாலை விபத்துகளினால் ஏற்படும் உயிரிழப்பை நம்மால் எப்படிக் குறைக்க முடியும்?
வாகன ஓட்டுநா் உரிமம் பெறுவதற்கான நிபந்தனைகள் கடுமையாக இருந்தபோதிலும், போதிய அனுபவம் இல்லாதவா்கள் இடைத்தரகா்கள் மூலம் ஓட்டுநா் உரிமம் பெறுகின்ற நிலை நம்நாட்டில் தொடா்கின்ற நிலையைக் காணமுடிகிறது.
சாலை விதிமீறல்களுக்கான அபராதத் தொகையை அதிகப்படுத்தினால், ஓட்டுநா்கள் சாலை விதிமீறல்களில் ஈடுபடமாட்டாா்கள் என்ற கருத்தின் அடிப்படையில் 2019-ஆம் ஆண்டில் மோட்டாா் வாகனச் சட்டம் திருத்தம் செய்யப்பட்டது. ஆனால், அபராதத் தொகை உயா்வு சாலை விதிமீறல்களுக்குத் தீா்வாகாது என்பதுதான் உண்மையான கள நிலவரம்.
சாலையில் செல்லும் வாகனங்களைத் தடுத்து நிறுத்தி காவல்துறையினா் மேற்கொள்ளும் சோதனைகள் பெரும்பாலும் அபராதத் தொகை வசூலிப்பதற்காகவே செய்யப்படுகின்றன. இம்மாதிரியான வாகனத் தணிக்கைகள் மேலைநாடுகளில் நடத்தப்படுவதில்லை.
அறிவியல் தொழில் நுட்பத்தைப் பயன்படுத்தி, சாலைகளில் பயணிக்கும் அனைத்து வாகனங்களையும் கண்காணிப்பு கேமராக்கள் மூலம் கண்காணித்து, சாலை விதிமீறல்களில் ஈடுபடும் அனைத்து ஓட்டுநா்கள் மீதும் துரித நடவடிக்கை மேலைநாடுகளில் எடுக்கப்படுகிறது. அத்தகைய நடைமுறை நம்நாட்டில் பின்பற்றப்படவில்லை. அதற்குத் தேவையான நவீன தொழில் நுட்பமும் காவல்துறையில் முழுமையாக இல்லை.
சாலை விபத்துகளால் நிகழும் உயிரிழப்புகள் குறித்து பதிவு செய்யப்படும் குற்ற வழக்குகள் பெரும்பாலும் இழப்பீட்டுத் தொகை பெறுவதற்கான இன்றியமையாத் தேவையாகத்தான் நம்நாட்டில் கருதப்படுகிறது. இவ்வழக்குகள் மீதான நீதிமன்ற விசாரணை முடிவு பெறாமல் பல ஆண்டுகள் நிலுவையில் இருப்பதும், விசாரணையின் முடிவில் வழங்கப்படும் தண்டனை சாதாரண தண்டனையாக இருப்பதும் சாலை விபத்துகள் அதிக அளவில் நிகழ்வதற்கான காரணங்களாக அமைகின்றன.
சாலை விதிகளைப் பின்பற்றுவது குறித்தும், பாதுகாப்பான சாலைப் பயணம் குறித்தும் பள்ளிக் கல்வியில் கற்பிக்கப்பட்டால் ஆண்டுதோறும் நிகழும் சாலை விபத்துகளின் எண்ணிக்கை குறையும்.
சாலை விதி மீறல்களில் ஈடுபடும் வாகனங்களைத் தொடா்ந்து கண்காணித்து உடனுக்குடன் சட்ட ரீதியான நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கத் தேவையான நவீன தொழில் நுட்ப வசதிகளை அமைப்பதும், சாலை விபத்து வழக்குகளில் நீதிமன்ற விசாரணையை விரைவாக நடத்தி தீா்ப்பையும் வரைவாக வழங்குவதும் சாலை விபத்துகளால் ஏற்படும் உயிரிழப்புகளைக் குறைக்கப் பெரிதும் துணைபுரியும் என்பதில் ஐயமில்லை.
கட்டுரையாளா்: காவல்துறை உயா் அதிகாரி (ஓய்வு).
பஞ்சாப் மாநிலத்தின் புதிய முதல்வராகப் பொறுப்பேற்றிருக்கும் சரண்ஜித் சிங் சன்னி, நாடு தழுவிய அளவில் வாழ்த்துகளைப் பெற்றுவருகிறார். அம்மாநிலத்தில், பட்டியல் இனத்திலிருந்து முதல்வராகப் பதவியேற்றுள்ள முதலாவது நபர் அவர். இளம்வயதில் கைரிக்ஷா இழுத்தவர், ரிக்ஷாவில் நாற்காலிகள் விற்றவர் என்று அடித்தட்டு மக்களின் அனுபவங்களோடு அவர்களின் பிரதிநிதியாய் அரசியலில் நுழைந்தவர். மாணவர் அரசியல் தலைவரான அவர், பின்பு சட்டம் பயின்று வழக்கறிஞராகவும் தகுதிபெற்றார்.
பஞ்சாபில், பட்டியல் இனத்தவரின் எண்ணிக்கை ஏறக்குறைய 31% என்றாலும், அவர்களுக்குள் நிலவும் சாதிய வேறுபாடுகள் அரசியல் தலைமையேற்கும் வாய்ப்பில்லாத சூழலை ஏற்படுத்தியிருந்தன. தற்போதும்கூட, பஞ்சாப் மாநிலத்தின் காங்கிரஸ் கட்சிக்குள் நடந்துவரும் உட்கட்சிப் பூசல்களின் விளைவாகவே சரண்ஜித் சிங் சன்னி முதல்வராகியுள்ளார். அவர் முழு அதிகாரம் பெற்ற முதல்வராக இருக்க முடியாது என்பதும் பஞ்சாப் காங்கிரஸ் கட்சித் தலைவர் நவ்ஜோத் சிங் சித்து ஆதரவால்தான் அந்தப் பதவியில் தொடர முடியும் என்பதும்தான் உண்மை நிலை.
ஜாட் சீக்கியரான சுக்ஜிந்தர் சிங் ரந்தவா, இந்து மதத்தைச் சேர்ந்த ஓ.பி.சோனி ஆகிய இருவரும் துணை முதல்வர்களாகப் பொறுப்பேற்றுக்கொண்டுள்ளனர். சாதி, மத அடிப்படையில், அனைத்துப் பிரிவினருக்கும் வாய்ப்புகள் வழங்கப்பட்டுள்ளதாகச் சொல்லப்பட்டாலும் துணை முதல்வர்களைத் தேர்ந்தெடுப்பதில் முன்னாள் முதல்வர் அமரீந்தர் சிங் ஆதரவாளர்களுக்கும் மாநிலக் கட்சித் தலைவர் நவ்ஜோத் சிங் சித்து ஆதரவாளர்களுக்கும் இடையில் கடுமையான கருத்து வேறுபாடுகள் பிரதிபலித்துள்ளன. அடுத்து, அமைச்சரவையில் அங்கம் வகிக்கவிருப்பவர்களை முடிவுசெய்வதற்காகக் கட்சித் தலைமையுடன் கலந்தாலோசிக்க டெல்லிக்குப் புறப்பட்டுள்ளார் சன்னி. புதிய அமைச்சரவையில் இடம்பெறும் அமரீந்தரின் ஆதரவாளர்களைச் சமாளிக்க வேண்டிய சவாலையும் இனிமேல் அவர் எதிர்கொண்டாக வேண்டும்.
முன்னாள் முதல்வர் அமரீந்தர் சிங் காலத்தில் உரிய கவனம் செலுத்தப்படாமலிருந்த பல பிரச்சினைகள் புதிய முதல்வர் முன்னால் வரிசைகட்டி நிற்கின்றன. மின்சாரக் கொள்முதல் ஒப்பந்தங்கள், போதைப் பொருள் தடுப்பு நடவடிக்கைகள், 2015-ல் சீக்கியர்களின் மறை நூல் அவமதிக்கப்பட்டதைக் கண்டித்து நடந்த ஆர்ப்பாட்டத்தில் காவல் துறை துப்பாக்கிச் சூடு நடத்தியது தொடர்பான வழக்கு ஆகியவற்றில் விரைந்து நடவடிக்கை எடுக்க வேண்டும் என்ற எதிர்பார்ப்பு மக்களிடம் நிலவுகிறது. கருத்து வேறுபாட்டின் காரணமாக அமைச்சரவையிலிருந்து விலகிய சித்து, இந்தக் கோரிக்கைகளை முன்வைத்தே அமரீந்தருக்கு நெருக்கடிகளைக் கொடுக்கத் தொடங்கினார்.
அடுத்த ஆண்டு சட்டமன்றத் தேர்தலைச் சந்திக்கவிருக்கும் நிலையில், பஞ்சாப் அமைச்சரவையில் நிகழ்ந்திருக்கும் இந்த மாற்றம் என்னென்ன விளைவுகளை ஏற்படுத்தக்கூடும் என்ற கேள்வியும் உள்ளது. பஞ்சாபில் காங்கிரஸை எதிர்க்கும் நிலையில், வலுவான எதிர்க்கட்சியோ கூட்டணியோ இதுவரை இல்லையென்றாலும், தொடர்ந்து கிளர்ச்சியில் ஈடுபட்டுவரும் விவசாயிகள் ஒன்றிணைந்து தனிக் கட்சியைத் தொடங்கவும் வாய்ப்புள்ளது. அவ்வாறு ஏதேனும் நடந்தால், காங்கிரஸ் கடுமையான போட்டியொன்றைச் சந்திக்க வேண்டியிருக்கும்.
இந்தியா இறக்குமதி செய்யும் கச்சா எண்ணெய், தங்கம் ஆகியவற்றின் மதிப்புக்கு அடுத்தபடியாகச் சமையல் எண்ணெயின் மதிப்பு உள்ளது. நாட்டின் உணவுத் தேவையைப் பூர்த்திசெய்யக் கொண்டுவரப்பட்ட பசுமைப் புரட்சியினால் தானிய உற்பத்தியில் தன்னிறைவை அடைந்தாலும் எண்ணெய் வித்துப் பயிர்களின் உற்பத்தியைப் பெருக்க அறிமுகப்படுத்தப்பட்ட பல திட்டங்களும் எதிர்பார்த்த இலக்கை அடையவில்லை. இதனால், சமையலுக்குப் பெருமளவில் பனை எண்ணெய்யை (பாமாயில்) இறக்குமதி செய்து பயன்படுத்திவருகிறோம். பெருந்தொகையைக் கொண்டு பனை எண்ணெய் உற்பத்தியைப் பெருக்க எடுக்கப்படும் நடவடிக்கைகள் எதிர்காலத்தில் நிலையான வளர்ச்சிக்குக் கைகொடுக்குமா என்பதே வல்லுநர்களின் கேள்வியாக உள்ளது.
இந்திய நுகர்வோர் பல ஆண்டுகளாகப் பாரம்பரிய எண்ணெய் வித்துக்களான கடலை, எள், சூரியகாந்தி, கடுகு, சோயா, ஆளிவிதை, தேங்காய் போன்றவற்றைச் சமையலுக்குப் பயன்படுத்துகிறார்கள். மக்கள்தொகைப் பெருக்கம், உணவு நுகர்வு முறை மாற்றங்கள், பாரம்பரிய எண்ணெய் வித்துப் பயிர்களின் உற்பத்திக் குறைவு போன்றவற்றின் காரணமாகச் சமையல் எண்ணெய் தட்டுப்பாடு ஏற்பட்டது. 1980-களில் பனை எண்ணெய் வர்த்தகம் ஆப்பிரிக்க நாடுகளிலிருந்து இந்தியாவுக்குள் நுழைந்தது. இந்தியாவில் முதன்முதலாக அந்தமான் மற்றும் நிக்கோபார் தீவின் வேளாண் திட்டத்தின் கீழ் 1979-ல் 2,400 ஹெக்டேரில் பனை எண்ணெய் வளர்ப்பதற்கான திட்டம் முன்னெடுக்கப்பட்டது. இதில் சுமார் 1,593 ஹெக்டேர் எண்ணெய்ப் பனை பயிரிடப்பட்ட நிலையில், 1986-ல் சுற்றுச்சூழல் பாதுகாப்பு கோரி இத்திட்டத்தை மத்திய சுற்றுச்சூழல் அமைச்சகம் தடைசெய்தது. இதைத் தொடர்ந்து, உள்நாட்டிலேயே எண்ணெய் வித்துக்களின் உற்பத்தியைப் பெருக்க 1990-ல் கொண்டுவரப்பட்ட மஞ்சள் புரட்சியின் வாயிலாக நிலக்கடலை, கடுகு மற்றும் சோயாபீன் போன்ற பயிர்களின் உற்பத்தி பெருகினாலும், மொத்த சமையல் எண்ணெயின் தேவையை ஈடுகட்டவில்லை. 1990-களில் நாட்டில் மொத்த சமையல் எண்ணெய் தேவையில் 97% உள்நாட்டிலேயே உற்பத்திசெய்யப்பட்டது. ஆனால், தற்போது இந்தியாவின் இறக்குமதியில் 60%-க்கும் மேல் சமையல் எண்ணெய், குறிப்பாகப் பனை எண்ணெய் இறக்குமதி பங்குவகிக்கிறது. ஆனாலும், பெருவாரியான உயர்வருவாய் நுகர்வோர் பாரம்பரிய எண்ணெயையே விரும்புகின்றனர்.
உடல் நலத்துக்குக் கேடு விளைவிக்கும் கொழுப்பு அதிகம் உள்ளதால், பனை எண்ணெய் நல்லதல்ல என்று பல மருத்துவ ஆய்வுகள் கூறுகின்றன. ஆனாலும், தற்போது நாம் பயன்படுத்தும் இனிப்பு வகைகள், சாக்லேட், நொறுக்குத் தீனிகள், நூடுல்ஸ் போன்றவற்றிலும் உணவகங்களில் பெரும்பாலும் பனை எண்ணெயே பயன்படுத்தப்படுகிறது. குறிப்பாக, வறுமைக்கோட்டுக்குக் கீழ் உள்ள அடித்தட்டு மக்களில் பெரும்பாலானோர், நியாய விலைக் கடைகளில் பனை எண்ணெயை வாங்கிப் பயன்படுத்துகின்றனர். உலகளவில், ஒவ்வொரு நபரும் ஆண்டுக்குச் சராசரியாக எட்டு கிலோகிராம் பனை எண்ணெய் உட்கொள்கின்றனர் என ஆய்வுகள் தெரிவிக்கின்றன.
புதிய திட்டம்
இந்நிலையில், 2018-ல் வெளிவந்த மத்திய அரசின் இந்தியப் பனை எண்ணெய் ஆராய்ச்சி நிறுவனத்தின் ஆய்வு முடிவுகள் மற்றும் தற்போதைய எண்ணெய்த் தட்டுப்பாடு ஆகியவற்றைக் கருத்தில் கொண்டு, வடகிழக்கு மாநிலங்களிலும் அந்தமான் மற்றும் நிக்கோபார் தீவுகளிலும் சுமார் 6.5 லட்சம் ஹெக்டேரில் எண்ணெய்ப் பனை பயிரிட ரூ.11,040 கோடி ஒதுக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இத்தொகையில், மத்திய அரசின் பங்களிப்பு 80% ஆகவும் (ரூ.8,844 கோடி) மாநில அரசின் பங்களிப்பு 20%ஆகவும் (ரூ.2,196 கோடி) இருக்கும் என அறிவிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இத்திட்டத்தின் வாயிலாக 2029-2030-ம் ஆண்டுகளில் 28 லட்சம் டன்னாக உற்பத்தியை அதிகரிக்க உத்தேசிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது. இதில் பரிந்துரைக்கப்பட்ட பெரும்பாலான பகுதிகள் இயற்கை எழில் சூழ்ந்த காடுகள், பழங்குடி மக்களின் வாழ்விடங்களாகும். இவ்வாறான பெரிய அளவிலான பனை எண்ணெய்ச் சாகுபடித் திட்டத்தை நடைமுறைப்படுத்தினால், அதன்மூலம் சுற்றுச்சூழல் பாதிப்பு ஏற்படுவதுடன், முன்மொழியப்பட்ட பகுதிகளில் வசிக்கும் சிறு - குறு விவசாயிகள் மற்றும் பழங்குடி மக்கள் தங்கள் நில உரிமையை இழக்கும் அபாயம் உள்ளது என சமூக ஆர்வலர்கள் எச்சரிக்கின்றனர்.
விளைவுகள்
மத்திய உணவு மற்றும் பொது விநியோக அமைச்சகம் எண்ணெய்த் தட்டுப்பாட்டைக் கருத்தில் கொண்டு, மார்ச் 2008-ல் அனைத்து சமையல் எண்ணெய் ஏற்றுமதிக்கும் தடை விதித்தது. சுமார் 10 ஆண்டுகளுக்குப் பிறகு 60%-க்கு மேல் இறக்குமதியைச் சார்ந்து இருந்தபோதிலும் 2017-க்குப் பிறகு இந்தத் தடை படிப்படியாகத் தளர்த்தப்பட்டது. இதனால் பன்னாட்டுச் சந்தை மதிப்பு கொண்ட பனை எண்ணெய் வர்த்தகத்தை இந்தியாவில் உள்ள சில பெருநிறுவனங்கள் முன்னெடுக்க ஆர்வம் காட்டுவதாகத் தெரிகிறது. தற்போதைய திட்டம், எதிர்காலத்தில் உள்நாட்டுத் தேவைக்கு அதிகமான உற்பத்திக்கும் ஏற்றுமதிக்கும் வழிவகுக்குமேயானால், அது நாட்டின் சுற்றுச்சூழலைப் பெரிதும் பாதிக்கும்.
எடுத்துக்காட்டாக, சமையல் எண்ணெய்க்கான உலகளாவிய சந்தைத் தேவையைச் சாதகமாக்கப் பல நாடுகள் அவற்றின் பசுமைக்காடுகளையும் மலைக்காடுகளில் உள்ள மரங்களையும் அகற்றிப் பனை எண்ணெய் உற்பத்தி செய்தன. இதில் உலகின் 85% அளவுக்குப் பனை எண்ணெய் உற்பத்தி செய்யும் கிழக்காசிய நாடுகளான இந்தோனேசியா, மலேசியாவில் சுற்றுச்சூழல் பெரிதும் பாதிக்கப்பட்டதுடன், பல்லுயிர்களின் வாழ்வாதாரமும் கேள்விக்குறியாகியுள்ளது. தற்போது இந்தோனேசியாவும் இலங்கையும் எண்ணெய்ப் பனை வளர்ப்பதற்குக் கட்டுப்பாடுகள் விதிக்கத் தொடங்கிவிட்டன. இந்தியாவில், ஆந்திரத்திலும் அந்தமான் தீவுகளிலும் பனை எண்ணெய் உற்பத்தி அதிகரித்துவருவதைக் கருத்தில் கொண்டு சுற்றுச்சூழலைப் பாதுகாக்கும் வகையிலும் உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் 2002-ல் அந்தமான் மற்றும் நிக்கோபார் தீவுகளில் பனை எண்ணெய் போன்ற அனைத்து ஒற்றைப் பயிர் முறைகளையும் தடை செய்தது.
திட்டமிடல் தேவை
தற்போதைய சூழலில் பனை எண்ணெயின் பங்கு இன்றியமையாததாக இருந்தாலும், ஊட்டச்சத்து நிறைந்த பாரம்பரிய எண்ணெய் வித்துப் பயிர்களின் உற்பத்தியைப் பெருக்க ஆதார விலையை உயர்த்துதல், புதிய தொழில்நுட்பங்களைப் புகுத்துதல், உற்பத்தித் திறனைக் கூட்டுதல் போன்ற திட்டங்கள் தேவை. மேலும், நாடு முழுவதும் செயல்பட்டுவரும் பயிர் சார்ந்த உழவர் உற்பத்தியாளர் நிறுவனங்கள் பல வேளாண் உற்பத்தியை மதிப்புக்கூட்டுதல் மூலம் அதிக வருவாய் ஈட்டுவதைப் போல, பனை எண்ணெய் உற்பத்தியிலும் மதிப்புக்கூட்டுதல் முறையை ஊக்கப்படுத்தினால் பெருநிறுவனங்களின் தலையீடு கட்டுப்படுத்தப்படுவதுடன் விவசாயிகளின் வருவாயும் உயரும்.
கடந்த மாதம் (ஆகஸ்ட் 17) சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்றத்துக்கு ஒரு வழக்கு வந்தது. நாடாளுமன்றத்தில் தமிழ்நாட்டுக்கு ஒதுக்கப்பட்டிருக்கும் இடங்களைப் பற்றி அந்த வழக்கில் பேசப்பட்டது. வழக்கை விசாரித்த நீதிபதிகள் கிருபாகரனும் புகழேந்தியும் வெளிப்படுத்திய கவலை கவனத்துக்குரியது. 1962 வரை, நாடாளுமன்றத்துக்குத் தமிழ்நாடு 41 உறுப்பினர்களை அனுப்பியது. 1967 முதல் இந்த எண்ணிக்கை 39 ஆகக் குறைந்துவிட்டது. மக்கள்தொகை அடிப்படையில் உறுப்பினர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை மாநிலங்களுக்குப் பகிர்ந்தளிக்கப்பட்டதால் தமிழ்நாட்டின் வீதம் குறைந்துவிட்டது. மக்கள்தொகையைச் சிறப்பாகக் கட்டுப்படுத்திவரும் ஒரு மாநிலத்துக்கு இது தண்டனையாகாதா? 1999-ல் வாஜ்பாய் அரசு ஒற்றை வாக்கு வித்தியாசத்தில் பதவி இழந்ததை நினைவூட்டிய நீதிபதிகள், நாடாளுமன்றத்தின் ஒவ்வொரு இடமும் முக்கியமானதில்லையா என்று கேட்டார்கள். இதைத் தொடர்ந்து ஊடகங்களில் ஒரு காத்திரமான உரையாடல் நடக்கும் என்று எதிர்பார்த்தேன். அப்படி எதுவும் நடந்ததாகத் தெரியவில்லை.
நீதிபதிகள் தொட்டுக் காட்டியிருப்பது ஒரு பெரிய சிக்கலின் சிறிய நுனியை மட்டுமே. நமது அரசமைப்புச் சட்டத்தின் 81-வது கூறு, ஒவ்வொரு மாநிலமும் அதனதன் மக்கள் தொகையின் விகிதத்தில் நாடாளுமன்ற இடங்களைப் பெறும் என்கிறது. 1962 பொதுத் தேர்தலில் 1951 மக்கள்தொகைக் கணக்கீட்டின்படி நாடாளுமன்ற இடங்கள் வழங்கப்பட்டன. தமிழ்நாடு 41 இடங்களைப் பெற்றது. 1967 பொதுத் தேர்தலில் 1961 மக்கள்தொகைக் கணக்கீடு பயன்படுத்தப்பட்டது. தமிழ்நாட்டு உறுப்பினர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை 39 ஆகக் குறைந்தது. 1971 தேர்தலிலும் அதுவே நீடித்தது. 1976 நெருக்கடி நிலைக் காலகட்டத்தில், இந்திரா காந்தியின் அரசு ஒரு சட்டத் திருத்தத்தைக் கொணர்ந்தது. நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை அடுத்த 25 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு (அதாவது 2001 வரை) மாற்றப்படாமல் இருக்கும் என்பதுதான் திருத்தம். குடும்பக் கட்டுப்பாட்டுத் திட்டத்தை முன்னெடுத்துச் செல்லும் மாநிலங்களின் பிரதிநிதித்துவத்தைக் குறைத்துவிடக் கூடாது என்பதுதான் நோக்கம். 2002-ல் வாஜ்பாய் அரசும் இன்னொரு திருத்தத்தின் வாயிலாக இந்தக் கால அவகாசத்தை மேலும் 25 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு (2026 வரை) நீட்டித்தது. 2026-க்குப் பிறகு இந்தச் சட்டம் மீண்டும் திருத்தப்படாவிட்டால் என்ன ஆகும்?
இதற்கு அலிஸ்டர் மாக்மில்லன் எனும் அரசியல் அறிவியலர் பதில் சொல்கிறார். 2001 மக்கள்தொகைக் கணக்கீட்டின்படி நாடாளுமன்ற இடங்கள் ஒதுக்கப்பட்டால், தமிழ்நாடு ஏழு இடங்களை இழக்கும், உத்தர பிரதேசம் மேலதிகமாக எட்டு இடங்களைப் பெறும். தமிழ்நாடு, கேரளம், ஆந்திரம், தெலங்கானா, கர்நாடகம் ஆகிய ஐந்து தென்மாநிலங்கள் கூட்டாக 18 இடங்களை இழக்கும். உத்தர பிரதேசம், பிஹார், ராஜஸ்தான், மத்தியப் பிரதேசம் உத்தராகண்ட், ஜார்கண்ட், சத்தீஸ்கர், ஹரியாணா, இமாச்சலப் பிரதேசம் ஆகிய இந்தி பேசும் வடமாநிலங்கள் 22 கூடுதல் இடங்களைப் பெறும். இது 2001 கணக்கு. சட்டத் திருத்தத்தின் கால அவகாசம் முடிகிற 2026-ல் இருக்கக்கூடிய மக்கள்தொகையைக் கணக்கிட்டுப் பங்கு வைத்தால், தென்மாநில இருக்கைகள் இப்போதைய 24%-லிருந்து 19%ஆகக் குறையும்; இந்தி பேசும் மாநில இருக்கைகள் இப்போதைய 40%-லிருந்து 46%ஆக உயரும். தெற்கு செல்வாக்கை இழக்கும். இந்தி பேசும் மாநிலங்களில் வெற்றி பெறும் பெரிய கட்சி எந்தத் தென்மாநிலத்தின் உதவியுமின்றி ஆட்சி அமைக்கும் சூழல் உருவாகும்.
ஆலோசனைகள் மூன்று
இந்தப் பிரச்சினையைப் பற்றிப் பேசுபவர்கள் பிரதானமான மூன்று கருத்துகளை முன்வைக்கிறார்கள். முதல் ஆலோசனை, அரசமைப்பைப் பின்பற்றி மக்கள்தொகை அடிப்படையில் நாடாளுமன்ற இடங்கள் பிரிக்கப்பட வேண்டும் என்பது. இப்போதைய தேர்தலில் ஒவ்வொரு நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினரும் பிரதிநிதித்துவப்படுத்தும் மக்களின் எண்ணிக்கை பெருமளவில் வேறுபடுகிறது. தமிழ்நாட்டின் ஒரு உறுப்பினர் சராசரியாக 18 லட்சம் மக்களின் பிரதிநிதியாக இருக்கிறார். அதே வேளையில், உத்தர பிரதேசத்தின் ஒரு உறுப்பினர் 30 லட்சம் மக்களின் பிரதிநிதியாக இருக்கிறார். இதைச் சமன்படுத்த வேண்டும் என்கிறார்கள் முதல் பிரிவினர். அப்படிச் செய்தால், தென் மாநிலங்கள் தண்டிக்கப் படுமே என்ற கேள்விக்கு அவர்களிடம் பதில் இல்லை.
இரண்டாவது ஆலோசனை, உறுப்பினர்களின் எண்ணிக்கையைக் கூட்டிவிடலாம் என்பது. கேரளத்தின் உறுப்பினர் எண்ணிக்கை 20. இதை நிலைநிறுத்திக்கொண்டு, அந்த விகிதத்தில் மற்ற மாநிலங்களின் உறுப்பினர்களை நிர்ணயிக்க வேண்டும் என்பது மாக்மில்லன் போன்றவர்கள் வழங்கும் ஆலோசனை. இதன்படி தமிழ்நாடு 49 உறுப்பினர்களைப் பெறும். உத்தர பிரதேசம் 143 (இப்போது 80) உறுப்பினர்களைப் பெறும். மொத்த உறுப்பினர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை 848 ஆக உயரும். இதன்படி, தமிழ்நாட்டின் உறுப்பினர்களின் எண்ணிக்கை கூடினாலும், அவையில் அதன் விகிதம் இப்போதைய 7.2%-லிருந்து (39/543) 5.8%ஆக (49/848) குறைந்துவிடும். மாறாக, உத்தர பிரதேச உறுப்பினர்களின் விகிதம் 14.7%-லிருந்து 16.9%ஆக உயர்ந்துவிடும். இந்தத் திட்டத்தின் கீழும் தென்மாநில இருக்கைகள் 19%ஆகவும் இந்தி மாநில இருக்கைகள் 46%ஆகவும் இருக்கும். இந்த ஆலோசனையும் தென்மாநிலங்களுக்கு உகந்ததாக இராது.
மூன்றாவது ஆலோசனை, மக்களவையின் இடங்களை மக்கள்தொகை அடிப்படையில் மாற்றிவிட்டு, மாநிலங்களவையில் எல்லா மாநிலங்களுக்கும் ஒரே அளவிலான இடங்களை நிர்ணயித்துவிடலாம் என்பது. இதிலும் மக்களவையில் தென்மாநிலங்கள் இழக்க நேரும்; மேலும், அந்த இழப்பு மாநிலங்களவையில் ஈடுகட்டப்படாது. இந்தியாவின் ஜி.எஸ்.டி கவுன்சிலில் ஒவ்வொரு மாநிலத்துக்கும் ஒரு வாக்குதான். இதனால் தமிழகம் போன்ற பெரிய, வளமான, அதிக வரி வருவாய் ஈட்டுகிற மாநிலத்தால் தனது சக்திக்கேற்ற குரலை கவுன்சில் கூட்டங்களில் எழுப்ப முடிவதில்லை. ஆகவே, இந்த மூன்றாவது ஆலோசனையும் தென்மாநிலங்களுக்கு ஏற்புடையதாக இருக்காது.
எண்களும் மனிதமும்
இது போன்ற ஆலோசனைகள் இந்தப் பிரச்சினையைக் கணக்குகளாக மட்டும் பார்க்கின்றன. மாறாக, மனிதர்களின் பிரச்சினையாக அணுக வேண்டும். தென்மாநிலங்களால் எப்படி மக்கள்தொகையைக் கட்டுப்படுத்த முடிந்தது? ஒரு பெண் சராசரியாகப் பிரசவிக்கும் குழந்தைகளின் எண்ணிக்கை, கருவள விகிதம் எனப்படுகிறது. இந்த விகிதம் 2.1 ஆக இருந்தால், அது பதிலீட்டு விகிதம் எனப்படும். அதாவது, ஒரு பெண் சராசரியாக 2.1 குழந்தைகளை ஈன்றால், அந்தச் சமூகத்தில் மக்கள்தொகை நிலையாக இருக்கும். தமிழ்நாட்டில் கருவள விகிதம் 1981-ல் 3.4ஆக இருந்தது, இது பதிலீட்டு விகிதத்தைவிட அதிகம். இப்போது 1.5, பதிலீட்டு விகிதத்தைவிடக் குறைவு. இதே காலகட்டத்தில் உத்தர பிரதேசத்தில் கருவள விகிதம் 5.8 என்பதிலிருந்து 3 ஆகியிருக்கிறது.
மக்கள்தொகை குறைவதற்கு ஒரு சமூகம் கல்வியில் சிறந்ததாக இருக்க வேண்டும். பெண்கள் கல்வியிலும் உழைப்பிலும் உற்பத்தியிலும் பங்கெடுக்க வேண்டும். மருத்துவ வசதி எல்லோருக்கும் கிடைக்க வேண்டும். இதனால் தொழில் பெருகும், பொருளாதாரம் வளரும். தமிழ்நாட்டில் அதுதான் நடக்கிறது. அதனால்தான் இந்தியாவின் 5.96% மக்களைக் கொண்டுள்ள தமிழகத்தால் நாட்டின் மொத்த உற்பத்தியில் 9% பங்களிக்க முடிகிறது. நாட்டின் 16.51% மக்களைக் கொண்டிருக்கும் உத்தர பிரதேசமும் அதே அளவுக்குத்தான் பங்களிக்கிறது. ஆனால், வரி வருவாயில் தமிழ்நாட்டுக்கு 6% வழங்கும் ஒன்றிய அரசு, உத்தர பிரதேசத்துக்கு 17% வழங்குகிறது. நிதி ஒதுக்கீட்டில் நிலவும் இந்தச் சமமின்மை நாடாளுமன்றத்துக்கும் நீண்டுவிடக் கூடாது.
இந்தியாவின் எல்லா மாநிலங்களும் கல்வி, மருத்துவம், உடல் நலம், பெண்கள் முன்னேற்றம், பொருளாதாரம் போன்ற எல்லா அலகுகளிலும் முன்னேற வேண்டும். அதுவரை நாடாளுமன்றம், இப்போதைய இடப்பகிர்வின் அடிப்படையிலேயே இயங்க வேண்டும். அதுதான் சிறப்பாகச் செயல்பட்டுவரும் தமிழ்நாடு உள்ளிட்ட தென்மாநிலங்களுக்கு அளிக்கப்படும் நீதியாக இருக்கும்.
- மு.இராமனாதன், எழுத்தாளர், பொறியாளர்.
தொடர்புக்கு: mu.ramanathan@gmail.com
In recent weeks, the Supreme Court of India’s collegium has been busy. New judges have been appointed to the Court on its advice and long overdue vacancies have been filled up. Now, after a meeting held on September 16, the body has made proposals to alter the existing composition of various High Courts. When these recommendations are notified, new Chief Justices will be appointed to as many as eight different courts, five existing Chief Justices will swap positions with others, and a slew of puisne judges will be moved to new courts.
A need for transparency
These recommendations are seen as reflective of a new and proactive collegium. A resolve for swiftness is fine as far as it goes; clearing up vacancies is a minimal requirement of a functioning system. What ought to concern us, though, is that long-standing apprehensions about the collegium’s operation remain unaddressed: specifically, its opacity and a lack of independent scrutiny of its decisions. These misgivings are usually seen in the context of a battle between the executive and the judiciary. Less evident is the effect that the failings have on the status of the High Courts. Today, even without express constitutional sanction, the collegium effectively exercises a power of supervision over each of the High Courts.
For nearly two years, despite vacancies on the Bench, the collegium made no recommendations for appointments to the Supreme Court. The conjecture in the press was that this logjam owed to a reluctance amongst some of its members to elevate Justice Akil Kureshi to the Court. Indeed, it was only after a change in its composition that the panel recommended on August 17 a list of names for elevation. This list did not contain Justice Kureshi’s name.
The perfunctory nature of the collegium’s resolutions means that we do not know the reasons for his exclusion. We also do not know why five Chief Justices, including Justice Kureshi, and several other puisne judges are now being transferred to different courts. This is not to suggest that these decisions are unfounded. It is possible that each of the choices made is predicated on administrative needs. But whatever the rationale, surely the public has a right to know.
The middle course
Separation of powers is a bedrock principle of Indian constitutionalism. Inherent in that idea is the guarantee of an autonomous judiciary. To that end, the process of appointing and transferring judges assumes salience. But the question of how to strike a balance between the sovereign function of making appointments and the need to ensure an independent judiciary has long plagued the republic.
The Constitution’s framers wrestled over the question for many days. Ultimately, they adopted what Dr. B.R. Ambedkar described as a “middle course”. That path stipulates the following: Judges to the Supreme Court are to be appointed by the President of India in consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and such other judges that he deems fit. Judges to the High Courts are to be appointed by the President in consultation with the CJI, the Governor of the State and the Chief Justice of that court. In the case of transfers, the President may move a judge from one High Court to another, after consulting the CJI.
Where primacy rests
In this design, there is no mention of a “collegium”. But since 1993, when the Supreme Court rendered a ruling in the Second Judges Case, the word consultation has been interpreted to mean “concurrence”. What is more, that concurrence, the Court held there, ought to be secured not from the CJI alone, but from a body of judges that the judgment described as a “collegium”. Thus, the Court wound up creating a whole new process for making appointments and transfers and carved out a system where notional primacy came to rest in the top echelons of the judiciary.
This procedure has since been clarified. The collegium for appointments to the Supreme Court and for transfers between High Courts now comprises the CJI and his four senior-most colleagues, and for appointments to the High Courts comprises the CJI and his two senior-most colleagues. When appointing judges to the High Courts, the collegium must also consult other senior judges on the Supreme Court who had previously served as judges of the High Court under consideration. All of this is contained in a “Memorandum of Procedure” (MoP). But there is, in fact, no actual guidance on how judges are to be selected.
The NJAC and after
In 2015, Parliament sought to undo the labyrinthine procedures put in place by the Court through the 99th Constitutional Amendment. The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), that the law created, comprised members from the judiciary, the executive, and the lay-public. But the Court scuppered the efforts to replace the collegium and it held in the Fourth Judges Case that judicial primacy in making appointments and transfers was an essential feature of the Constitution. In other words, the Court held that a body that found no mention in the actual text of the Constitution had assumed a position so sacrosanct that it could not be touched even by a constitutional amendment.
To be sure, the NJAC was far from perfect. There were legitimate fears that the commission might have resulted in the appointment of malleable judges. Therefore, it is plausible to argue that until a proper alternative is framed, the collegium represents the best solution; that allowing senior judges of the Supreme Court primacy in matters of appointments and transfers is the only practical way to guarantee the independence of the judiciary.
But when the Court struck down the NJAC, it also promised to reform the existing system. Six years down the line those promises have been all but forgotten. A new MoP, for instance, is nowhere in sight. The considerations that must go into the procedure for selecting judges is left unexplained. The words “merit” and “diversity” are thrown around without any corresponding debates on what they, in fact, mean. Somehow, amidst all of this, we have arrived at a consensus that enveloping a veil over the process of selection is essential to judicial autonomy, and that there is no legitimate reason why the public ought to know how judges are chosen and transferred.
In the case of the latest set of recommendations, five Chief Justices of High Courts have been reshuffled. Our constitutional scheme envisages no power of administrative superintendence in the Supreme Court over the High Courts. But when transfers are made routine, when the process of appointing Chief Justices to High Courts is shrouded in secrecy, ade factosystem of oversight is put in place.
Getting back the shine
It is clear that we have come a long way from a time when Chief Justices of High Courts declined invitations to the Supreme Court, because they valued the work that they were already entrusted with. Restoring High Courts to that position of prestige must be seen as essential to the process of building trust in our Constitution. Achieving this will no doubt require more than just a tweak in the process of appointments. But what is clear is that the present system and the mysteries underlining the decision-making only further dilute the High Courts’ prominence.
When Chief Justices are moved around with alacrity, and when they are accorded tenures lasting a matter of months, at best, it is impossible for them to make any lasting changes. At some point we must take seriously the task of reforming the existing scheme, because the status quo is ultimately corrosive of the very institutions that it seeks to protect.
Suhrith Parthasarathy is an advocate practising at the Madras High Court
Inflation for the last four months has been worryingly high — wholesale price index (WPI) has been above 10% and consumer price index (CPI) crossed the 6% mark in June, which was above the Reserve Bank of India (RBI)’s tolerance band. This is happening at a time when demand has been down, unemployment has been high, many have lost incomes and poverty has aggravated. So, why is there high inflation and does the official data capture the real picture?
Data issues
In April and May 2020, data on production and prices could not be collected due to the strict lockdown. Unlock had gradually started in June and July 2020 but normalcy had not returned. So, the current data on prices for April to July 2021 are not comparable with the same months of 2020. As such, the official inflation figures for these months in 2021 do not reflect the true picture.
Anyway, a single number for inflation is an aggregate across different commodities and services — the price rise differs for different items of consumption. So, the single number is arrived at by assigning weights to different commodities and services. For WPI, the weights in production are used; for CPI, the consumption basket is used. But people are not homogenous. The consumption basket is vastly different for the poor, the middle classes, and the rich. Hence, the CPI is different for each of these classes and a composite index requires averaging the baskets. So, in a sense, it represents none of the categories.
During lockdown and unlock in 2020, people largely consumed essentials. RBI data show that consumer confidence fell drastically from 105 in January 2020 to 55.5 by January 2021. That means, even when the economy started to grow officially, consumer confidence had not recovered. Employment and incomes were still down and according to one report, 230 million slipped below the poverty line. All this implies that the consumption basket for different sections of the population had changed. While the consumption pattern of the well-off sections may have changed little, the poor and middle classes, especially those who lost jobs and incomes, would have had to cut back on their consumption. Thus, the weights in the CPI would have changed and inflation required recalculation, but this has not been done. Consumer confidence was down to 48.6 in July 2021 due to the impact of the second wave of COVID-19.
Additionally, inflation data under-represents services in the consumption basket. In production, services are about 55% of the GDP but have no representation in WPI and about 40% in CPI. We know that health costs shot up during the pandemic, but is this captured in inflation figures? Similarly, education costs soared with the requirement of mobile phones, laptops and Wi-Fi. Many services were not used. Eating out and travel, for instance, should have been factored out.
In brief, the shock of lockdowns not only made data collection difficult but the consumption basket for calculating CPI should have been changed.
Inflation pinches the pockets of the consumer. If the rate of inflation is 10%, then compared to the previous year a person has to spend 10% more to buy the same amount of things. If the person’s income also rises by 10%, inflation does not matter. But if the person’s income rises by less than 10%, their budget gets impacted adversely. For the middle classes, both consumption of less essential items and savings get reduced. But the poor, who hardly save, have to curtail essential consumption.
In India, 94% work in the unorganised sector and mostly earn low incomes and have little savings. By definition, they cannot bargain for higher incomes as prices rise, and get hit by inflation. Further, due to lockdowns, the wages of many declined, both in the unorganised and organised sectors. This has impacted their family budgets.
Consequently, demand has declined not only for non-essentials but even for essentials. In a vicious cycle, this is slowing down economic recovery and employment generation. Further, this impacts the government’s revenues and tends to increase the budgetary deficit. This puts pressure on the government to cut back budgetary expenditures, especially on the social sector. That aggravates poverty and reduces demand further. Thus, inflation in times of low demand and reduced incomes leads to a vicious cycle of slowing the economy and a growing crisis in the lives of the poor and unemployed, most of whom belong to the unorganised sector and some to the organised sector.
Factors underlying inflation
The government has increased taxation of energy to raise resources. Since energy is used for all production, prices of all goods and services tend to rise and push up the rate of inflation. Further, this is an indirect tax, it is regressive and impacts the poor disproportionately more. It also makes the RBI’s task of controlling inflation difficult.
The lockdowns disrupted supplies and that added to shortages and price rise. Prices of medicines and medical equipment rose dramatically. Prices of items of day-to-day consumption also rose. Fruits and vegetable prices rose since these items could not reach the urban markets. Their prices collapsed in rural areas but rose sharply in urban areas. Big business raised prices since competition from the unorganised sector decreased. And in spite of a lower wage bill, they raised prices as reflected in a sharp rise in the profits of the corporate sector.
International factors have impacted prices. Most major economies have recovered and demand for inputs has increased while supplies have remained disrupted (like chips for automobiles). So, commodity and input prices have risen (like in the case of metals). Businesses claim increase in input costs underlies price rise. The weakening of the rupee also added to inflation.
In brief, the current official inflation rate does not correctly measure price rise since the lockdown administered a shock to the economy. The method of calculating it needed modification. Many of the non-rich have suffered a double blow due to loss of income and rise in prices. This is slowing down the pickup in growth by curtailing demand.
Arun Kumar is Malcolm Adiseshiah Chair Professor, Institute of Social Sciences, and author of ‘Indian Economy’s Greatest Crisis: Impact of the Coronavirus and the Road Ahead’
The recently published Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment Report from Working Group I — ‘Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis’ — is a clarion call for climate action. It provides one of the most expansive scientific reviews on the science and impacts of climate change.
The report discusses five different shared socio-economic pathways for the future with varying levels of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The scenarios illustrated are the following: very low and low GHG emissions, where emissions decline to net zero around or after the middle of the century, beyond which emissions are net negative; intermediate GHG emissions; high and very high emissions where they are double the current levels by 2100 and 2050, respectively. Even in the intermediate scenario, it is extremely likely that average warming will exceed 2°C near mid-century. The average global temperature is already 1.09°C higher than pre-industrial levels and CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is currently 410 ppm compared to 285 ppm in 1850.
Over 200 experts working in several domains of climate have put the report together by assessing the evidence and the uncertainties. They express their level of confidence (a qualitative measure of the validity of the findings) ranging from very low to very high. They also assess likelihood (a quantitative measure of uncertainty in a finding) which is expressed probabilistically based on observations or modelling results.
Come hell or high water
Close to 700 million people worldwide live along the coast and there continue to be plans to expand coastal cities. Therefore, understanding the risks involved from climate change and sea level rise in the 21st and 22nd centuries is crucial. Sea level rise will continue after emissions no longer increase, because oceans respond slowly to warming. The centennial-scale irreversibility of sea level rise has implications for the future even under the low emissions scenarios.
Sea level rise occurs mainly due to the expansion of warm ocean waters, melting of glaciers on land, and the melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. Global mean sea level (GMSL) rose by 0.2m between 1901 and 2018. The average rate of sea level rise was 1.3 mm/year (1901-1971) and rose to 3.7 mm/year (2006-2018). While sea level rise in the last century was mainly due to thermal expansion, glacier and ice sheet melt are now big contributors.
In the low emissions scenario, GMSL is expected to be 0.19m in 2050 and 0.44m by 2100. In the very high emissions scenario, GMSL is expected to be about 0.23m in 2050 and 0.77m in 2100. These increases are relative to 1995-2014 and do not include uncertainties in ice sheet processes.
Scientists rely on ice sheet models to estimate future glacier melt. While these models have improved over the years, there are shortcomings in the knowledge and representation of the physical processes.
Uncertainties
Ice sheets can destabilise rapidly as the water gets warm (marine ice sheet instability or MISI). Ice cliffs can collapse swiftly in a related process, leading to rapid sea level rise; this is marine ice cliff instability (MICI). Such changes are difficult to model and MICI events are not included in the sea level projections mentioned above.
As Siegert et al. indicate, changes in ice-ocean interactions can cause extensive and rapid sea level rise. This happens from mass loss of ice shelves (ice that flows into cold oceans while attached to the land), which may disintegrate suddenly. Under strong warming scenarios, ice shelves become vulnerable and lead to MISI. In the very high emissions scenario, with low confidence (and in the 17th-83rd percentile range), sea level rise can be as high as 1.61m by 2100.
Using ice sheet models coupled with ocean models to create probabilistic scenarios for the future is therefore tricky. The models do not capture the abrupt and non-linear dynamics of changes that take place. The report has a high-end storyline that includes processes where there is uncertainty. The main uncertainty lies in ‘when’ rather than ‘if’ the high-end scenario occurs. Projections based on ‘structured expert judgments’ indicate that sea level rise as high as 2.3m by 2100 cannot be ruled out.
According to the UN Environment Programme Emissions Gap Report, the world is heading for a temperature rise above 3°C this century, which is double the Paris Agreement aspiration. And there is deep uncertainty in sea level projections for warming above 3°C.
Vulnerability in India
Communities along the coast in India are vulnerable to sea level rise and storms, which will become more intense and frequent. They will be accompanied by storm surges, heavy rain and flooding. Even the 0.1m to 0.2m rise expected along India in the next few decades can cause frequent coastal flooding. A speculator might think that if less than a metre sea level rise by 2100 is the likely scenario, they have another 60-80 years to continue developing infrastructure along the coast. That would not, however, be the right way to interpret the IPCC data.
The uncertainty regarding a metre or more of sea level rise before 2100 is related to a lack of knowledge and inability to run models with the accuracy needed. Low confidence does not mean higher sea level rise findings are not to be trusted. In this case, the low confidence is from unknowns — poor data and difficulty representing these processes well in models. Ignoring the unknowns can prove dangerous.
Adaptation to sea level rise must include a range of measures, along with coastal regulation, which should be stricter, not laxer, as it has become with each update of the Coastal Regulation Zone. The government should not insure or bail out speculators, coastal communities should be alerted in advance and protected during severe weather events, natural and other barriers should be considered in a limited manner to protect certain vulnerable areas, and retreat should be part of the adaptation strategies for some very low-lying areas.
Sujatha Byravan is a scientist who studies science, technology and policy
Tamil Nadu has been in the middle of a journey for some time to set up a medical college in every district. The aim is to ensure efficient delivery of advanced medical care to residents. This has required having specialist and super-specialist doctors to staff various departments in the medical colleges and the hospitals in the State.
Policies by the State
To ensure full value to its investment and maintain institutional continuity, the State brought in three policies. A quota was created wherein 50% of the seats in government medical colleges was earmarked for doctors working in government institutions (in-service candidates) with the stipulation that they needed to work in the Tamil Nadu Medical Services until superannuation. To absorb trained super-specialists who are not associated with Tamil Nadu Medical Services (non-service candidates), it created a bond for them to serve in government hospitals (after the completion of their training) for not less than two years; it also created a domicile requirement for them to appear for the super-specialty entrance examination.
Until 2015-16, admission to Tamil Nadu super-specialty medical seats was on the basis of a State entrance exam, with domicile requirement and in-service quota. The domicile requirement for the admissions to super-specialty courses required by the States of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana was dismantled in 2016 following a judgment by a Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Dipak Mishra and Prafulla C. Pant. They indirectly invoked the nine-judge Bench judgment inIndra Sawhney etc. vs Union Of India(1992) which requires super-specialty seats in medicine to be outside the ambit of reservation, with expression of no plausible reasons associated with domicile or reservation or ‘efficiency of administration’.
With the introduction of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Super Specialty (NEET-SS) conducted by the National Board of Examinations from 2017-18, State governments were robbed of their ability to conduct entrance examinations and counselling for super-specialty seats created in their medical colleges as the States were required to surrender 100% of their seats to the all-India quota. As an extension, the in-service quota stood null and void.
In-service quota, directive
A writ petition (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 196 of 2018; https://bit.ly/2XHFagc) was filed by the Tamilnadu Medical Officers Association (TNMOA) on behalf of in-service doctors in Tamil Nadu to contest the removal of 50% in-service quota for post-graduate medical courses. The Constitution Bench disposed of this case on in-service quota with an order on August 31, 2020, stating that except for the determination of minimum standards and coordination,the State’s power in regulating medical education is preserved. They stated that the State authorities may provide quota for in-service doctors from within the State’s own merit list, also adding that aspiring in-service doctors must clear the NEET examination with the minimum prescribed marks.
The Tamil Nadu G.O.
Extrapolating the directions of the Constitution Bench, the Health and Family Welfare Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu on November 7, 2020, issued G.O. (Ms) No. 462. Through this G.O., the Government of Tamil Nadu sought to implement a 50% quota in super-specialty seats in the State for in-service candidates. As the admission process was in the final stages, the Supreme Court Bench, on November 27, 2020, decided not to permit a quota for in-service doctors for the year 2020-21 alone.
With doubts around the line of the judgment inTNMOA vs Union of Indiaand the validity of the G.O. (Ms) No. 462 by the Government of Tamil Nadu, it remains to be seen what trajectory the Supreme Court’s decisions will take.
Administration and inclusion
Maintenance of the efficiency of administration is an argument which is consistently invoked by the Supreme Court through Article335 of the Constitution, to negate demands for reservations/quotas. It is here that one is motivated to question the working definition of “efficiency”, “merit” and “efficiency of administration” in government that the courts abide by. A welcome move in this regard is the judgment by the two-judge Supreme Court Bench (Justices Uday Umesh Lalit and D.Y. Chandrachud) inB.K. Pavitra vs Union of India(2019) which nudges the courts to define the multidimensional term of “efficiency of administration” that is grounded in inclusion.
This definition should have a systems-view of the cascading impact that the removal of domicile requirement and in-service quota can have on the integrity of the State medical infrastructure. On August 25, 2021, the Director of Medical Education issued a letter to the deans of medical colleges requesting them to obtain an undertaking from the non-service super-specialty doctors of 2020-21 who have not opted or are not willing to take up posting even when vacancies are available in their specialty departments. It is understood that nearly 80% of the other State super-specialty candidates, who constitute more than 50% in government medical colleges in Tamil Nadu did not attend counselling held for posting. In Tamil Nadu, with domicile and in-service quota, the percentage of in-service candidates in super-specialty seats used to hover around 40%. But with removal of domicile and in-service quota, in the post-NEET-SS scenario, the percentage of in-service candidates has come down to as low as 6%.
It is here that the point raised by Advocate Wilson inDr. Prerit Sharma vs Dr. Bilu B.S.(2020), invoking the Supreme Court judgments permitting in-service quota in super-specialty medical courses as seen inK. Duraisamy and Ors. vs State of T.N.(2001) 2 SCC 538 andModern Dental College and Research Centre and Ors. vs State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors.(2016) 7 SCC353, assumes greater importance.
With the sustenance of the medical infrastructure intimately linked to the delivery of public health which the States are responsible for through the Constitution, one is left to wonder why the higher judiciary consistently rules against the interventions by the State to maximise the outcomes through domicile, quota for in-service candidates and bond requirements.
Dr. Yazhini P.M. is a general practitioner based in Chennai. Jeyannathann Karunanithi is an independent policy analyst and a water professional, also based in Chennai. The views expressed are personal
The Quad (Australia, Japan, India and the U.S.) meets in a landmark physical summit this week. The agenda for the Quad has widened — till now, it was largely focused on strengthening strategic and defence pillars. This should now bring industry into the dialogue process to advance the desired outcomes.
The four nations are vibrant democracies and open economies. Three are developed countries and one is an emerging market. The Quad leaders met formally but virtually for the first time in March this year, and the joint statement captured the “spirit of the Quad”, stressing democratic values, while pledging to strengthen cooperation on the “defining challenges” of the times.
On the economic side, challenges were identified as the economic and health impacts of COVID-19, cyberspace, critical technologies, and quality infrastructure investment. Working groups were set up on vaccines, critical and emerging technologies, and climate action.
For India, each of the other three countries is a strategic partner, and bilateral and multilateral initiatives have been taken across multiple areas in different fora with each. The Quad syncs with India’s other regional programmes such as the Indo-Pacific Oceans’ Initiative and the Supply Chain Resilience Initiative.
India’s total trade with the three Quad partners was over $108 billion in 2020-21, accounting for almost 16% of its total merchandise exports and imports. On the investment side, the U.S. is India’s second largest source of foreign direct investments, while Japan has a notable footprint in India’s major infrastructure projects. Inflows from Australia amount to less than a billion dollars, but the country has outlined a long-term strategy for economic engagement with India.
Business partnerships
To advance their goals for a free, open and inclusive Indo-Pacific, the four participants of Quad must activate business partnerships meaningfully with definitive measures to align economic and strategic objectives.
The first piece of the economic pillar is trade and investment. Joint efforts by all Quad countries can help to establish alternative manufacturing hubs and make regional supply chains more diversified. The SCRI with India, Australia and Japan aims to address vulnerabilities in existing supply chains that were exposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Similarly, the Quad could consider adding a trade ministers’ interaction to its agenda which may engage in lowering trade barriers and boosting trade linkages among the partner countries as well as in the Indo-Pacific region. With India as a natural option for a China-Plus strategy, domestic policies to promote manufacturing and ease of doing business would help in the long-term success of trade cooperation.
Quality infrastructure investment is another challenge highlighted in the statement. Innovative financing and public-private partnership models can enlarge the space for private industry and support public funds in the endeavour. Green infrastructure creation must be built into the template. A working group on this area could look into specific projects for the region that would best feed into trade objectives. As in the vaccine cooperation proposal, different partner countries could focus on various aspects of construction, drawing on their respective strengths.
The third priority area for the Quad is climate change for which a working group has been set up. Cooperation on multiple dimensions of the climate challenge is proposed, including finance, emissions reduction, technology and capacity-building. With mitigation and adaptation as key aims, the involvement of industry to support governmental efforts would be critical.
As a grouping of like-minded nations working on shared objectives in the Indo-Pacific region, the Quad is a formidable economic force that can deliver many gains on the identified pillars for the participating nations as well as the region. By adding businesses into its strategy mix, its initiatives would be further fortified and expanded. We hope that the governments would consider a forum for such private sector engagement.
Chandrajit Banerjee is Director General, Confederation of Indian Industry
At its first physical meeting during the pandemic, the GST Tax Council approved a flurry of changes. Concessional tax rates on vital COVID-19 equipment such as oxygen concentrators will lapse on September 30, while the lower rates on medicines were extended till December. Whatever the pace of vaccination, there are no signs the virus and its variants would be extinct on New Year’s Day, so the Council could have taken a more considerate view on pandemic essentials. Tax rate tweaks were okayed for an eclectic range of sectors with long-pending course correction on inverted duty structures plaguing several items, including footwear and textiles. The semblance of clarity brought in on a much-disputed issue — the definition of an intermediary — is welcome, for it was hurting several sectors, including IT services exports. Double taxation on the import of leased aircraft goes. Food delivery services players shall be made liable to collect and remit taxes instead of the restaurants. One awaits the fine print to assess the impact on consumers and smaller outlets. The plan to tax coconut oil as a personal care item at 18% for pack sizes below one litre and retain the 5% rate on edible oils for larger packs, has been held back for study, and will hopefully be shelved for good.
These pluses and minuses aside, two things stand out for Indian consumers — the Council’s firm dismissal of any shift of petroleum products to GST to lower the tax burden and the fact that GST cess on automobiles, tobacco and aerated drinks will now be levied till April 2026, not June 2022 as originally envisaged. While the Council may have discussed petro products only briefly to comply with a Kerala High Court order, consumers who need some relief on fuel prices — irrespective of who cuts taxes — may have held misplaced hopes. If the Government really wants a consumption rebound that may reignite private investments, the Centre and States must begin talks on rationalising fuel taxes. The Finance Minister has often expressed the worry: ‘What if we cut taxes and States do not’. Perhaps, a compact could be arrived at, so both give up a little revenue to spur spending. A similar dialogue is needed for an honest review of the GST regime’s progress and the way ahead. With just nine more months of assured compensation for States, they are worried about revenue streams falling off the cliff thereafter. Their pleas for an extension in the compensation period have met with stern diffidence and the argument that GST revenues are below expectations. Two ministerial groups have been tasked to augment revenues using technology and rate rationalisations. The Centre need not wait for their reports to hold a special Council meeting to discuss States’ compensation concerns, as had been promised. At this juncture, the Council should be a forum for empathetic contemplation, not fractious friction.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had framed the September 20 Parliamentary election as Canada’s “pivotal moment”. Two years into the four-year term of his minority government, he dissolved Parliament and called the snap election hoping that Canadians would give him an absolute majority. However, Mr. Trudeau must be both relieved and disappointed with the preliminary results. His Liberal Party got the most seats in Parliament, at 158, just one more than what they won in the 2019 vote, but well short of a majority of 170 seats. To continue to stay in power, the Liberals will have to depend on smaller parties. The Conservatives, who under the leadership of Erin O’Toole took a moderate position on contentious issues from carbon tax to a ban on assault rifles, failed to make any gain. His plan was to reach out to the voters beyond the Conservative base and take on the liberals on policy specifics rather than on ideology. They secured 119 seats, down from 121 in 2019. While the centre-left New Democrats, led by Jagmeet Singh, won 25 seats, one more than in the last vote, the Bloc Québécois, which backs Quebec independence, took 34 seats, a gain of two. Mr. Singh, whose party backed Mr. Trudeau’s minority government after the 2019 election, has hinted that he would continue to support the Liberals.
Mr. Trudeau, son of the former Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, took over the party’s reins in 2013 at a time when the liberal prospects were dim. But a young Mr. Trudeau not only revived the Liberal Party but also led it to a surprise election victory in 2015. He has remained the most influential voice in Canada’s political landscape. In 2019, he secured victory but without an absolute majority, which forced him to seek the support of the New Democrats. Poll numbers for the Liberals soared after the government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. By calling the snap election, Mr. Trudeau’s plan was to turn those numbers into actual votes and win a fresh four-year term with a clear majority. But the decision to call a mid-term election was controversial. His rivals called him a political opportunist who had pushed the country into an expensive election — at C$600 million, it is the most expensive in its history — in the midst of the COVID scare. Voter turnout, at 58.44%, was the lowest ever. In the end, the voters backed Mr. Trudeau’s government but stopped short of endorsing his political gamble. Having led the party to three back-to-back victories, he is the undisputed leader of the Liberals. He should focus on the art of coalition politics, finding common ground with the New Democrats for his progressive legislative agenda and providing stable governance to tackle Canada’s myriad problems, from the COVID challenge to the climate crisis.
Twenty persons including two women died to-day after consuming varnish in Tiruvottiyur in North Madras [Madras, Sept. 22]. Of them eleven died at the Stanley Hospital. The others died in their houses before they could be taken to hospital. Yesterday a middle-aged man of Perambur Barracks who consumed varnish later died in the Government Hospital. Forty-eight persons were admitted to the Stanley Hospital since mid-night of Tuesday. More than hundred persons mostly slum-dwellers had taken what was described as ‘kalakkal’ (varnish) since Monday. Patients with symptoms of blurred eye sight, nausea, and respiratory trouble came streaming in after 9 this morning to the hospital. The poisonous element in the drink is suspected to be methyl alcohol. A hospital spokesman said that the patients were administered orally ethyl alcohol to neutralise the methyl alcohol. Sodium bicarbonate solution and glucose was also given intravenously. For those who experienced breathing trouble, oxygen was administered. According to a Tiruvottiyur Councillor, the victims had bought the varnish from a shop on Tiruvottiyur High Road as there was no toddy or arrack shop in that locality.
Sometimes, the porridge needs to be too hot (or too cold), for there to even be a third bear. It turns out — according to a recent study in the journal Conservation Biology — that for giant pandas, there is such a phenomenon as too much of a good thing. From data collected at the Wolong nature reserve in China coupled with computer modelling, researchers have concluded that some imperfections in their habitat bring benefits when it comes to mating. Gene flow among giant pandas increases as the proportion of the ideal bamboo-rich habitat within a landscape increases but then sees a decline when this figure breaches the 80 per cent mark.
The panda, for long a symbol of endangered species (it’s on the logo of the WWF), has seen a resurgence in recent years and has moved up the list to “vulnerable”. This is no small feat, considering just how difficult it is to get pandas to mate, particularly in captivity. For example, Ying Ying and Le Le, a panda couple that resides in Ocean Park in Hong Kong zoo, managed to get together only after a decade in 2020, after various efforts from their human handlers. The insights into the ideal habitat for pandas to reproduce will certainly inform future conservation efforts. But for humans, too, there are lessons.
Among the possible reasons for the decline in fertility as habitats get more “ideal” is the fact that too much comfort reduces the drive to survive. And, of course, too much hardship does not allow beings to thrive. It is that fine balance that allows for ambition, for growth, and perhaps even creativity. Like Goldilocks, the lesson the rest of us can learn from the Ursidae is how to get things just right.
The attack on the residence of Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi in the heart of the national capital marks a dangerous new low. That activists from a Hindu right-wing organisation are emboldened enough to gather at one of Delhi’s most secure neighbourhoods, vandalise a parliamentarian’s house, and chant communal abuses is a sign that the footsoldiers of polarisation have a disturbing confidence in their impunity. The Delhi Police, which has arrested five members of the Hindu Sena, must disabuse them of such notions — and ensure that the guilty are held accountable. Without any surprise, the Hindu Sena activists have defended their violent actions by accusing Owaisi of making “anti-Hindu” speeches. Owaisi had reacted to UP chief minister Yogi Adityanath’s abba jaan slur in a recent speech about government welfare schemes. The attack on the MP’s house is just another example of how the right to take offence is being legitimised by self-appointed custodians of religion and enforced by muscle power at the expense of constitutional freedoms of speech and expression.
This is not the first time in recent months that anti-minority rabble-rousing spectacles have been staged in the national capital — and its surrounds. Last month, at a Jantar Mantar gathering — again in the high-security Lutyen’s Delhi — members of several Hindu right-wing organisations called for violence against the Muslim community. Not only was the alarming aggression on public display recorded on video by the activists, but also spread further through the velocity of social media. While arrests were made in that case, too, the growing clout of groups that preach violence in the name of religion must not be taken lightly. Indeed, across the country, a crude simmering mobilisation appears to have licensed violence against ordinary Muslims, whether it is a bangle-seller in Indore or a rickshaw-puller in Kanpur. It has led to umpteen instances of moral policing of women by proponents of the paranoia of “love jihad”. It will also further ghettoise cities and villages into spaces for “us” and “them”, and sow conflict and disharmony.
The history of this subcontinent has grim lessons on the consequences of such lawlessness. By hurling stones and axes at an MP’s house in Lutyen’s Delhi, the vandals of the Hindu Sena attempt to send a message to their radicalised base. But, for the Delhi Police, which reports to the Union home minister, the stakes are definitely higher. It must crack down on such displays of brazen aggression against the Hyderabad MP. Doing otherwise would run the risk of allowing a communal contagion to spread out of control.
No tears need be shed for the cancellation of the SAARC foreign ministers meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, given that so much in the region is lost already. Afghanistan was inducted into SAARC in 2007, a decision that recognised its struggle to emerge from years of war and isolation, and its historical, political, religious, economic and cultural links to the rest of the region. The takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban is a massive setback to South Asia. It is yet to be officially recognised by any country, or by the United Nations, though some Western nations are engaged with it to provide humanitarian aid. In the SAARC grouping, even Pakistan, which makes no secret of its support for the Taliban government, has yet to declare official recognition of the new set up in Kabul. So it is surprising that it wanted the Taliban symbolically represented at the planned regional meeting, with an empty chair (Amir Khan Muttaqi, the Taliban’s “acting foreign minister”, designated and sanctioned as a terrorist under United Nations Security Council resolution 1267 like many other Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan cabinet members, could not have attended). The move appears to have been an attempt to pressgang SAARC to grant de facto legitimacy to the IEA. It is not clear how many SAARC capitals pushed back against this, but it is certain Delhi would have been among them, and rightly so. As SAARC works by consensus, the meeting has had to be called off.
However, the larger issue of recognition of the IEA is looming. The IEA has written to the UN Secretary General to accept its own chosen Permanent Representative to the UN. But recognition is the only leverage the world now has with the Taliban, and it is in no position to grant this easily, especially as the IEA has conveyed quite clearly that it does not intend to address, at least to begin with, global concerns about a Haqqani heavy government without women and ethnic minorities. The UN should take its time considering the Taliban request.
It may be time to face up to the fact that there is no real chance of reviving an already moribund SAARC. It has been years since there was a summit, principally because it is Pakistan’s turn to host it, and Delhi has refused to participate due to the tensions between the two countries over terrorist incidents and other issues. Other SAARC arrangements, including regional trade, have never been able to get off the ground due to the forever hostility between the two big neighbours. To get around this, there was already talk of a separate grouping that would be “SAARC minus 1”. Now, with the Taliban in Kabul, and Pakistan playing its local guardian, regional cooperation in South Asia is bound to remain a chimera.
The US Treasury Secretary Donald Regan, who favours stricter IMF conditionalities about loans, says that his country still has questions about $ 5 million SDR loan to India. In general Regan wants the IMF to be stricter about giving loans. The problems about India, he said, include continuing domestic and international deficits, failure to control the money supply and a general “inability to get their house in order.” The Reagan administration’s tough attitude towards the World Bank and other lending institutions— also stressed by Regan on Monday—has been known for a long time. It is being further developed in a detailed study, parts of which have already been leaked presumably.
Punjab Tension
Appealing for communal amity in Punjab, the Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on Tuesday expressed her anguish at attempts to exploit religion for political ends. Describing the Akali Dal charge that a clash of two personalities in the state Congress (I) was responsible for the present tension as absolutely wrong , the Prime Minister told a news conference that the need of the hour was to create a congenial atmosphere. The clash of personalities was an apparent reference to reported differences between the Union Home Minister, Zail Singh, and the State Chief Minister, Darbara Singh, something the Prime Minister denied vehemently.
Gromyko’s Charges
Soviet Foreign Minister, Andrei Gromyko, has accused “certain quarters in Western countries” of interfering in Poland’s internal affairs and trying to loosen its socialist foundations. But he told the UN General Assembly in a speech that these attempts will be futile. He also lashed out at what he termed hostile, criminal intrigues by the United States against Cuba.
Earlier this month, a division bench of the Gauhati High Court stated in an order: “… citizenship, being an important right of a person, ordinarily, should be decided based on merit by considering the material evidences that may be adduced by the person concerned and not by way of default as happened in the present case.” The court was hearing the case of Asor Uddin, who was declared to be a “foreigner” by a Foreigners Tribunal through an ex parte order — in absentia. Ordinarily, this should not be big news — citizenship is indeed an important right, in fact, the most important right because it is the right to have other rights. But that’s not how the pillars of Indian democracy have treated citizenship. In Assam, any person, including decorated army officers, can be accused of being a “non-citizen”. Hence, this observation feels like a breath of fresh air.
The Ministry of Home Affairs revealed in Parliament that from 1985 to February 28, 2019, 63,959 people have been declared “foreigners” through ex parte orders by the Foreigners Tribunal in Assam — 62 per cent of the total people declared as “foreigners” in the state.
In a criminal case, however serious the charges might be, the trial doesn’t proceed without hearing the accused. But a person can be stripped of his citizenship in absentia — courtesy, the draconian pre-constitutional Foreigners Act of 1946. If a person sent notice by the tribunal fails to appear before it to prove their citizenship, he is declared a “foreigner’ through an ex parte order. The failure to appear could be driven by several factors — most commonly not receiving the notice, failure to afford legal representation and late issuance of a copy of documents by the executive.
The Foreigners Act’s roots lie in the Foreigners Ordinance, which was promulgated in 1939 to meet the emergency created by the Second World War. The Foreigners Act, 1940, replaced the ordinance — this was wartime legislation. Section 7 of the 1940 Act vested the burden of proof upon the foreigner. The Foreigners Act, 1946, repealed the 1940 Act. The burden of proof remained the same. Thus, a legislation which took birth during the Second World War is now being applied to vulnerable citizens — mostly poor farmers, daily wagers, destitute women, and widows. Moinal Mollah and Jabbar Ali were also declared “foreigners” through ex parte orders. Mollah spent almost three years in detention before getting released, he is now an Indian citizen. Jabbar died in detention as a “foreigner”.
The Foreigners Act was never meant to deal with persons who are considered citizens at one point in time. Section 2(a) of the 1946 Act defines “foreigner” as a person who is not a citizen of India. But almost every person tried by the foreigners’ tribunals in Assam was an Indian citizen, before being accused of being an “illegal migrant” and “doubtful voter or D-voter” by the Assam Border Police and the Election Commission respectively. Both these exercises violate the fundamental right to a fair investigation.
The “burden of proof” has been validated by the Supreme Court in the Sarbananda Sonowal case. Sonowal challenged the Illegal Migration (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983, (henceforth IMDT), before the SC. IMDT emphasised procedural fairness, it had an appellate platform to ensure a fair trial, unlike the Foreigners Act, and the burden of proof was on the state. But the apex court found these procedures “extremely difficult, cumbersome and time-consuming” and held IMDT unconstitutional.
There is no end to where subsequent events proved Sonowal wrong. K K Venugopal argued for the state of Assam in favour of IMDT stating that as mandated in Article 21, no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law and that there has to be a fair procedure for expulsion of foreigners. The Bench rejected this argument by stating that, “This principle can have no application here for the obvious reason that in the matter of identification of a foreigner and his deportation, he is not being deprived of his life or personal liberty.” This is despite the fact that the Foreigners Act has provisions for detention and restriction of movements. Assam started detaining “declared foreigners” since 2010 to deport to the “country of origin” but the failure to deport created a situation of indefinite detention.
The SC on multiple occasions in the Sonowal judgment has stated that there are “millions of illegal Bangladeshi nationals in Assam”. The court came to this conclusion largely based on a 1998 report by former Assam Governor S K Sinha. The report was not based on any scientific and empirical data, but was apparently prepared after inspection of border areas and districts, discussion with the Indian Ambassador in Bangladesh, and talks with political leaders — yes, political leaders. The judgment extensively quotes from the report, including the prediction that the demand for a merger of the Muslim-dominated districts of Assam with Bangladesh is just a matter of time — after 23 years of the Sinha report, that time is yet to come.
A search in the legal database Manupatra shows that the Sonowal judgment has been quoted 212 times by high courts across the country and seven times by the Supreme Court: Sonowal has become the jurisprudence of citizenship. If citizenship is an important right, as rightly stated by the Gauhati High Court, the Sonowal judgment should cease to be the touchstone to adjudicate citizenship cases.
Kannur University has reportedly decided to drop the writings of V D Savarkar and M S Golwalkar from its master of arts course on Governance and Politics. The university had included portions from Golwalkar’s books, including Bunch of Thoughts, and Savarkar’s Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? in the syllabus of PG Governance and Politics. This course is taught only in Brennen College, under Kannur University, so the syllabus was prepared by the faculty of the Brennan College, which is how it should be.
After opposition by the student wing of the Congress and the IUML, the CPM’s student wing SFI, which was earlier silent on the issue, found the readings unacceptable. The student outfits of the opposition parties agitated, alleging that the university was saffronising the syllabus by including these two ideologues of Hindutva.
The state government led by the CPM sought an explanation from the university. Vice-Chancellor Gopinath Ravindran rejected the charges, saying: “The saffronisation allegation is completely baseless. If you raise such allegations against Kannur University, you can raise similar charges against Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi also. V D Savarkar is included in the syllabus of JNU also.”
This is not a very sound argument. JNU cannot be a benchmark for all academic decisions. They should stand on their own merit. The VC was right to an extent when he said that the syllabus should have representation from all ideologies to allow students to study them critically with a comparative mind.
But a syllabus cannot fight politics. So, the VC had to form an external expert committee, which has apparently suggested that it be removed from the third semester.
This controversy reminded me of an unrelated incident. Approximately 15 years ago, when the UPA was in power and DU was looking for a new VC, I bumped into a leader of a communist party. She informed me that she had managed to stop a problematic academic from being considered for the post. How can a scholar who had made Savarkar part of the syllabus be allowed to head DU, she asked. I was dumbstruck. That having Savarkar in the PG course of political science would pollute the minds of the students was an absurd idea.
Hindutva is a political reality of our times and we need to understand how it works intellectually. Savarkar and Golwalkar are the most significant proponents of this ideology. Without reading them, how can you have an idea of this project which has overrun India and is attractive to many minds?
A syllabus is not a set of propaganda material. When we include readings of different kinds, we expect them to be read and examined critically from all angles. Obviously, you do not compromise with some fundamental values. Genocide or racial supremacy cannot be treated as valid viewpoints. But we do need to understand how genocidal ideas turn into common sense. For that, we would need to study those who successfully drove their masses towards such an ideology. How do you understand fascism if you do not read Mussolini or Mein Kampf?
But we fight our syllabus battles in a very unacademic manner. It remains all about representation, be it historical figures or writers. We never look at the making of a syllabus from the pedagogical angle. In his essay, ‘Education after Auschwitz’, Theodore Adorno said that the primary task before education today is to not let another Auschwitz happen. How can you achieve this if you do not understand how people willingly became complicit in the crime and how others found it acceptable? Also, why did many people not think it their business to be bothered about it?
It would be instructive to look at the debate in Germany on the teaching of Mein Kampf in schools. After the expiry of the book’s copyright, its publication became possible. The German teachers’ union and Social-Democratic Party (SPD) asked for extracts from the book to be included in the school curriculum as a means of teaching students about the roots of racism and modern anti-Semitism in Germany.
It was argued that it was important to historically unmask this anti-Semitic, dehumanising polemical pamphlet. It could be done by explaining the propaganda mechanism with the help of appropriately qualified teachers.
The reference to Mein Kampf evokes strong emotions and the concerns of the Jews cannot be ignored. But by not critically analysing “this antithesis of humanity, freedom and openness to the world”, you leave it open to be read only as propaganda.
The VC of the Kannur University should have engaged the critics in a discussion on these lines, as to how we deal with an anti-human text to build society’s resistance to the temptation of such a monstrous ideology. It is not a question of doing a balancing act by having the texts of all ideologies together without any educational objective. In a country like India, where Islamophobia is ruining national life, the task of education is to make young minds aware of the theoretical underpinnings of this disease. It is all the more important as followers of Savarkar and Golwalkar do not want their writings to be discussed critically. The RSS wants to whitewash Golwalkar to hide his real intent. The task before the scholarship is to present him in his entirety to make the students see what his ideology is.
While discussing syllabi and readings, we need to treat our teachers and students as intelligent, responsible beings. The teacher does not merely transfer something cooked and the student is not an inert recipient. This is what the VC of Kannur University should have conveyed to the government. And the government should not have interfered in the academic decision-making process of the university.
On Friday, the leaders of Australia, India, Japan, and the United States will meet for the first-ever in-person Quadrilateral (“Quad”) summit. A year ago, such a gathering would have been difficult to envision. Until January 2021, Delhi and Tokyo would not even use the word “Quad” in their statements. More significantly, with elections looming in the US, the fate of the Quad was unclear. The Trump administration had helped revive it in 2017, but the Joe Biden campaign had shown little interest in the Quad. Rather than take an Anything-But-Trump attitude, however, President Biden has not just embraced this coalition, but doubled down on it.
So, what explains the Biden administration persisting with the Quad, and even elevating it from the ministerial to the leader level? Utility trumped politics. The coalition fits with the president’s desire to see democracies try to deliver, and the administration’s broader foreign policy approach emphasising alliances and partnerships — and it helps provide a solution to its China problem.
Biden’s embrace of the Quad came early in the administration. Within a month of taking office, the administration hosted a ministerial, and then, a month later, a virtual Quad leaders’ summit. This was consistent with the administration’s desire to shore up alliances and partnerships, in part to build a “position of strength” from which to approach competitors such as China. As the first multilateral leaders’ meeting that Biden hosted, the Quad summit also reflected — and stemmed from — the administration’s intention to focus on the Indo-Pacific region. In addition, it helped signal that the administration would follow not a China-first approach, but an Indo-Pacific or Asia-first approach from which the China policy would flow. Moreover, like the Trump administration, Biden officials envisioned a significant role for non-ally India in their strategy for the region — and the Quad provided a way to work with India beyond bilateral platforms.
The Quad also fits with the administration’s adoption of flexible multilateralism. This flows from a recognition that bilateral alliances and partnerships, as well as regional and international organisations are necessary but insufficient mechanisms to deal with today’s challenges. This is where coalitions come in, bringing together allies and partners aligned on certain issues or interests.
In the Indo-Pacific, a crucial interest for the Biden administration is maintaining a rules-based order, one that is being challenged by an assertive China. America’s hub-and-spoke alliance system is critical; ASEAN is important. But they are not enough, and an Asian NATO is impossible. Enter the Quad, which brings together countries that meet the three requirements of ideal coalition membership: They are relevant, resourceful, and ready to work together to tackle the challenges in the Indo-Pacific.
And make no mistake, for the Biden administration (and the other members), this challenge is significantly about China. The Quad leaders don’t mention the C word explicitly in their statements. Yet that country’s assertiveness in recent years is what has made the Quad both necessary and possible. Necessary because the challenges China has generated in the Indo-Pacific are acute and cannot be tackled alone. And possible because Beijing’s assertiveness — particularly vis-à-vis the Quad members themselves — has created the market for collaboration between these like-minded states who share concerns about Beijing’s behaviour. This behaviour has also helped strengthen the four countries’ bilateral and trilateral ties on which the Quad is built. And intensifying competition with China has contributed to the Biden administration overcoming any reluctance it might have had to embracing the Quad.
Nonetheless, the Biden administration and the other three governments have reframed the conversation around the Quad away from the Trump administration’s more explicit China framing. They have highlighted the Quad’s origins in the four countries’ collective response to the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, which led to the short-lived Quad 1.0 in 2007. And the first major collaborative initiative of Quad 2.0 involves providing 1 billion Covid vaccine doses in the Indo-Pacific by 2022.
The first helps highlight the Quad’s regional and organic origins. The second conveys a message that is more welcome in Asia — that the grouping is not against something (that is China) but for something (offering solutions to regional problems and preserving a rules-based order). And both help counter Chinese talking points that either dismiss the Quad as useless or accuse it of being a US-imposed, exclusive, anti-China security alliance that will destabilise the region.
That’s not to say the Quad in the Biden era lacks a security dimension. The four navies and their special forces are indeed in the middle of conducting a military exercise. And the agenda at the summit will likely include a discussion on the state of the China challenge, maritime security cooperation, and critical and emerging technology collaboration. But it will also include combating Covid and climate change, enhancing regional connectivity, and fuelling innovation. It’s not that the countries won’t discuss building a balancing coalition in the region privately, but, publicly, they’re more likely to talk about building resilience in the region.
Given the month he’s had with the fallout from the Afghanistan withdrawal and the AUKUS rollout, President Biden will also want to emphasise America’s resilience — and that reports of its decline are greatly exaggerated. And his Quad partners have traveled from afar to convey their belief — or at least their hope — that, that is indeed the case.
The last 19 months of the pandemic have been some of the most difficult of our lives. We all spent more time isolated in our homes than ever before. But we found a universal connection in the remarkable stories we watched. The world rooted for their favourite characters and was transported to a reimagined Regency England, a college campus in Jaipur, the Louvre in Paris, a 1960s chess tournament in Moscow, a karate dojo in Los Angeles and a bank in Spain with people wearing Dali masks.
Stories have always been a source of comfort, joy and community for people around the world. Today the screen reminds us that great stories have the enduring power to unite, inspire and entertain. Storytelling goes to the heart of what it means to be human. When we watch stories, we forge new connections and build a deeper understanding of the world, making us all feel more connected. We have the responsibility of providing choice and control to our members, especially parents, so they can decide what their children watch.
India is home to the finest traditions of storytelling. Home to one of the world’s most vibrant entertainment industries, India is remarkably well placed to lead in the era of internet entertainment. Brilliant creators and talent, spread across the country and united in their love for storytelling, are creating shows and films that can be watched by Indians on hundreds of millions of screens, be it a TV or smartphone.
Earlier this year, we joined hands with UNESCO to celebrate India’s rich cultural heritage through the family favourite animation, Mighty Little Bheem. India has the vision and talent to export its best stories; and with our subtitles and dubs in over 30 languages, more people can now discover even more Indian stories and culture — wherever they live.
It’s a huge privilege to be a part of the creative community in India. We’ve licensed hundreds of Indian films and shows for our members and invested in over 100 Netflix originals, almost all of which have been commissioned by Indian executives who live locally, know the culture and speak the language. It’s testament to India’s breadth of storytelling that these originals have been filmed in over 25 cities and towns across the country, from Lucknow to Lonavla, Mumbai to Madurai, Gulmarg to Goa, Kolkata to Kochi.
As a part of the growing creative community in India, we understand that telling stories that are made in India and can be watched by the world is a collective experience. These successful stories are born of partnerships with brilliant Indian creators, directors, writers, actors and crew. Our commitment to India is strong and growing. We want to deepen our partnership with Indian creators as they reinvent genres, stretch boundaries, and inspire new ideas. In the last year, we have supported multiple production workshops, and editing courses with the New York Film Academy. We will continue to build and nurture the next generation of creative talent — whether young animators in partnership with GOBELINS L’école de L’image, one of the world’s finest animation schools, or entirely new talent through BAFTA Breakthrough India, an initiative to find 10 new voices across the country.
Inclusion in storytelling is important to us and we are proud that more than half of our films and series in India feature women in central roles. Since last year, we’ve worked with more than one thousand women creators, talent, and crew on and off the screen in India.
The popularity of Indian stories means that the entertainment industry is an important economic driver for India too. It’s why we work so hard to find stories from across India, supporting our creative partners in bringing their visions to life.
Last year when the pandemic hit, we stood with the creative community and committed $150 million to support the hardest hit workers on our own productions globally — carpenters, electricians, hair and make-up artists. We also helped the broader film and television industry through the creation of over 20 hardship funds in partnership with organisations from around the world, including the Producers Guild of India. It was inspiring to see the creative community of Tamil cinema come together for the nine-film anthology Navarasa, sending a message of resilience and solidarity during these tough times that echoed far and wide.
Working together is how we will usher in a new golden age of creativity in India, from India and by India, but that can be enjoyed all around the world.
Two meetings of the leaders of a plurilateral grouping within seven months is an exceptional development in world affairs, especially when it involves the US and its three Quad partners — Australia, Japan and India. Why the leaders are meeting again on September 24 and what they hope to achieve are matters of mounting public interest. This first in-person summit is especially significant — set against the backdrop of the Indo-Pacific region grappling with the repercussions of Afghanistan, the growing aggressiveness of China and the formation of AUKUS, a brand-new trilateral security partnership.
The leaders’ summit of the Quadrilateral Framework will be hosted by US President Joseph Biden in Washington. It may be of greater substance than the inaugural virtual summit of March 12, because the context of the two summits is significantly different. In March, the Biden administration had just begun its innings; it was struggling to define its China and Indo-Pacific policies, and expectations from the Quad were low.
A substantive joint statement, reinforced by a smart op-ed by the four leaders in The Washington Post, drew global attention. Now, three weeks after the chaotic and mismanaged withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, that country’s future and regional security issues are bound to dominate the discussions. The onus is on the US to convince its partners that the Afghan experience has strengthened, not weakened, its resolve to defend its — and their — interests in the Indo-Pacific.
The AUKUS — the Australia-UK-US partnership — too will need some serious explaining, particularly to Japan and India, which worry about the emergence of an inner circle (US and Australia) within the Quad, which is now connected to the UK, a non-Quad partner. There are even reports that British Prime Minister Boris Johnson may be visiting Washington around the time of the Quad summit.
Indian experts are divided over the impact of AUKUS on the Quad. Some argue that it reduces the Quad’s salience, while others maintain that the Quad is strengthened by the new trilateral. However, a sober evaluation suggests that AUKUS will have both positive and negative implications for the Quad; these will become evident after the forthcoming summit.
Another consequential development is the September 16 release of the European Union’s Indo-Pacific strategy. A shorter version presented in April has now been given a comprehensive form. It paints the EU and the Indo-Pacific as deeply connected in diverse realms ranging from trade and investment to security and defence. The EU’s determination to scale up and diversify cooperation with democratic and like-minded nations could be a boost to the Quad, provided the Europeans are ready to stand up to China’s assertive behaviour, violations of international law and norms and increasing use of coercion.
These issues will dominate the headlines in Washington for sure. But the Quad also has to do the necessary and backbreaking work of institutionalising itself, and the fulfilling of past commitments. For instance, the joint vaccine production programme seems to be on track and their distribution first to needy Indo-Pacific countries will begin in early 2022. The working group on emerging and critical technologies too is reporting progress. A principal endeavour is to leverage the Open Radio Access Network (O-RAN) to derive benefits of interoperability of the 5G technologies offered by different vendors in the west.
On climate change, the focus of the third working group, some key issues remain unresolved — specifically, India is unable to show “more ambitions” regarding its climate goals, despite two visits to New Delhi this year by John Kerry, the US president’s special envoy on climate. But efforts are underway to finalise technology-sharing and other cooperation to meet the challenges of climate change.
An expansion of the agenda is on the cards and will include new areas like infrastructure and connectivity, education, cyber security and maritime security. Hopefully, it will also include cooperation in the Blue Economy, as all the four nations are endowed with immense oceanic resources.
The special attention to infrastructure comes from the US, given its announcement of the “Build Back Better World” (B3W) at the G7 summit last June, but which has yet to become a reality. What the US government will now propose and whether its package will include details such as planning, logistics, new financing and identification of specific projects, will be keenly observed.
With the China challenge now recognised as being both multi-faceted and long-term, the Quad needs to devise a matching strategy. Joint innovative and practical recommendations are worth considering, like ‘The Quad Economy & Technology Task Force Report: A Time for Concerted Action,’” crafted by international experts and published by think tank Gateway House in August.
India should be cautiously optimistic about the role and prospects of the Quad. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Washington will be his first major voyage abroad in the Covid era, after his visit to Dhaka in June this year. His advisers expect India’s strategic perspective will be fully factored in, considering that it is the only Quad power with land borders with China, and proximity to the serious threat of terrorism, extremism and radicalisation emanating from Afghanistan.
Given India’s pivotal position in the Indo-Pacific region, it may be appropriate if the Quad summit in 2022 is hosted by New Delhi. The nation will be fully ready to assume this responsibility.
India is a federal country; the Indian Constitution distributes the legislative field of education among both states and the Union. The establishment (incorporation), regulation, and winding up of universities is an exclusive state subject. That power is denied to the Parliament.
Admission of students, appointment of teaching faculty, conduct of examination, declaration of results, conferment of degrees, fixation of syllabus are all included within the regulation of the university. “Coordination and determination of standards in higher education” is an exclusive field conferred on the Union. The Union has to co-ordinate with states before fixing such standards. According to the Supreme Court, “The word coordination does not merely mean evaluation but also harmonising relationship for concerted action”. Without such consultation with the state governments and treating them as equal partners, the Union cannot decide the standards by itself. Even after the 42nd Amendment, the legislative field of “incorporation”, “regulation” and “winding up” of the universities, carved out from education, remains with the states.
In 1984, when the demand for certain courses exceeded the number of seats available, Tamil Nadu evolved the Common Entrance Test (CET) for admission to engineering and medical institutions. Later, a decision was taken to abolish all entrance examinations through the “Tamil Nadu admission in professional educational institutions Act 2006” (Act 3 /2007). Students were admitted only on the basis of their performance in the qualifying examinations (Class XII marks).
From 1997, the Union government showed its intent to control the admissions to all medical institutions. The Medical Council of India (MCI) on December 21, 2010, and the Dental Council of India (DCI) in 2012, issued notifications prescribing a common entrance examination for admission. The Supreme Court, in 2013, in the Christian Medical College vs Union of India case ruled that MCI and DCI had no such powers to regulate the admission of students into medical institutions “since they have the effect of denuding the states, state-run Universities”. In the review petitions filed by MCI, the Supreme Court on April 11, 2016 “recalled” the judgment delivered on July 18, 2013.
Within a few days thereafter, the Sankalp Charitable Trust filed a public interest litigation, seeking a direction to make NEET compulsory for admission of students to all medical colleges. That case first appeared before the court on April 27, 2016. The very next day, the writ of mandamus was issued as prayed for. The SC gave the reason that the2013 judgment had already been recalled therefore, the “notifications dated December 21, 2010 are in operation as on today”. Though education is a concurrent subject, NEET was mandated without even giving notice to any of the states. The SC failed to note that the field covered by Entry 25 List III (Concurrent List), is “Education minus establishment and regulation of universities”.
The MCI Act, Section 10D, conferred power to regulate admissions to medical colleges. That was inserted only in May 2016. In December 2010, there was no legislative authority to issue such a notification. A valid notification was issued only on January 22, 2018. At present, the MCI Act has been repealed; only the National Medical Commission Act holds the field.
Laws are made for the people; people are not made for law. The success of a law is determined by its outcome. If a law does not achieve the object, the law has to be changed to ensure the desired outcome.
According to our study, NEET has reduced the number of Class XII students getting admitted to medical colleges. Only students who attended coaching classes for two or three years could get admission. Very few “first-generation” students could clear NEET. It shows that the wealthy and powerful have rigged the system of NEET to perpetuate their privilege. The professional classes have figured out how to pass their advantage to their children, converting meritocracy into hereditary aristocracy. There cannot be a competition between a race-horse and a “cart-pulling” horse. The rural and urban poor cannot spend lakhs of rupees to get coached for NEET and cannot afford to wait for two or three years only to prepare for the test.
Conducting NEET and NEXT (National Exit Exam for MBBS) under the NMC Act is also tantamount to shifting the regulation of university to the Union list. That amounts to altering the basic structure of the Constitution.
“Public health, hospital and dispensaries” is a state subject. Therefore, there is a constitutional obligation on the state to ensure quality public health even in remote villages, which do not have the facilities available in metro cities. The objective of starting more medical colleges in remote areas is to get qualified doctors in and around that region. Rarely are persons from metropolises willing to serve in remote villages.
Every student entering medical colleges does not become an expert in their field. Every patient does not require such expertise in treatment. But a qualified medical practitioner is required to treat common ailments. That can be achieved only by producing qualified doctors from all areas within a state.
One of the consequences of NEET would be the fall in the number of such dedicated doctors willing to serve in remote areas. Till the 1960s, even in Madras City, the number of MBBS doctors was inadequate. Only RMP (registered medical practitioner) and LMP (Licentiate in Medical Practice) diploma holders would treat people. This would have been the state of affairs even in Calcutta, Bombay and Delhi. That situation has changed today, only due to the sustained attention on the improvement of health taken by the states. If the admission of students continues to be done based on NEET, India will go back to the pre-Independence era on public health. There may not be enough doctors available for rural public health centres. Even for ordinary ailments, people would have to travel to metro cities.
The SC, as early as 1960, had suggested starting more rural universities to cater to the rural people. Though this was in a case relating to reservations, the rationale is applicable to admissions of students as well. Finally, students should be tested only on what they have learnt in their years of schooling. Testing them through entrance examinations in areas they did not study is nothing but arbitrary.
While addressing a conference of Brahmins recently, Bahujan Samaj Party chief Mayawati said she will take care of the dignity, glory and livelihood of Brahmins and provide them proper representation in the party and the government. The BSP is trying hard to form a Dalit-Brahmin social alliance for the UP assembly election in 2022. In a way, this is an effort to revive the experiment the BSP had successfully conducted during the 2007 assembly election.
The BSP’s electoral strategy is based on forming social alliances of Dalits — its vote base — with other communities. This works in two ways: First, by providing political representation and second, through evolving social harmony or “bhaichara”. After 2007, the BSP tried to form electoral alliances with communities such as Muslims and Yadavs, but these didn’t fetch the expected returns. It, therefore, is attempting to repeat the Dalit-Brahmin alliance experiment that won the party office in 2007 for the forthcoming election.
In this form of social engineering, a community with a lower location in the social hierarchy proposes and leads an alliance with a community that has a higher location, so that they can acquire and share power. The question is whether the two social poles can come together comfortably in 2022.
Post Independence, Indian democracy had, in its own way, ruptured the functioning of the social hierarchy. Brahmins and Dalits, two social poles, started supporting the Congress together and worked politically as an alliance to acquire power. Due to various reasons, contradictions and disillusionment arose in this political alliance which, on the one hand, caused the political downfall of the Congress and, on the other, gave rise to the BSP in north India. The BSP’s own Dalit vote base is insufficient for the party to win elections. That is why it started looking for alliances with other communities. It realised that the contradiction of Dalits with the new dominant communities in UP is sharper than with the traditionally dominant communities like Brahmins. This is due to changes in rural land relations and the growing political aspirations of neo-rich, neo-dominant groups, most of whom have emerged from among the OBCs in rural Uttar Pradesh. So it was strategically comfortable for the BSP to form a Dalit-Brahmin alliance under its leadership.
After the decline of the Congress, Brahmins, as a caste, lost their importance in the politics of the state and started rallying around the BJP. The BSP had formed an alliance with the BJP in 1995 after its coalition with the Samajwadi Party failed. Thus, through various ways, Mayawati evolved the BSP’s connect with Brahmin leaders and proposed a Dalit-Brahmin alliance under the “sarvajan” agenda in 2007. This alliance succeeded because the BSP had developed a comfort level with Brahmin leaders and the community after having worked together for at least six-seven years before the election. This social alliance between Dalits and Brahmins had been forged by forming bhaichara samitis (brotherhood committees).
But this time it seems that the BSP is trying to revive a political alliance with Brahmins, which has been a major vote base for the BJP, without developing a social alliance. Dalits at the grassroots may feel comfortable while voting for the BSP along with Brahmins, but a similar socio-political comfort in the Brahmin community can’t emerge naturally. The necessary political accommodation has to be cultivated through a rigorous campaign. Merely depending on anti-incumbency or highlighting the perception of Brahmin annoyance with the BJP cannot necessarily produce a shift in allegiance at the grass roots.
Moreover, the cultural-religious symbols through which the BJP works to mobilise the public are very deeply ingrained in the hearts and minds of a major section of the Brahmin public. This has made them a long-term vote base for the BJP.
In these conditions, the BSP’s over-dependence on the Dalit-Brahmin alliance for electoral victory in 2022 may not yield the expected results. A middle-aged villager from the Jatav community in a village near Allahabad told me, “Bhaiyya, hum neeche aur upar ek ho jaye to hume kaun hara sakta hai? (When people from a lower social location and those from a higher social location come together, then who can defeat us?)” But we still need to know whether those referred to as “uparwaley” in this conversation feel comfortable in shifting their political position in the favour of the BSP.
Jittery global financial markets are glued to events in China. Property developer Evergrande Group, a colossus with liabilities of about $304 billion, is due to make a repayment on its debt. Speculation about the true state of Evergrande’s financial health has already rocked major financial markets. We may get to know just a little more.
There are three strands key to this story. Evergrande encapsulates cronyism with Chinese characteristics. Its 25-year journey began with the opening up of housing to private ownership in the backdrop of rapid urbanisation that accompanied a scorching pace of economic growth. Close ties between the company’s founders and the Communist Party were the norm. The spinoff was that it paved the way for faster growth through access to a state-dominated financial system, characterised by a high degree of financial repression. Evergrande also branched into unrelated areas – pig farming, electric vehicles and the inevitable football team (Guangzhou FC).
Second, Evergrande’s debt fuelled growth depended on robust private demand for housing; about 60% of China’s population is urban. Once growth slowed, cracks showed up across sectors. IMF’s December 2020 country report on China warned the highly indebted property sector posed financial stability risks. Weak demand could push down property prices, which would stress debt servicing. China’s central bank then took the precautionary measure of tightening debt flow to property developers, which further exposed Evergrande’s fragile foundation. The third strand is where the potential for contagion lies. IMF said that property developers had 12% of China’s corporate debt and a “significant” percentage of foreign debt.
China is the world’s second largest economy, after the US. With a GDP of $14.7 trillion, it contributes 17% of the global GDP and has an outsize impact through trade and financial flows. That’s why Evergrande’s financial health matters. The problem here is that the world does not know enough about the state of the health of China’s financial sector. This is highly risky in an interconnected world. China’s opacity in many matters is a global risk in and of itself.
Separately, Evergrande forefronts the hidden financial stability risks of the liquidity waves unleashed by leading central banks. The search for yield has lowered credit appraisal standards. Hence, markets are back to wondering if Evergrande is TBTF (too big to fail)? But with China there’s nothing clearly discernible, adding to uncertainty.
After wide protests by student unions and others, Kannur University decided to delete readings from RSS and Hindu Mahasabha leaders MS Golwalkar and VD Savarkar that it had recently included in its postgraduate syllabus on politics. Kerala’s CPM-led LDF government had expressed its opposition. Textbook wars are not new, they erupt everywhere in the world. In India, the right-wing claims that the left has had a chokehold over higher education, pre-empting any scholarship with implications that hurt its causes. But it is also true that the Hindu right seems equally determined to erase this legacy.
Some institutions have struck down texts that seem to challenge a ‘Hindutva’ storytelling. Examples are AK Ramanujan’s 300 Ramayanas, texts by Mahasweta Devi, Bama and Sukirtharani. There is a politics, a project of shaping and prioritising, in every curriculum. In conflicts over the curriculum, some argue that certain views should be outside the bounds of reasonable discourse. But the Kannur University curriculum was meant for adult postgraduate scholars, not impressionable schoolchildren.
Whether or not one agrees with Savarkar or Golwalkar, their ideas are now alive in this country. Excising them from the curriculum serves no purpose. Contextualising and engaging with their ideas is more useful even for those who oppose them. In India, historical figures tend to become larger than life, to be idealised or shunned. We personalise and glorify. But including someone in a curriculum is to grapple with their thoughts, see them respond to their situations, the historical currents that produced them, their human compromises and subterfuges. Reading texts of all shades can lead young people to see the many-sidedness of anyone held up as a Great Man, whether by the right or the left, or even by centrists, who often falsely claim to have no biases. Savarkar and Golwalkar should be read, just as their polar intellectual opposites should be.
The successful listing of Freshworks, the first Indian software-as-a-service (SaaS) firm, on Nasdaq, is an opportunity for other SaaS startups to follow to service global customers and compete against the best global companies. Freshworks raised over $1 billion in an initial public offering (IPO), taking its valuation to over $10.13 billion. The company has created wealth for its employees - over 500 of its employees are crorepatis and 76% of the employees own shares in the company. This is welcome. Now it joins the big names from the enterprise software business. Most SaaS IPOs over the last 18 months have enthused investors as they anticipate growth in the sector even after the pandemic, thanks to digitalisation, needed for remote work across the world that has boosted demand for enterprise software products. The successful listings include tech ventures such as Zoom, Snowflake, Asana and Palantir. It helped Freshworks too.
Founded in 2010, in Chennai, Freshworks competes with the likes of Salesforce, helping businesses with customer management, offering products that include a messaging platform and an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered chatbot for customer support and call-centre solutions. It is among the new generation of entrants that have gained from digital technologies such as machine learning (ML), enabling customised offering of services. Listing will raise growth capital, help investors get a slice of the future tech giant, and provide a smooth exit route for venture capital funds. Remarkably, Freshworks, and a few firms that includes Zoho, have become global companies in a decade or so.
India's tech startup ecosystem is more robust, given our own large market and significant user base. It is heartening to see women spearheading startups in enterprise software business (including one of the contenders for the 2021 edition of ET Startup Awards). Core engineering capability and entrepreneurial imagination drive such businesses. India needs more and better engineering colleges, fed by better schools, and respect for creativity.
The World Health Organisation (WHO), the apex global body entrusted with guiding the world on matters related to human health and well-being, has revised its guidelines on the maximum concentration of pollutants in the atmosphere for air to be considered safe. This revision, the first since 2005, is in response to growing scientific evidence of the deleterious impact of polluted air on human health and productivity. Far too many people, nearly 90% in 2019, continue to live in areas with dirty air.
The WHO's air quality norms are based on science. National standards, while anchored in science, are political outcomes - an effort to balance competing needs. This is why air quality norms even in environmentally progressive countries fall short of WHO's norms. India's National Ambient Air Quality Standards, last revised in 2009, are lax, by WHO standards. With more robust links between poor air quality and human health and productivity, it is critical for governments to step up their efforts. India's National Clean Air Action Plan recognises the dangers of poor air quality. This effort is far from perfect, and its pace, slow. Air pollution has to be addressed through an airshed approach rather than just focusing on urban areas. The Commission for Air Quality Management of the National Capital Region and adjoining areas reflects an acceptance of the airshed approach. Major changes, such as the drastic reduction of the fossil fuel use, are critical but will take time.
Air pollution is not a seasonal problem but requires year-round consistent systemic efforts. Many measures overlap with those needed to combat climate change. Dust management is an added concern. Without a change in approach, the WHO's revised guidelines will remain aspirational.