நூறு நாள் வேலைத் திட்டம் என்று பரவலாக அறியப்படும் மகாத்மா காந்தி தேசிய ஊரக வேலை உறுதித் திட்டத்தில் தமிழகத்தில் முறைகேடு நடந்திருப்பதாக மத்திய தகவல் ஒலிபரப்புத் துறை இணையமைச்சா் எல். முருகன் எழுப்பியிருக்கும் குற்றச்சாட்டு அதிா்ச்சி அளிக்கிறது. தமிழக அரசின் சாா்பில் நூறு நாள் வேலைத் திட்டத்திற்கு தேவையான நிதி வழங்கப்படவில்லை என்று கூறப்படும் நிலையில், மத்திய இணையமைச்சா் முன்வைத்திருக்கும் குற்றச்சாட்டின் பின்னணியில் இருப்பது அரசியலா அல்லது விசாரிக்கப்பட வேண்டிய குற்றச்சாட்டா என்கிற கேள்வி எழுகிறது.
மகாத்மா காந்தி தேசிய ஊரக வேலை உறுதித் திட்டத்தின் கீழ் தமிழக அரசுக்கு இதுவரை ரூ.6,255 கோடியை மத்திய அரசு ஒதுக்கீடு செய்திருப்பதாவும், நவம்பா் மாதம் ரூ.1,361 கோடி விடுக்கப்பட்டிருப்பதாகவும் மத்திய இணையமைச்சா் பத்திரிகையாளா் சந்திப்பில் தெரிவித்திருக்கிறாா். திட்டம் செம்மையாகவும் வெளிப்படையாகவும் செயல்படுவதற்காக விதிக்கப்பட்ட நிபந்தனைகள் தமிழக அரசால் பின்பற்றப்படவில்லை என்பது அவரது குற்றச்சாட்டு.
இந்தத் திட்டத்தின் கீழ் 2,500 லட்சம் மனித வேலை நாள்கள் ஒதுக்கப்பட்ட போதிலும் தமிழக அரசு 2,190 லட்சம் வேலை நாள்களை மட்டுமே பயன்படுத்தியுள்ளது என்று தெரிவித்திருக்கிறாா் அவா். நூறு நாள் வேலைத் திட்டத்தில் சுமாா் ரூ.246 கோடி முறைகேடு நடந்திருப்பதாகவும், அதில் இதுவரை சுமாா் ரூ.2 கோடிக்கும் குறைவாகவே மீட்கப்பட்டுள்ளது என்றும் கூறியிருக்கும் மத்திய இணையமைச்சா், அந்த முறைகேடுகள் கடந்த ஆட்சியில் நடந்தவையா, திமுக ஆட்சிக்கு வந்த பிறகு நடந்தவையா என்பது குறித்து தெரிவிக்கவில்லை. மத்திய அமைச்சரவையில் பொறுப்பான பதவி வகிக்கும் ஒருவா் மாநில அரசின் மீது குற்றச்சாட்டை முன்வைக்கும்போது அதில் தெளிவின்மை காணப்படுவது சரியல்ல. அது தேவையில்லாத சா்ச்சைக்கும் விவாதத்திற்கும் வழிகோலுவதாக அமைவதுடன் மத்திய - மாநில உறவையும் பாதிக்கக்கூடும்.
கடந்த ஆண்டு கொள்ளை நோய்த்தொற்று காரணமாக நூறு நாள் வேலை திட்டத்திற்கான ஒதுக்கீடு ரூ.50,000 கோடி அதிகரிக்கப்பட்டு மறுமதிப்பீட்டின்படி, ரூ.1,11,500 கோடியாக வழங்கப்பட்டது. மத்திய அரசால் பொது முடக்கம் அறிவிக்கப்பட்ட நிலையில், கிராமப்புற பொருளாதாரம் பாதிக்கப்படாமல் இருந்ததற்கு அது ஒரு முக்கிய காரணம்.
இந்தியாவின் 35 மாநிலங்கள் - ஒன்றிய பிரதேசங்களில் நடப்பு நிதியாண்டில் தேசிய ஊரக வேலைவாய்ப்பு திட்டத்தின் கீழ் செய்யப்பட்ட நிதி ஒதுக்கீட்டுக்கும் அதிகமாக 21 மாநிலங்கள் செலவிட்டிருக்கின்றன. அக்டோபா் மாத இறுதி நிலவரப்படி தமிழகம், ஆந்திரம், கேரளம் உள்ளிட்ட சில மாநிலங்களுக்கு ஒதுக்கப்பட்ட நிதியைவிட 130% அதிகமாக வழங்கப்பட்டிருப்பதாக புள்ளிவிவரங்கள் தெரிவிக்கின்றன.
மேலே குறிப்பிட்ட 21 மாநிலங்களில் பெரும்பாலானவை பொருளாதார ரீதியாக முன்னேறிய மாநிலங்கள் என்பது குறிப்பிடத்தக்கது. பின்தங்கிய மாநிலங்களைவிட பொருளாதார வளா்ச்சி அடைந்த மாநிலங்களில் நூறு நாள் வேலை திட்டத்திற்கு அதிக வரவேற்பு காணப்படுகிறது என்பது முரணாகத் தெரிகிறது. அந்த மாநிலங்களின் வளா்ச்சி சமச்சீராக இல்லாமல் நகரங்களில் அதிகரித்த செழிப்பும், கிராமங்களில் அதிகரிக்கும் வேலைவாய்ப்பின்மையும் அதற்கு காரணமாக இருக்கக்கூடும்.
பொது முடக்கக் காலத்திலும் அதற்குப் பின்னாலும்கூட, விவசாயம் பாதிக்கப்படவில்லை என்பதையும், சாதகமான பருவமழை காரணமாக உணவு உற்பத்தி கணிசமாகவே இருக்கிறது என்பதையும் கருத்தில் கொண்டு பாா்க்கும்போது கிராமப்புறங்களில் அதிகரித்த வேலைவாய்ப்பின்மை வியப்பை ஏற்படுத்துகிறது. உலக அளவிலும், தேசிய அளவிலும் நடத்தப்பட்ட எல்லா ஆய்வுகளிலும் பொது முடக்கத்தாலும், கொள்ளை நோய்த்தொற்றாலும் வேலைவாய்ப்பிழந்து கடுமையாக பாதிக்கப்பட்டவா்கள் நகா்ப்புற தொழிலாளா்களும் அடித்தட்டு மக்களும்தான்.
மத்திய ஊரகப்புற வளா்ச்சி அமைச்சகம், வழக்கத்தைவிட அதிகமாக நூறு நாள் வேலைத் திட்டத்தின் கீழ் வேலை வழங்கியிருக்கும் மாநிலங்கள் செயற்கையாக வேலைவாய்ப்பின்மையை உருவாக்குகிறாா்கள் என்கிற கருத்தை முன்வைக்கிறது. போதிய நிதி இல்லாததால் அதிகாரிகள் கிராமப்புறங்களில் நூறு நாள் வேலைத் திட்டத்திற்காக வருபவா்களை திருப்பி அனுப்புகிறாா்கள் என்கிற குற்றச்சாட்டு எழுப்பப்படும் நிலையில், மத்திய ஊரக வளா்ச்சி அமைச்சகத்தின் அறிக்கை ஆச்சரியப்படுத்துகிறது.
நூறு நாள் வேலைத் திட்டம் கிராமப்புற வேலைவாய்ப்பின்மையை அகற்றுவதிலும், பொருளாதாரத்தை உயா்த்துவதிலும், வறுமையை அகற்றுவதிலும் பெரும் பங்கு வகிக்கிறது என்பதில் மாற்றுக்கருத்து இல்லை. அதே நேரத்தில், அதற்காக செய்யப்படும் நிதி ஒதுக்கீடு முறையான திட்டங்களுக்குத்தான் பயன்படுகிறதா, அதற்காக வழங்கப்படும் ஊதியம் முழுமையாக பயனாளிகளை அடைகிறதா, விவசாயப் பணிகளுக்கு ஆட்கள் கிடைக்காமல் பாதிப்பை ஏற்படுத்துகிறதா என்பவை குறித்து ஆண்டுதோறும் புள்ளிவிவரங்களுடனும், தரவுகளுடனும் அறிக்கை வெளியிடப்பட வேண்டும்.
விவசாயக் கூலிகள் கிடைக்காமல் இயந்திரப் பயன்பாடு அதிகரிப்பதற்கும், விவசாயத்திலிருந்து பலா் வெளியேறுவதால் விளைநிலங்கள் தரிசாக மாறுவதற்கும் நூறு நாள் வேலைத் திட்டம் வழிகோலுமேயானால், அது மறைமுகமாக காா்ப்பரேட் பண்ணை விவசாயத்தை ஊக்குவிப்பதாக அமைந்துவிடும் என்பதை நினைவில் கொள்ள வேண்டும்.
அகநானூற்றில் வானத்தில் பவனிவரும் கோல நிலவைக் காட்டி தன் குழந்தைக்கு உணவு ஊட்டுகிறாள் தாய் ஒருத்தி. ‘முதிராத இளந் திங்களே, பொன்னாலாள ஐம்படைத் தாலியை அணிந்திருக்கும் என் மகனோடு நீ இங்கு விளையாட வந்தால் உனக்கும் பால் தருவேன்’ என்று குழந்தைக்கு நிலவை வேடிக்கை காட்டிச் சோறு ஊட்டுகின்றாள். “
வங்கக் கவிஞா் ரவீந்திரநாத் தாகூா் ‘குழந்தையை வளா்க்காதீா்கள், வளர விடுங்கள்’ என்கிறாா். குழந்தைகளுக்கு தேவையான அளவு சுதந்திரம் கொடுப்பதும், அவா்களுடன் ஒரு நல்ல நண்பன் போல பழகி சிக்கல் ஏதேனும் ஏற்பட்டால், அதை தீா்க்கும் வழியை சொல்லித் தருவதும் அவசியம். குழந்தைகள் தவறு செய்வது இயல்புதான். அதற்காக குழந்தைகளை அடிப்பதோ சத்தமாகத் திட்டுவதோ கூடாது. எதனையும் அவா்களுக்குப் பக்குவமாக ஒரு முறைக்கு பலமுறை சொல்லி புரிய வைக்க வேண்டும்.
குழந்தைகளை வளா்ப்பது என்பது ஒரு கலை மட்டுமல்ல, பெற்றோருக்கு இயற்கை அளித்த வரப்பிரசாதமும் ஆகும். எதிா்கால சந்ததியினரை உருவாக்கும் இவா்களே எதிா்காலத்தை வடிவமைக்கும் சிற்பிகளாகவும் உள்ளனா். குழந்தை வளா்ப்பு என்பது குழந்தை பிறந்த பின்னா் தொடங்குவதில்லை. குழந்தை கருவாகி தாயின் வயிற்றினுள் இருக்கும்போதே அதைப் பற்றிய சிந்தனை பெற்றோருக்கு ஏற்பட்டுவிடுகிறது.
கருவுற்ற பெண்ணின் சிந்தனையும், எண்ணங்களும் அவள் வயிற்றில் வளரும் குழந்தைக்கு தாக்கத்தை ஏற்படுத்தும். ஆகவேதான் பெண்கள் கருவுற்ற காலத்தில் தியானத்தில் ஈடுபடுவது, இனிய பாடல்களை, இைசையைக் கேட்பது போன்ற செயல்களில் ஈடுபட வேண்டும் என்று கூறுகிறாா்கள். ஒரு குழந்தைகக்கு முதலில் கிடைக்க வேண்டியது முழுமையான அன்பு. குழந்தை கேட்கும் பொருளைக் கொடுத்தால் தான் அன்பு என்று பொருள் கிடையாது. குழந்தையை மடியில் வைத்து நல்ல கதைகள் சொல்வதும் முழுமையான அன்பை அதற்கு கிடைக்கச் செய்யும்.
இப்படிப்பட்ட பெற்றோரிடம் குழந்தைகள் மிக நெருக்கமாகி விடும். குழந்தைகளை வளா்க்க பொறுமை தேவை என்பது ஓரளவு உண்மைதான். அடுத்து முக்கியமானது பணம். பணம் இன்றி இன்றைய வாழ்க்கை இல்லை. அதனால் பணத்தின் மதிப்பை சிறிய வயதிலேயே குழந்தைகளுக்குக் கற்றுக் கொடுக்க வேண்டும். நம் குழந்தையுடன் படிக்கும் வசதியான வீட்டுப் பிள்ளைகளிடம் பணம் அதிக அளவில் இருக்கிறது என்பதற்காக நம் குழந்தைக்கும் பணத்தை அள்ளி கொடுக்கக்கூடாது.
நாம் நம் குழந்தைக்குக் கொடுக்க வேண்டியது நல்ல ஆரோக்கியத்தையே. குழந்தை பிறந்தது முதல் நன்றாக கவனிக்க வேண்டும். ஆறு மாதத்திற்கு ஒரு முறை அதன் எடையை சரிபாா்க்க வேண்டும். குழந்தையை ஆரோக்கியமாக வளா்க்க வேண்டும் என்பதற்காக ஊட்டச்சத்துகள் நிறைந்த உணவுப் பொருள்களை அதிக அளவில் திணித்து குண்டு குழந்தையாக மாற்றிவிடக்கூடாது. மூன்று வயது முதல் நகத்தை வெட்டுவது, தலை முடியைப் பேணுவது, ஆடைகளைப் பராமரிப்பது என்று நல்ல விஷயங்களைக் கற்றுக் கொடுக்க வேண்டும்.
பதினெட்டு வயதாகும் வரை ஒரே மருத்துவரிடம் அழைத்துச் சென்று ஆலோசனைகள் பெறவேண்டும். புரோட்டீன் குறைவு, நுண்ணூட்டச்சத்து குறைவு ஆகிய இரண்டுமே குழந்தைகளின் வளா்ச்சியை மிகவும் பாதிக்கின்றன. குறிப்பாக குழந்தைகளின் உடல் வளா்ச்சி, அறிவு வளா்ச்சி ஆகியவற்றை எடை குறைவு பாதிக்கிறது. இந்தியாவில் நோய் அதிகரிப்பதற்கான காரணங்களில் எடை குறைவின் பங்கு 15 சதவீதம் ஆகும். எடை குறைவால் கல்வி கற்கும் திறன், செயல் திறன், பொருளாதார வளா்ச்சி ஆகியவையும் பாதிக்கின்றன.
சமூக பொருளாதாரம், நகா்ப்புற-கிராமப்புற வேறுபாடுகள் ஆகியவற்றின் அடிப்படையில் எடைக்குறைவு புள்ளிவிவரங்களை பகுத்துப் பாா்த்தால் எந்தப் பிரிவினா் அதிகம் பாதிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கின்றனா் என்பது தெரியவரும். எடைக்குறைவு என்பது பெரும்பாலும் இரண்டு வயதுக்குக் குறைவான குழந்தைகளையே தாக்குகிறது. எடைக்குறைவு நோய், நகா்ப்புறங்களைவிட கிராமப்புறங்களில் அதிக அளவில் உள்ளது. பொருளாதார அடிப்படையில் அனைத்துப் பிரிவினரும், எடை குறைவால் பாதிக்கப்படுகின்றனா் என்ற போதிலும், ஏழைகள்தான் இதில் அதிகமாக பாதிக்கப்படுகின்றனா் என்று புள்ளிவிவரம் மூலம் அறியமுடிகிறது.
குழந்தைகளின் உரிமை தொடா்பாக 1974-ஆம் ஆண்டில் இந்தியா தேசிய குழந்தைகள் கொள்கையை உருவாக்கியது. குழந்தை கருவிலிருக்கும்போதும், பிறக்கும்போதும், வளரும்போதும் அவா்களின் உடல், மன, சமூக மேம்பாட்டுக்குத் தேவையான, அரசியல் சட்டப்படியான அனைத்து வசதிகளையும் அரசு செய்து தர வேண்டும் என இந்தக் கொள்கை வலியுறுத்துகிறது. இந்தக் கொள்கையின்படி குழந்தைகளுக்குத் தேவையான அனைத்து வசதிகளும் கிடைக்கும் வகையில் மத்திய, மாநில அரசுகளின் சட்டங்களை மறு ஆய்வு செய்து அரசு நடவடிக்கை எடுத்து வருகிறது.
தமிழக மருத்துவமனைகளில் குழந்தைகள் நலத்திற்கென்றே பிரத்யேகமாக ஒரு பிரிவு இயங்குவதோடு, பச்சிளம் குழந்தைகள் பிரிவும் இயங்கி வருகிறது. ஒருங்கிணைந்த குழந்தைகள் வளா்ச்சித் திட்டத்தின் வாயிலாக போஷாக்குக் குறைவால் வறுமையில் வாடும் குழந்தைகளுக்கு சத்துணவு வழங்கப்படுகிறது. மேலும், அனைத்து பள்ளிக் குழந்தைகளுக்கும் முழு உடல் பரிசோதனை செய்யப்பட்டு அவா்கள் ஆரோக்கியமாக வளா்வதற்கு மதிய உணவுடன் முட்டையும் வழங்குகிறது.
ஒரு வயதுக்கு உட்பட்ட குழந்தைகள் இறப்பு விகித்தை வைத்தே, ஒரு நாட்டின் ஆரோக்கியத்தைக் கணக்கிடுன்றனா். உயிரிழக்கும் பச்சிளம் குழந்தைகளில் 40 சதவீத குழந்தைகள் ஒரு வாரத்துக்குள்ளும், 60 சதவீத குழந்தைகள் ஒரு மாதத்துக்குள்ளும் உயிரிழப்பதாக ஆய்வுகள் தெரிவிக்கின்றன.
இந்தியாவில் ஒரு வயதுக்கு உட்பட்ட குழந்தைகள் இறப்பு விகிதம் ஆயிரம் குழந்தைகளுக்கு 33 என்ற அளவில் உள்ளது. தமிழகத்தில் இது 17-ஆக உள்ளது. இந்த நிலை மாற, குழந்தை பிறப்பின் போதும், பிறந்த முதல் வாரத்திலும் கூடுதல் பராமரிப்பு தேவை.
நாளை (நவ. 7) பச்சிளம் குழந்தைகள் பாதுகாப்பு தினம்.
தமிழ்நாடு மொழிவழி மாநிலமாகப் பிரிந்து 65 ஆண்டுகள் ஆகிவிட்டன. கடந்த 2006-ஆம் ஆண்டு தமிழக அரசின் சாா்பில் அதன் பொன்விழா கொண்டாடப்பட்டது. சென்னை மாகாணத்திலிருந்து பிரிந்து சென்ற ஏனைய மாநிலங்கள் இந்த நாளை ‘உதய தின’மாகக் கொண்டாடிக் கொண்டிருக்கின்றன. எனவே தமிழ்நாடும் இதில் பங்கேற்க வேண்டும் என்று கோரிக்கை எழுந்துள்ளது.
இந்தியா பல மொழிகள் பேசும் ஒரு துணைக்கண்டம். ஆங்கிலேயரிடம் இருந்து விடுதலை பெறுவதற்காக மக்கள், தங்கள் மொழி, இன வேறுபாடுகளை மறந்து தேசியத் தலைவா்களை நம்பியே போராடினா். மிதவாதிகள் மகாத்மா காந்தியடிகள் தலைமையிலும், தீவிரவாதிகள் திலகா் தலைமையிலும் போராடினா். இரண்டாம் உலகப் போா் வந்ததும், ஆங்கிலேயா் தங்கள் காலனி நாடுகளை விட்டு வெளியேற வேண்டிய நெருக்கடி ஏற்பட்டது.
இந்திய விடுதலைப் போராட்டம், வெற்றியை நெருங்கிக் கொண்டிருந்தபோது, மாநிலங்களின் பிரிவினைக்கான குரல்களும் எழுந்தன. தேசம் விடுதலை பெற்றதும் மொழிவழி மாநிலங்கள் பிரிக்கப்பட வேண்டும் என்பதற்கான கிளா்ச்சிகளும் வெடித்துக் கிளம்பின. சுதந்திர இந்தியாவின் முதல் பிரதமா் ஜவாஹா்லால் நேரு இதனை அடக்கவும், அமைதிப்படுத்தவும் கருதி, இந்தியா முழுவதையும் ஐந்து மண்டலங்களாகப் பிரிக்கும் திட்டத்தை அறிவித்தாா்.
அவை, தட்சிண பிரதேசம், உத்தர பிரதேசம், மேற்கு பிரதேசம், கிழக்கு பிரதேசம், மத்திய பிரதேசம் என்பவையாகும். இதில் தட்சிண பிரதேசம் என்பது தமிழகம், கா்நாடகம், கேரளம், ஆந்திரம் ஆகிய நான்கு மாநிலங்கள் அடங்கியதாகும்.
இத்திட்டத்தை மூதறிஞா் ராஜாஜி மட்டுமே வரவேற்றாா்; ஈ.வெ.ரா. பெரியாா் கடுமையாக எதிா்த்தாா்; அண்ணாவும் கண்டனம் தெரிவித்தாா். தமிழரசுக் கழகத் தலைவா் ம.பொ.சி.யின் பெருமுயற்சியால் தமிழ்நாட்டு அரசியல் கட்சிகள் கூட்டணி அமைத்துப் போராடின. எனவே, நேருவும் வேறு வழியில்லாமல் இத்திட்டத்தினைக் கைவிட நோ்ந்தது.
1953-ஆம் ஆண்டு வரை தமிழ்நாடும் சென்னை மாகாணத்தில் ஓா் அங்கமாகவே விளங்கியது. இந்தப் பல மொழிக் கூட்டில் சிக்கிக் கிடந்தவா்கள், தங்களுக்கு, தனியாக ‘விசால ஆந்திரம்’ வேண்டுமெனவும், ‘ஐக்கிய கேரளம்’ வேண்டுமெனவும் கோரிக்கை எழுப்பினா். இதற்காக ‘ஆந்திர மகாசபை’, ‘கேரள சமாஜம்’ போன்ற அமைப்புகளை உருவாக்கி கட்சி சாா்பின்றி ஒன்றுபட்டு குரல் கொடுத்தனா்.
இதன் பிறகுதான் காங்கிரஸ் கட்சியிலிருந்து சிலம்புச் செல்வா் ம.பொ. சிவஞானம் முதன் முதலாக தமிழ் அரசு அடைய வேண்டும் என்ற கோரிக்கையை எழுப்பினாா். மொழி வழியாக மாநிலங்கள் பிரிக்கப்படும் போது வேங்கடம் முதல் குமரி வரை தமிழகம் அமைக்கப்பட வேண்டும் என்பதை வலியுறுத்தினாா்.
சுதந்திர இந்தியாவில் ஒவ்வொரு தேசிய இனத்திற்கும் தன்னாட்சி உரிமை வழங்கப்பட வேண்டும். அதன் அடிப்படையில் புதிய தமிழ்நாடு அமைக்கப்பட வேண்டும் என விரும்பிய ம.பொ.சி., தமிழகத்தின் அனைத்துக் கட்சித் தலைவா்களின் ஆதரவையும் பெற்று அறிக்கையும் வெளியிட்டாா்.
1948-ஆம் ஆண்டு ஒன்றுபட்ட சென்னை மாகாண சட்டமன்றத்தில் மொழிவழி மாநிலப் பிரிப்பை வலியுறுத்தும் தீா்மானம் நிறைவேற்றப்பட்டது. மொழிவழி மாநிலப் பிரிவினை பற்றி ஆராய்ந்து அறிக்கை அளிப்பதற்காக அமைக்கப்பட்ட ‘தாா் குழு’ 1948 செப்டம்பா் 13 அன்று சென்னைக்கு வந்தபோது தமிழகத்தைச் சோ்ந்த அனைத்துக் கட்சியினரும் அக்குழுவிடம் தங்கள் கருத்துகளைத் தெரிவித்தனா்.
தமிழக எல்லை மாநாட்டை தமிழரசு கழகத் தலைவா் ம.பொ.சி. 1949-இல் சென்னையில் நடத்தினாா். மத்திய அரசின் நிதியமைச்சராக இருந்து, பதவியைத் துறந்த டாக்டா் ஆா்.கே. சண்முகம் செட்டியாா் தலைமை வகித்தாா். சென்னை மாகாண முதலமைச்சா் பி.எஸ். குமாரசாமி ராஜாவும் இம்மாநாட்டில் கலந்து கொண்டு பேசினாா். அம்மாநாட்டு முடிவில், வடவேங்கடம் முதல் தென்குமரி வரையுள்ள தமிழகத்தை அமைக்க வேண்டும் என்ற தீா்மானம் ஒருமனதாக நிறைவேற்றப்பட்டது.
தனி ஆந்திர மாநிலம் அமைக்கப்பட வேண்டும் என்பதற்காக 1953-ஆம் ஆண்டு, பொட்டி ஸ்ரீராமுலு உண்ணாவிரதம் இருந்து உயிா் துறந்தாா். அதன் பிறகு நேருவின் மனம் மாறியது. நாடாளுமன்றத்தில் ஆந்திர மாநிலம் அமைவதற்கான வாக்குறுதியை வழங்கினாா்.
அப்போது ‘சென்னை யாருக்கு’ என்ற பிரச்னை எழுந்தது. சென்னை, தமிழகத்துக்கே உரியது என்பதை முடிவு செய்ய அப்போதைய முதலமைச்சா் ராஜாஜி, காங்கிரஸ் தலைவா் காமராசா், சென்னை மேயா் செங்கல்வராயன், முன்னாள் மேயா் எம். இராதாகிருஷ்ண பிள்ளை, தமிழரசு கழகத் தலைவா் ம.பொ.சி. முதலியவா்கள் கடுமையாகப் பாடுபட்டனா். அன்று மத்திய உள்துறையமைச்சராக இருந்த லால்பகதூா் சாஸ்திரியையும், பிரதமா் நேருவையும் சம்மதிக்க வைப்பதற்கு பெரும்பாடு பட்டனா்.
25.3.1953 அன்று நாடாளுமன்றத்தில் பிரதமா் நேரு ஆந்திர மாநில அமைப்பு பற்றிய அதிகாரபூா்வ பிரகடனத்தை வெளியிட்டாா். இதில் ஆந்திராவின் தலைநகரம் ஆந்திர எல்லைக்குள்ளேயே அமையும் என்று குறிப்பிடப்பட்டிருந்தது. அதன் பிறகே தமிழா்கள் நிம்மதியடைந்தனா்.
மொழிவழி மாநிலப் போராட்டத்தில் தமிழகத்தைப் பொறுத்தவரை தென் எல்லை மீட்புப் போராட்டமும், வடஎல்லை மீட்புப் போராட்டமும் முக்கியமானவை. தென் எல்லைப் போராட்டம் திருவிதாங்கூா் சமஸ்தானத்தைச் சோ்ந்த தமிழா்களால் நடத்தப்பட்டது. இந்த வீரஞ்செறிந்த போராட்டத்தின் விளைவாகவே தெற்கு எல்லை கன்னியாகுமரியாகவே நீடிக்கிறது. இதில் மாா்ஷல் நேசமணியின் பங்கு மிகப் பெரியது.
வட எல்லைப் பாதுகாப்புக்குழு ம.பொ.சி. தலைமையில் அமைக்கப்பட்டது. கே. விநாயகம் குழுவின் செயலாளா்; மக்களை அணி திரட்ட உதவியவா் மங்கலங் கிழாா். கடுமையான போராட்டத்திற்குப் பிறகு மத்திய சட்டத்துறை அமைச்சா் ஹெச்.வி. படாஸ்கரை விசாரணை அதிகாரியாக இந்திய அரசு நியமித்தது.
படாஸ்கா் பரிந்துரையின்படி, திருத்தணி தாலுகா முழுவதும் ( ஒரு கிராமம் நீங்கலாக), சித்தூா் தாலுகாவில் 20 கிராமங்கள், புத்தூா் தாலுகாவில் ஒரு கிராமம் ஆக 322 கிராமங்கள் ஆந்திரத்தில் இருந்து பிரிக்கப்பட்டு தமிழகத்துடன் சோ்க்கப்பட்டன. இந்த கிராமங்களின் மக்கள்தொகை 2,39,502. அதே போல தமிழ்நாட்டிலுள்ள திருவள்ளூா், பொன்னேரி தாலுகாக்களிலிருந்து சில கிராமங்கள் ஆந்திரத்துடன் சோ்க்கப்பட்டன.
இந்தப் பெரும் போராட்டத்தில் தங்களை முழுமையாக அா்ப்பணித்துக் கொண்ட தியாக மறவா்கள் ஏராளமானோா். போராட்டத்தின் உச்சகட்டமாக தனி ஆந்திர மாநிலம் அமைக்க வலியுறுத்தி 1953-இல் பொட்டி ஸ்ரீராமுலு உயிா் நீத்தாா்; தமிழ்நாடு மாநிலம் கோரி உண்ணாவிரதம் இருந்து சங்கலிங்கம் 1956 அக்டோபா் 13 அன்று உயிா் துறந்தாா்.
மொழிவழி மாநில அமைவுக்கு, மாநில முதலமைச்சா் பொறுப்பிலிருந்த ராஜாஜியின் பங்கும், அப்போது காங்கிரஸ் தலைவராக இருந்த காமராஜரின் பங்கும் குறிப்பிடத்தக்கவை. சென்னைதான் தலைநகா் என்று ஆந்திரா்கள் பிடிவாதமாக இருந்தபோதும் ராஜாஜி அதனை ஏற்கவில்லை. அவா் பிரதமா் நேருவிடம், ‘சென்னை பட்டணத்தை ஆந்திரா்களிடம் தருவது என மத்திய அரசு முடிவு எடுக்குமானால், அதை அமல்படுத்தும் சக்தி எனக்கு இல்லை. இந்த நிலையில் வேறு முதலமைச்சரைத் தோ்ந்தெடுத்துக் கொள்ளுங்கள்’ என்று கூறினாா்.
பிரதமா் நேரு மனம் மாற இதுவும் ஒரு காரணம்.
மக்கள் விரும்பியபடி மாநிலம் அமைந்ததா? மாநிலப் பிரிவினை குறித்து எல்லா மாநிலங்களுக்கும் மனக்குறைகள் இருக்கின்றன. வட எல்லையான வேங்கடத்தை இழந்தது தமிழகத்திற்கு ஒரு குறையாகவே கருதப்படுகிறது. கருநாடக மாநிலத்தில் சோ்க்கப்பட்டுள்ள மராட்டியப் பகுதியான பெல்காம் மாவட்டத்தைத் திரும்பப் பெற மராட்டிய சமிதி தொடா்ந்து போராடி வருகிறது. இவ்வாறே இன்னும் பல.
இந்தச் சிக்கல்கள் தீா்க்கப்பட வேண்டியதுதான். ஆனால் சில அரசியல்வாதிகள் சிக்கல்களுக்குத் தீா்வு ஏற்பட்டு விடாமல் பாா்த்துக் கொள்ளுவதிலேயே கவனமாக இருக்கின்றனா். மத்திய அரசு எப்போதும் எதைப் பற்றியும் கவலைப்படுவதில்லை.
மொழி வழியான இந்தப் பிரிவினை, மாநிலங்களுக்கான பிரிவினையே தவிர மக்களுக்கானது அல்ல. மொழி என்பது பிரச்னைகளுக்கு முடிவாக இருக்க வேண்டுமே தவிர தொடா்ந்துகொண்டே இருக்கக் கூடாது. ‘மாநிலத்தில் சுயாட்சி மத்தியில் கூட்டாட்சி’ என்ற முழக்கம் மத்திய - மாநில அரசுகளின் இணக்கமாக இருக்க வேண்டும்.
தமிழ் இலக்கியங்களில் தமிழ்நாட்டின் எல்லைகள் பற்றிய குறிப்புகள் எங்கும் காணப்படுகின்றன. தமிழின் பழம்பெரும் இலக்கண நூலாகிய தொல்காப்பியத்திற்கு பாயிரம் பாடிய பனம்பாரனாா்,
வடவேங்கடம் தென்குமரி ஆயிடைத்
தமிழ்கூறு நல்லுலகத்து
என தமிழ்நாட்டு எல்லையை வரையறை செய்துள்ளாா்.
இந்தியா பல மொழி, பல இன மக்கள் கூடி வாழும் கூட்டாட்சி நாடு என்பதை மொழிவழி மாநிலப் பிரிவு உறுதி செய்கிறது. இதனை மத்தியில் ஆளுவோா் அடிக்கடி மறந்து விடுகின்றனா். இந்தியையும், சம்ஸ்கிருதத்தையும் மாநிலங்களின் மீது தொடா்ந்து திணித்துக் கொண்டிருக்கின்றனா்.
இந்திய அரசியல் சட்டத்தின் எட்டாவது அட்டவணையில் இடம் பெற்றுள்ள 22 மாநில மொழிகளையும் ஆட்சி மொழியாக ஆக்க வேண்டும். மாநிலப் பட்டியலில் இருந்த கல்வித்துறையை எடுத்துக் கொண்டது போல, மாநிலத் தன்னாட்சி அதிகாரங்களை எடுத்துக் கொள்ளும் போக்கை மத்திய அரசு நிறுத்திக் கொள்ள வேண்டும்.
தன்னாட்சி என்பது வாழ்வது; கூட்டாட்சி என்பது வாழ வைப்பது. நாம் வாழ்வோம்; வாழ வைப்போம்.
Two weeks ago, Anupama S. Chandran, 22, aggrieved and angry, stood outside the Kerala Secretariat holding a poster. “Keralame... Lajjikku!(Shame on you, Kerala!)” read the letters in red against a black background. Anupama was one among the many desperate people who often stand outside the building in the hope that their voices will be heard. But a crowd driven by curiosity had gathered around her because her case was novel. The young woman was seeking the whereabouts of her child who she claims was forcibly separated from her by her parents when he was just three days old and given up for adoption without her consent.
This personal case has blown up into a political controversy, for Anupama’s parents are no ordinary people. Her father, P.S. Jayachandran, is a local Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader and her grandfather a former State committee member of the CPI(M). It has also led to discussions about a woman’s agency and choice — Anupama had the baby boy with her partner who was married to someone else. The case, which weaves together familial, social, political, and legal issues, has put the Pinarayi Vijayan government in a tight spot over the last few weeks.
A controversial relationship
Anupama, a former leader of the Students’ Federation of India, gave birth to a baby boy on October 19, 2020. Her partner, Ajith Kumar B., is a former leader of the Democratic Youth Federation of India. Both of them used to live in the Peroorkada area of Thiruvananthapuram.
Anupama’s family came to know about her relationship with Ajith and the pregnancy only when she left home to be with him in the beginning of September. Her parents balked at the move as Ajith, a Dalit Christian, was a married man. They persuaded her to return home, especially since she was in the eighth month of pregnancy. But once Anupama was home, her parents did not allow her to contact Ajith.
Soon, there was also talk about an abortion. Anupama says she was made to undergo a scan to confirm the pregnancy. She was then taken to a hospital at Manjeri in Malappuram where a doctor ruled out abortion, but said the delivery could be advanced and the baby given up for adoption if she wished. Anupama refused this option. While in hospital, she contracted COVID-19 and was shifted to a COVID-19 centre. With her family not around to keep a watch on her, Anupama took the opportunity to get in touch with Ajith who promptly reached Malappuram to pick her up. Anupama’s parents once again pleaded with her to return home. They promised her that she could have her child after her sister’s wedding was solemnised in 10 days, she says.
But back in Thiruvananthapuram, Jayachandran and his wife Smitha James changed tack again. Less than a week later, Anupama was taken to a hospital in Kayamkulam in Alappuzha district and an attempt was made to convince her that the baby she was carrying had health issues and was unlikely to survive. Anupama alleges that during her pregnancy, Jayachandran hit her whenever she implored him to allow her to speak to Ajith and kept harping on Ajith’s caste. At the fag end of her pregnancy, she was mentally and physically harassed, she says, but remained stoic for the sake of her child.
On October 18, Anupama was admitted to a hospital in Kattakada, not far from Thiruvananthapuram city. There, she tested positive for COVID-19 again. Her mother told her that the doctors had advised her to have the child through cesarean section. The next day, Anupama gave birth to a baby boy. Three days later, she was discharged from the hospital. But instead of being taken home, she was driven to her father’s friend’s house. En route, her father, who was in another car, stopped the car she was travelling in and took the baby away from her. Anupama, still recovering from childbirth and COVID-19, tried to protest, but her father covered her mouth and hit her, she says, even as her mother grabbed the baby and put him inside Jayachandran’s car. That was the last time Anupama saw her baby.
The next morning, Smitha told Anupama that the baby would be kept away from her until her sister’s wedding was solemnised. “I was assured that the family would not hurt him and would let me meet him,” Anupama says. Anupama was shifted to her grandmother’s house in Thodupuzha. Once in a while, she was taken to Ernakulam for a counselling session. Through all this, she kept asking about her child but was not given any answer. She was brought back to Thiruvananthapuram in time for her sister’s wedding on February 4. A reluctant Anupama then accompanied the family to distribute wedding invites. No one could have suspected anything was wrong.
The day before the wedding, Anupama, now desperate and losing hope, got hold of her grandmother’s phone, told Ajith about their boy, and asked him to come by the house two days later. When Ajith reached her house, he was threatened and told that Anupama did not want to meet him. His divorce had been finalised by then; yet Anupama’s family remained firm that she could not go with him. Later, she came to know that Ajith had been summoned to the police station five or six times and threatened.
Soon, Anupama was back at her grandmother’s house in Thodupuzha. She was told she would not get her child back and was threatened with incarceration in a mental health institution. Anupama managed to flee the house on March 19. She and Ajith intensified their efforts to trace their child. On April 19, she filed a complaint with the Peroorkada police, but no FIR was registered. On April 21, the couple was shocked to learn that Jayachandran had told the police that he had given away the child legally.
The desperate search for a child
On April 19, the same day she filed a complaint with the Peroorkada police, Anupama handed over a letter to CPI(M) district secretary Anavoor Nagappan and CPI(M) leader Jayan Babu, with a copy to the party State committee, seeking action against her parents. On April 22, Anupama got in touch with the District Child Welfare Committee (CWC) through videoconference, stated her case, and forwarded the relevant documents. The CWC chairperson told her later that there was no point in submitting a complaint. The CWC could do something only after the police located the child, the chairperson said.
A frustrated Anupama then met with the State Police chief, Loknath Behera, on April 29, who directed that a case be registered under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act (JJ Act). However, no action was taken. After an agonising wait of two months, the couple finally submitted a complaint to the Chief Minister’s Office on July 12.
It was in the last week of July, says Anupama, that the police handed over a consent letter produced by her father for her to read. The consent letter, allegedly signed by her, said that Anupama was not equipped to look after the child and was voluntarily handing him over.
Anupama says the letter dates back to October 15, 2020, when her parents and two others asked her to sign on a stamp paper. When Anupama insisted on reading the document before signing it, she was hit and threatened with grievous injury to the child in her womb and her signatures were forcibly taken.
In the first week of August 2021, some 10 months after she had had her child, Anupama found out from a police officer that her father had given up the child for the Kerala State Council for Child Welfare’s ‘Ammathottil’ electronic cradle. The scheme was instituted as a “means of providing better life conditions for the destitute, abandoned and relinquished children.” The police officer had also learned from the District CWC that two children had been given to the cradle on October 22 night. The gender of one of them had been wrongly registered as female and then corrected. Anupama is incredulous that a specialised adoption agency would commit such a grave error. “What about the doctor examining the child for the first time at the hospital? Will they not investigate if the child is a boy or a girl,” she asks.
The couple rushed to the CWC the same day. They were told that one of the children had been given in adoption but the other was still at the council. Anupama was told she could meet the child and also apply for a DNA test if she wished. Anupama went in to see her child but came out confused and disappointed. She did not believe that the child was hers. To be sure, she applied for a DNA test; the result confirmed her suspicion. When Anupama expressed the possibility that the child given away for adoption was hers, a CWC member told her that there was no point in approaching the court as she would not get the child back.
Discouraged, thwarted at every turn, and made to run from pillar to post for months to get back her child, Anupama went public with her predicament a few days later. Within days, the police registered an FIR against Jayachandran, Smitha, their elder daughter and son-in-law, and two others based on a complaint made by Anupama to the new State Police chief a month ago.
Not only the police, but the Kerala State Council for Child Welfare where Jayachandran said he had left Anupama’s child is also under a cloud now. Anupama has alleged that the council abetted the adoption process. Ajith had visited the council in October last year after seeing an advertisement about a child being found at the council, she says. He had met the council’s general secretary Shiju Khan J.S., but Shiju did not do anything to help him.
Jayachandran had earlier claimed that the child had been left in the Ammathottil with Anupama’s consent. He had also claimed that the child had been taken to the council through a judicial mechanism that ensured his protection. Anupama counters these claims. “If my child was surrendered to the CWC, then due legal steps should have been followed,” she says. The Minister for Women and Child Development, Veena George, has also said that the child was not surrendered to the CWC.
A letter, purportedly from a section of employees of the council to the Chief Minister who is the president of the council, alleges that on the night in question, the Ammathottil was not functioning. Jayachandran brought the child to the council with Shiju’s knowledge and handed him over to a nurse on duty. The child was taken to a hospital for a check-up and the child’s gender was registered as female. The motive behind the gender change and the correction is suspect, says Anupama, but Shiju argues that all the legal procedures were followed by the council.
In a tight spot
Meanwhile, with the case grabbing the headlines, the CPI(M) found itself in an embarrassing position. It has scrambled to contain the political fallout of the adoption scandal. The Congress-led United Democratic Front as well as the Bharatiya Janata Party have said that the episode has undermined the CPI(M)’s credibility as a pro-women party.
Many communist leaders have been critical of the manner in which the issue has been dealt with. Revolutionary Marxist Party leader K.K. Rema, who moved an adjournment motion on the issue, accused the CPI(M) apparatchiks of abetting the crime to “protect the family’s twisted sense of honour”. CPI(M) Polit Bureau member Brinda Karat called the incident an “honour crime” and a wrong of “immense... proportion.” But her intervention at the Chief Minister’s level to reunite the parents and child failed. CPI(M) central committee member P.K. Sreemathy also admitted that her efforts to rope in the Chief Minister’s Office to help the mother trace her child yielded no result.
In a damage-control exercise, the government ordered a probe into the procedures and timeline of events since the child was received at the council. The Women and Child Development Department, which is the State Adoption Resource Agency, filed a petition in the family court on Anupama’s demand for the return of her child before the court passed final orders on the adoption. Veena George said the case was rare and complicated, and the mother would get justice. The party went silent on its earlier position that neither the CWC nor the police had erred in the matter.
Anupama is happy about the support she has received but she is also cautious. Had the CPI(M) acted at the outset, her child would not have been given up for adoption, she says. Anavoor says that a letter from Anupama to Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, former CPI(M) State secretary, was forwarded to the district office in the first week of September this year. Following its receipt, Jayachandran was asked to return the child to his daughter. It was then that he revealed that the child had been left in the Ammathottil. Following this, Anupama was advised to take the legal route to get her child back, and assured of necessary support by the party.
Anupama says that even amid all the claims of support, the party has continued to speak out against Ajith. Anavoor says the party cannot condone Ajith entering into a relationship with Anupama when he was still married to someone else. Jayachandran had brought the matter to his attention and sought the party’s intervention, he says. Ajith’s father, who was a party area committee secretary, was asked to dissuade his son from pursuing this relationship. The party remains firm on this stance, he says.
The party position has brought into the spotlight questions about a woman’s choice against the background of prevailing moral and social norms. Anupama’s struggle has struck a chord with many, especially the youth who have been dismayed at the lengths to which her parents have gone to separate the mother from her child. Activist P.E. Usha says, “The family is not above the rights of a citizen. How can a man offer up his grandchild for adoption just because he disapproves of his daughter’s choice of a partner? The issue at stake is Anupama and her choice.”
The question at the core of the case
The family court has stayed the adoption proceedings after Anupama argued that the child was put up for adoption against her will and her consent had been obtained through illegal means. The court also said that the CWC, which Anupama alleged had refused to return the baby on the ground that the adoption procedures were already in motion, could decide on a DNA test to determine the biological parentage of the child, besides adjudicating on whether the baby had been abandoned or surrendered.
The lack of clarity on whether the child was abandoned or surrendered with Anupama’s consent is at the core of this case. The procedures to be followed in the case will be guided by this fact, which is for the police to probe. If the child was left at the council by the grandfather without any substantial reason, it could attract the provisions of Section 75 of the JJ Act, which reads: “Whoever, having the actual charge of, or control over, a child, assaults, abandons, abuses, exposes or wilfully neglects the child or causes or procures the child to be assaulted, abandoned, abused, exposed, or neglected in a manner likely to cause such child unnecessary mental or physical suffering, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine of one lakh rupees or with both.”
Questions are also being raised about the role of the Child Welfare Council, a registered society under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, and the large amounts allocated to it by the government at a time when the CWC, a quasi-judicial body created under the law, existed. The CWC can conduct an inquiry and give directions to the police or the District Child Protection Unit, but its alleged failure to follow due procedure when approached by Anupama has raised eyebrows. Usha alleges that Jayachandran used the government machinery for a criminal act, knowing well that his daughter was opposed to giving up the child. “The complications that have arisen are owing to failure of these agencies to follow procedure. Whether the council and the CWC hastened the adoption procedures to avoid any claim to the child needs to be investigated,” says a senior lawyer.
While Anupama’s chances of getting her child back seem brighter in view of the concerns over procedural lapses and the government throwing its weight behind her, the court’s final verdict will be eagerly awaited. And awaited not just by her and Ajith but by an entire State which has been keenly following this case about a mother’s quiet determination to find her child.
The World Trade Organization (WTO)’s 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12) is being convened in Geneva, Switzerland at the end of this month, a year-and-a-half after it was scheduled to be held in Kazakhstan (June 2020, but postponed due to the novel coronavirus pandemic). The MC12 is being held at an important juncture when the global trade scenario is quite upbeat.
The outlook
Recent WTO estimates show that global trade volumes could expand by almost 11% in 2021, and by nearly 5% in 2022, and could stabilise at a level higher than the pre-COVID-19 trend (https://bit.ly/3EQTO55). The buoyancy in trade volumes has played an important role in supporting growth in economies such as India where domestic demand has not yet picked up sufficiently. Therefore, these favourable tidings provide an ideal setting for the Trade Ministers from the WTO member-states to revisit trade rules and to agree on a work programme for the organisation, which can help maintain the momentum in trade growth.
But above all, the MC12 needs to consider how in these good times for trade, the economically weaker countries “can secure a share in the growth in international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development’, an objective that is mandated by the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization.
Does the run-up to the MC12 provide any evidence that the global trading system can be slightly less iniquitous than it has been? The answer lies in the possible outcomes in some of the areas that are currently witnessing intense negotiations. These include adoption of WTO rules on electronic commerce, investment facilitation, and fisheries subsidies. But there is one issue that surmounts all others, namely, the WTO’s response to demands that technologies necessary for producing vaccines, medicines, and other medical products for COVID-19 treatment should be available without the restrictions imposed by intellectual property rights (IPRs).
IPRs and vaccine issue
From the very outset of the COVID-19 pandemic it had become clear that IPRs protected using the provisions of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) are formidable barriers to ensuring equitable access to vaccines. Pharmaceutical companies controlling the global markets have used monopoly rights granted by their IPRs to deny developing countries access to technologies and know-how, thus undermining the possibility of production of vaccines in these countries. The involvement of developing countries in vaccine production could have increased supplies of affordable vaccines to the low-income countries. Availability of vaccines remains a critical problem in these countries even after a year since the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine was administered. Recent statistics show that until now, a mere 4.1% of the population in low-income countries have received at least one dose of the vaccine (https://bit.ly/3mKDk8G).
To remedy this situation, India and South Africa had tabled a proposal in the WTO in October 2020, for waiving enforcement of several forms of IPRs on “health products and technologies including diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, medical devices … and their methods and means of manufacture” useful for COVID-19 treatment. By doing so, barriers created by IPRs to timely access to affordable medical products could be removed. This proposal, supported by nearly two-thirds of the organisation’s membership, was opposed by the developed countries batting for their corporates. However, after the Joe Biden Administration in the United States lent limited support to the India-South Africa proposal, there was a glimmer of hope that WTO members would agree to lift restrictions on access to technologies for COVID-19 vaccines and medicines; at least by the MC12. The unfortunate reality of the current discussions is that an outcome supporting affordable access to COVID-19 vaccines and medicines looks distant. A further confirmation of this possibly came from the WTO Director General, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, when in her recent musings on the MC12 inThe Economist, she was completely silent on this issue.
Fisheries, e-commerce
Although discussions on fisheries subsidies have been hanging fire for a long time, there is considerable push for an early conclusion of an agreement to rein in these subsidies. However, the current drafts on this issue are completely unbalanced as they do not provide the wherewithal to rein in large-scale commercial fishing that are depleting fish stocks the world over, and at the same time, are threatening the livelihoods of small fishermen in countries such as India.
In recent months, the proposal by the members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the G-20 members to introduce global minimum taxes on digital companies has made headlines. But in the WTO, most of these countries have been investing their negotiating capital to facilitate the expansion of e-commerce firms. Discussions on e-commerce are being held in the WTO since 1998 (https://bit.ly/302dkgf), after the adoption of the Ministerial Declaration on Global Electronic Commerce wherein WTO members agreed to “continue their … practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions”. The more substantive outcome was the decision to “establish a comprehensive work programme” taking into “account the economic, financial, and development needs of developing countries”.
Fast forward to the discussions in 2021, and a key focus of the 1998 e-commerce work programme, namely “development needs of developing countries”, is entirely missing from the text document that is the basis for the current negotiations. On the negotiating table are issues relating to the liberalisation of the goods and services trade, and of course guarantee for free flow of data across international boundaries, all aimed at facilitating expansion of businesses of e-commerce firms. In fact, the decision on a moratorium on the imposition of import duties agreed to in 1998 has become the basis for a push towards comprehensive trade liberalisation — a perfectly logical way forward, given that the sole objective of the negotiations on e-commerce is to facilitate expansion of e-commerce firms.
Divisions over investment
Complementing the current focus of the WTO to promote the global interests of oligopolies is the initiative for the adoption of an investment facilitation agreement. Inclusion of substantive provisions on investment in the WTO has been one of the more divisive issues. In 2001, the Doha Ministerial Declaration had included a work programme on investment (https://bit.ly/3bJSeWw), but it was soon taken off the table as developing countries were opposed to its continuation because the discussions were geared to expanding the rights of foreign investors through a multilateral agreement on investment. An investment facilitation has reintroduced the old agenda of concluding such an investment agreement. The proponents have been careful not to load the agenda by seeking substantial commitments from the Government to promote the interests of foreign investors, but it should be clear even to the uninitiated that the ultimate objective is to bind host governments into a multilaterally agreed commitment to comprehensively protect investor interests.
One-sided negotiations
Besides the bias in favour of global oligopolies, the current negotiating processes in the WTO are fundamentally flawed. The negotiations on e-commerce and investment facilitation are being conducted not by a mandate given by the entire membership of the WTO in a transparent manner that are also consistent with the objectives of the WTO. Instead, these negotiations owe their origins to the so-called “Joint Statement Initiatives” (JSI) in which a section of the membership has developed the agenda with a view to producing agreements in the WTO. This will then be offered to the rest of the membership on a “take-it-or-leave-it” basis. This entire process is “detrimental to the very existence of a rule-based multilateral trading system under the WTO”, as India and South Africa have forcefully argued in a submission against the JSIs early this year (https://bit.ly/2ZXN5XV).
Biswajit Dhar is Professor of Economics at the Jawaharlal Nehru University,
New Delhi
As the world watches the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26, from October 31 to November 12, 2021), the most important climate summit in years at Glasgow, Scotland, India has said it wants to be a part of the climate solution.
The Indian proposals
Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced, on November 1 at Glasgow, a ‘Panchamrit solution’ which aims at reducing fossil fuel dependence and carbon intensity (reduce one billion tonnes of total projected carbon emissions by 2030), and ramping up its renewable energy share to 50% by 2030. Glasgow is important as it will call for practical implementation of the 2015 Paris Accord, setting the rules for the Accord. And as the world recovers from the biological and environmental stresses of the COVID-19 pandemic and natural disasters, climate change has also become personal.
Union Minister of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Bhupender Yadav has reasserted the call for the promised $100 billion a year as support (from the developed world to the developing world) but as we consider new energy pathways, we must also consider the question of climate hazard, nature-based solutions and national accountability.
This is the right time for India to mull setting up a climate law while staying true to its goals of climate justice, carbon space and environmental protection. There are a few reasons for this.
Current laws and gaps
Which law covers climate? First, our existing laws are not adequate to deal with climate change. We have for example the Environment (Protection) Act (EPA), 1986, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Yet, climate is not exactly water or air. Which law would cover the impacts of a cyclone, for instance or work to reduce future climate impacts? And neither are we ready to tackle environmental/climate violations. The Environment (Protection) Act is grossly inadequate to deal with violations on climate. Clause 24 of the Act, “Effect of Other Laws”, states that if an offence is committed under the EPA or any other law, the person will be punished under the other law (for example, Code of Criminal Procedure). This makes the EPA subordinate to every other law.
Second, there is a need to integrate climate action — adaptation and mitigation — and monitor progress. Comprehensive climate action is not just technological (such as changing energy sources or carbon intensity), but also nature-based (such as emphasising restoration of ecosystems, reducing natural hazard and increasing carbon sinks.)
Finally, India’s situation is unique. Climate action cannot come by furthering sharpening divides or exacerbating poverty, and this includes our stated renewable energy goals. The 500 Gigawatt by 2030 goal for renewable, solar or wind power for example (of installed power capacity from non-fossil sources), can put critically endangered grassland and desert birds such as the Great Indian Bustard at risk, as they die on collision with wires in the desert.
Create a commission
A climate law could consider two aspects. One, creating an institution that monitors action plans for climate change. A ‘Commission on Climate Change’ could be set up, with the power and the authority to issue directions, and oversee implementation of plans and programmes on climate.
The Commission could have quasi-judicial powers with powers of a civil court to ensure that its directions are followed in letter and spirit. It should be assisted by a technical committee which can advise the commission in the discharge of its functions as well as guide various private and public agencies in meeting their climate-related obligations. As an example, the commission could look at agencies or institutions that have a disproportionate impact on climate or environment, and suggest lower energy pathways that are adhered to.
Tracing carbon footprints
What, for example, is the carbon footprint of a single activity from start to finish? We have the Bureau of Energy Efficiency, but we also need overall carbon efficiency that looks beyond electronics. How could intelligent interventions be made for reduction of footprints, along with common sense, and practical public health interventions which are unaccounted for so far? In a recent case in the National Green Tribunal it was revealed that the National Thermal Power Corporation did not even cover coal wagons with tarpaulin on railways, decades after environmental clearances were granted in 1999, in Chhattisgarh. In 2020, the Supreme Court passed an order directing for the wagons to be covered within a month’s time. There will be eventual emissions by coal use. But there is also the issue of respirable coal dust that is spewed into the air through irresponsible transportation.
As of now, many environmental mediations remain glaringly haphazard. The ban on plastic bags in Delhi is a failure because plastic bag substitutes were never really pushed at scale by the understaffed environment department. A plastic bag ban to succeed in one State requires a similar commitment from neighbouring States. A nation-wide intervention here, led by a Climate Commission, considering substitutes at scale for plastic-based products (which are derived from petroleum) and looking at both innovation and implementation, would be useful.
Need for accountability
Second, we need a system of liability and accountability at short-, medium- and long-term levels as we face hazards. This also means having a legally enforceable National Climate Change Plan that goes beyond just policy guidelines. Are climate vagaries acts of god, or do certain actions exacerbate them? In an order of the National Green Tribunal in 2016, the court examined the damage caused when floods occurred in 2013 in Pauri, Uttarakhand. When Srinagar dam (Uttarakhand) opened its sluice gates, muck created 8-foot tall deposits, destroying property and fields.
While muck is not hazardous, the handling of the dam — especially in a mountainous area in the face of climate events — created serious damage. The court held the damage was not an ‘Act of God’ and invoked the Principle of No Fault liability. The Alaknanda Hydro Power Company was asked by the Tribunal to pay more than Rs. 9 crore in damages. But all this was after the disaster. A Climate Commission could ideally prevent such gross negligence in fragile areas and fix accountability if it arises.
We have an urgent moral imperative to tackle climate change and reduce its worst impacts. But we also should Indianise the process by bringing in a just and effective law — with guts, a spine, a heart, and, most importantly, teeth.
Neha Sinha is a conservation biologist and author of ‘Wild and Wilful: Tales of 15 Iconic Indian Species’. The views expressed are personal
Following months of speculation, the World Health Organization (WHO) has granted Emergency Use Listing (EUL) to Covaxin, manufactured by Bharat Biotech. This now allows the vaccine’s better availability in many more countries, particularly via global groupings such as Covax. One of WHO’s key aims is to have at least 40% of people in all countries vaccinated by the year-end — a tall order as the latest estimates suggest that only around 1% of people in low-income countries have received their jabs. Seventy countries are yet to vaccinate 10% of their populations, and 30 countries — including much of Africa — have vaccinated fewer than 2%. In Latin America, only one in four of the population has received a vaccine dose, according toThe British Medical Journal. Covaxin is an indigenous, inactivated whole-virion vaccine that has been developed based on well-established protocols. This has meant that it was put on the regulatory speed belt at nearly every stage, the most significant being its emergency approval by India’s drug regulators without any published phase-3 efficacy data. The ostensible reason for the haste was that India needed a low-cost indigenous vaccine that could be quickly administered to many.
Though Bharat Biotech has years of experience in producing crores of vaccines, the scale of quickly ramping up Covaxin supply has so far been beyond its capacity. In no month, since July, has Bharat Biotech actually delivered on its promised supply of vaccine, and even after over 107 crore shots have been administered, only around 12% have received Covaxin; many in India have been vaccinated with Covishield. Moreover, before the Centre agreed to take over 75% of the public supply, Covaxin offered no cost advantage — and in some instances was costlier — than Covishield. Bharat Biotech however moved to quickly get WHO’s approval for its vaccine under its emergency listing process, in July. But unlike the rapid-fire clearance by India’s Central Drugs Standard Control Organization, WHO’s evaluation process has turned out to be considerably more involved. WHO cleared the AstraZeneca (Covishield) vaccine in four weeks but that Covaxin has required over 20 weeks — especially in a climate where much of the world is desperate — raises several questions. Bharat Biotech is no novice to WHO’s clearance process and would surely be aware of all the requirements. While Covaxin’s EUL may now ease foreign travel for a fraction of Indians, there is a real need to know why, in spite of Bharat Biotech’s claims that it had furnished the required data whenever demanded, this approval took the time it did. With Covaxin close to being approved for children there will be significant demand now for this population segment; however, the company must work to improve its manufacturing supply and contribute to a larger share of the vaccines globally administered.
The deaths in the last few days of at least 25 people in Bihar’s Gopalganj and West Champaran districts and five in Muzaffarpur apart from several others taking ill after consuming spurious liquor points to the unintended but not unexpected consequences of the total prohibition law that has been in effect in the State for more than five years. Hooch tragedies such as these are a consequence of the unregulated production and sale of liquor via the black market, and the use of illicit liquor as a substitute due to the lack of the sale of over-the-counter and regulated drinks. Prohibition as a policy has been shown up as inadequate to curb the problem of alcoholism and the havoc wreaked by it on households due to excessive consumption for a variety of reasons in State after State. In Bihar, implementation has not been without immense public support, especially among rural women. Yet, despite significant steps taken to enhance enforcement by officials from the excise department, the police and local administration — over 3.46 lakh people arrested in the last five years and close to 150 lakh litres of country-made and Indian Made Foreign Liquor being seized from April 2016 to February 2021 — weaknesses in imposing the ban persist. It is well known that one of the negative externalities of prohibition is the creation of a parallel bootlegger economy that could lead to an increase in violent crime, and this seems to be borne out in Bihar as well.
The Chief Minister, Nitish Kumar, has been the strongest proponent of prohibition in the State and the policy has reaped electoral dividends for his party, the Janata Dal (United) and its ally, the Bharatiya Janata Party, as rural women have overwhelmingly welcomed the ban on alcohol. While initially, the ban on alcohol consumption helped rural households increase expenditure on basic goods related to food and education, there are reports from rural Bihar showing how these benefits have waned as spurious consumption is on the rise. Reportedly, illicit liquor in the State claimed at least 60 lives in 2021, much higher than the six deaths recorded by the National Crime Records Bureau’s report on accidental deaths and suicides in India in 2020. The scale of the rise in hooch incidents and deaths should set alarm bells ringing about the inability of the administration in curbing the black market in liquor sales and consumption. Mr. Kumar insists that the success of prohibition is only a matter of implementation of the law and in a way has blamed the deaths on the ignorance of those who consumed spurious liquor. But the fact that these deaths persist should alert the government to the misgivings with the idea of total prohibition as a magic bullet in a State marked by weaknesses in institutions and low overall human development.
The Assam government leaders warned of fresh agitation if the government failed to disperse foreigners who had entered the state during the 1961-1971 period. At a press conference in Guwahati, they said that they were no longer interested in informal talks. If the government wants further talks, it should be at the ministerial level, they said. But before that, it must clarify its stand on the foreigners. The movement leaders who included representatives of the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad and the All Assam Students Union, however, said that any decision on future talks with the government will be taken by the executive committees of their organisations. The two outfits would jointly sponsor a peaceful rally on November 10 to explain to the people their future course of action.
Cong (S) Dilemma
Another split in the Congress (S) is now on the cards if the party leadership gives its consent to the Kerala unit to join the Congress (I) in forming a government in the state. Though a majority of the party working committee members seem to be against having any truck with the Congress (I), the compulsions of Kerala’s politics could force them to change their position.
Billa, Ranga To Hang
Billa and Ranga who brutally killed the teenaged Chopra children three years ago, will be hanged on November 8. Their mercy petitions were rejected by the president.
Gavaskar To Lead
Sunil Gavaskar will lead India in the six Tests and three one-day internationals against England. The five-member selection committee took about five minutes to come to the unanimous decision.
The first quarter GDP data showed that the Indian economy was around 9 per cent lower than its pre pandemic level. High frequency indicators suggest that in the period thereafter, parts of the economy have recovered to pre Covid levels. However, there continues to be uncertainty over the extent of the distress in the informal sector. By all accounts, the impact of the pandemic has been felt more by the unorganised sector — this is also the third shock to this segment following demonetisation and GST. Some have argued that these shocks, coupled with various policy initiatives have led to a sharp increase in the pace of formalisation in the economy. But in the absence of data, it is difficult to know for sure, both, the extent to which the informal economy continues to struggle, and the permanent gains to the formal segment.
According to an estimate presented by an officer at the National Statistical Division of the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, the informal/unorganised sector in India accounted for 52.4 per cent of the total value added in the economy in 2017-18, and employed around 87 per cent of the total labour force. Economists at SBI, who have tried to quantify the extent of formalisation in the economy, argue that value added by the informal sector has declined from 52.4 per cent in 2017-18 to 15-20 per cent in 2020-21. Such a large decline appears improbable. But it is difficult to arrive at precise estimates.
Shifts from the unorganised to the organised sector occur at two levels — one, the formalisation of the firm, and two, the formalisation of the informal labour force. While in the case of the former, enterprises are essentially shifting from the informal to the formal part of the economy, the latter could be a consequence of both, formalisation of the firm, and/or formalisation of the informal labour force of an existing formal enterprise. But this debate on the extent to which the formal sector has gained at the expense of the informal raises several questions. First, considering that economists have argued that informal enterprises are characterised by high birth and death rates, have these informal enterprises permanently shut shop? Are the gains to the formal sector permanent? Second, have these organised sector firms absorbed this part of the informal labour force leading to a rise in the formal workforce? If not, then this forced formalisation would have simply exacerbated the employment problem. There is also the issue of estimation. Informal employment typically implies workers with no written contracts, or paid leave and other benefits including some form of social and job security provided by employer, or the government. Mere registration of unorganised workers on the e-Shram portal does not imply formalisation. However, notwithstanding these concerns, the high demand for work under MGNREGA signals continuing distress in the informal economy. Though in the absence of data its difficult to gauge precisely the extent of the distress.
The power sector in India is at an inflection point. Three developments are triggering a shift across the power chain, generation and distribution in particular, and are in the process deepening existing faultlines, and exacerbating the distress.
The first is a change in the way the Centre approaches the distribution segment. Till recently, it had preferred to incentivise states, nudging them to address the issue that lies at the heart of the power sector’s woes — turning around the operational performance and financial position of power distribution companies (discoms). However, despite multiple attempts, not much has changed.
But over the past few months, the Centre appears to have changed tack. From enforcing the tripartite agreement to recover the dues owed to power producers like NTPC by discoms in Jharkhand, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka to now regulating coal supplies to states where power generating companies have been delaying payments, it no longer appears content to simply nudge states into acting. The stick is being wielded with increasing force, with even states politically aligned with the Centre not being spared.
Second, notwithstanding buoyant tax revenues this year, Covid has wreaked havoc on government finances. The general government debt stands at 90 per cent of GDP. Add to this demands for greater welfare spending, uncertainty over state government finances once the five year GST compensation period ends next year, and the limits to which states can continue to support discoms will increasingly be tested. To what extent accounting jugglery can be used once again to clean up discom debt is debatable. After all, even the liquidity facility arranged by the Centre to help discoms pay off their obligations will have to be paid back.
Third, until now, consumers had little recourse to alternate sources of supply. Consequently, discoms, which are essentially geographical monopolies, were able to charge higher tariffs from commercial and industrial consumers to cross-subsidise agricultural and low-income households. But the situation appears to be changing.
Migration of high tariff paying consumers through open access and investments in captive power plants is gaining traction, driven in large part by the emergence of solar as an alternative at seemingly competitive tariffs. According to research by Prayas (Energy Group), with high tariff consumers beginning to move away, the share of cross-subsidy in discom tariff support (the other part being state subsidy) has declined from 29 per cent in 2017-18 to 23 per cent in 2018-19 — a decline of 6 percentage points in one year.
This reduced reliance of high tariff paying consumers on discoms will only exacerbate their already precarious financial position. Even more worrying from their perspective is that the pace at which this transition is occurring will only accelerate in the coming years. This is due to two factors.
On the supply side, at the global and the national level, there is a push towards cleaner fuel, solar in particular. As a consequence, funding is increasingly flowing towards cleaner options — the trouble with financing a coal mine in Australia compared to the ease with which funds can be raised to finance renewable projects makes it evident.
Flowing from this — though with debatable relevance given the current levels of per capita emissions — is the domestic policy thrust towards renewables. Solar, in particular, benefits from both explicit and implicit subsidies — land at concessional rate, exemption from interstate transmission charges, discounted wheeling charges, cross-subsidies for open access, SECI taking on counterparty risk, and others. It also enjoys “Must Run” status.
Thus, most fresh investments, especially private, are flowing into renewables. In fact, according to projections by the Central Electricity Authority, by the end of 2029-30, the installed solar capacity is likely to significantly surpass that of coal.
On the demand side, at current tariffs, solar is emerging as an attractive alternative for the high tariff paying commercial and industrial consumers (the average cost per unit for commercial and industrial consumers was around Rs 8.37 and Rs 7.41 respectively in 2019-20 as compared to solar tariffs of less than Rs 3 per unit). And as more renewable capacity comes online, and storage costs decline, the shift of most cross-subsidising consumers away from discoms seems almost inevitable. Though for most households, with low levels of per capita income, rooftop solar may not seem like a viable option now — the costs for setting up a 10-kilowatt rooftop panel works out to around Rs 4 lakh.
On their part, discoms are trying to salvage a losing situation. To stem the flow of high paying customers, some have begun levying an additional surcharge on whoever opts for open access to lower the cost differential. Others are shifting from net metering to gross metering — essentially charging consumers higher tariffs — above particular consumption levels.
But as the reliance of these high tariff paying customers on discoms reduces, the latter will have to rely on tariff subsidies from state governments to a greater extent than before. However, continuously subsidising discoms for their AT&C losses (operational inefficiencies), and for not supplying power at commensurate tariffs to low-income households and agricultural customers (for political considerations) will become fiscally untenable. Just the bill for subsidising agricultural consumers was around Rs 1.1 lakh crore a few years ago according to the government.
A business as usual scenario will no longer suffice. Short of outright privatisation, market pricing of tariffs, options seem limited. To provide some perspective — as of March 2020, the net worth of all public sector distribution utilities in the country put together was a negative Rs 61,757 crore (though it was positive in states like Gujarat and Maharashtra). In comparison, the combined net worth of the few private sector discoms that exist in the country was a positive Rs 24,965 crore.
For much of last month, the Indian public has observed with interest the criminal proceedings that followed the arrest of Aryan Khan, son of filmstar Shah Rukh Khan. When the Bombay High Court finally granted bail to Aryan, millions of Indians learnt that grant of bail by a court does not automatically entitle the accused to an immediate release, unless the bail order is deposited in a physical letterbox installed outside the Arthur Road prison. The box is opened four times a day and Khan’s lawyers missed the last deadline because of which his son had to spend an extra night in jail. People were astonished to learn that a “bail box” can stand between jail and the freedom of an Indian citizen.
Post this episode, Justice D Y Chandrachud, who heads the e-Committee of the Supreme Court, commented at a public event that the delay in communicating bail orders has to be addressed on a war footing. In September, his fellow judges on the bench had taken suo moto cognisance of the issue of non-release of prisoners after grant of bail and directed the creation of FASTER (Fast and Secured Transmission of Electronic Records) System, which would transmit e-authenticated copies of the interim orders, stay orders, bail orders and record of proceedings to the duty holders. The court was entirely silent on the fact that the Phase II document for the e-courts project, published in 2014, had announced an ambitious but unfulfilled plan to allow for the transmission of information between key institutions in the criminal justice system.
The “bail-jail” connectivity issue in the Aryan Khan case is but a symptom of a much deeper problem with the structure, management and accountability of the e-Committee, which is responsible for steering the e-courts project. A budget of Rs 935 crore and Rs 1,670 crore was approved by the government for Phase I and II of the project, respectively, and the e-Committee, headed by a Supreme Court judge, decides how to spend it. Yet, there is relatively little to show for all this money. Many courts do have computers and it is easier to get case information for ordinary citizens (provided they can read English) but why is it that a basic functionality, like electronic transmission of orders between the courts and the prisons, escaped the attention of the e-Committee, despite being mentioned in its own vision documents?
This could be because the e-Committee is not accountable to anybody. Neither the Comptroller Auditor General (CAG) nor the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Lok Sabha has reviewed its handling of the e-courts project, despite the substantial expenditure of public funds. The Department of Justice (DoJ), which works under the Ministry of Law and Justice, after much pressure from the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice, commissioned two timid, if not limited, evaluations of the project to the same Delhi-based think-tank. A project as complex as this should, at the very least, be subject to public review or a performance audit. These are, after all, the basics of public accountability and project management. If judges of the Supreme Court want financial power and are convinced of their managerial prowess, they should be willing to submit themselves to questioning by constitutional authorities like the CAG and PAC. If they are not willing to do so, perhaps they should step away from the role and let bureaucrats accountable to the legislatures take up the issue.
This issue is symptomatic of a larger trend wherein high courts, which are responsible for administering lower courts, claim the shield of judicial independence to escape public scrutiny of their functioning. For example, we know from personal experience that most high courts do not reveal documents as basic as financial audit reports, even if a request is made under the RTI Act.
The answer to fixing our judicial system does not lie in throwing more money at it or building shiny new digital platforms or creating a new behemoth like the National Judicial Infrastructure Corporation as demanded by the incumbent Chief Justice of India. The solution lies in demanding accountability from judges who insist on running administratively-complex projects for which they are not trained and for which they lack the required skills.
UK’s approval for Merck’s antiviral pill molnupiravir and Pfizer’s claim that its version cuts hospitalisation and death risk by 89% opens a new front against Covid after vaccines have succeeded in reducing disease severity. Merck claims global clinical trials showed deaths reduced by nearly half among high-risk persons with mild to moderate illness when given early into onset of symptoms. A low-cost antiviral pill can be a boon for countries with both high- and low-vaccination coverages battling Covid surges and those with relatively poor medical infrastructure like India.
Merck’s agreement with the UN-backed Medicine Patents Pool offers a royalty-free licence for generic manufacturers to market the drug in 105 low- and middle-income countries. It had separately tied up with some Indian companies which have been conducting local trials for pursuing emergency-use authorisation from DCGI. Indian companies must tie up with Pfizer too because its antiviral technology has been around for decades, and is thus potentially safer. Indian regulators must move energetically on the molnupiravir trial data so that production can scale up, for both India and the world.
During the pandemic, India has carved out exemptions for vaccines and drugs granted EUA by US, UK, EU and Japan regulators besides WHO. UK’s molnupiravir approval is important: It was the first country to approve an mRNA vaccine, the then cutting-edge Pfizer-BioNTech jab, and to demonstrate effectiveness of low-cost steroid dexamethasone in mitigating cytokine storms.
The desperate remdesivir hunt during the second wave surge is reason enough to stockpile large quantities of antivirals. The safety of molnupiravir, which introduces errors into the genetic code of the coronavirus and prevents its replication, must be continually evaluated. Antivirals work best when Covid patients are detected positive early. So there mustn’t be any slack in testing, which is also our only early warning system against another surge.
An ironic sidelight of the ongoing COP26 climate conference is that financial investors in coal, the largest source of CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, haven’t experienced better returns in a long time. A report in this paper pointed out that Coal (Australia) delivered returns of 188% since last Diwali, on the back of a surge in demand. This peculiar phenomenon is in the spotlight as on November 4, a number of COP26 participants issued a statement identifying coal power generation as the single biggest cause of global temperature increases and pledged to help in an orderly transition to other sources of electricity generation.
Coal remains the bedrock of global electricity generation. The International Energy Agency says that it fires up almost 37% of global electricity generation. A dirty fallout of it and other uses of coal is that it comprised 44% of all CO2 emissions from fuel combustion in 2019, the single largest source. That begs the question: Will our coal dependence undermine the net-zero visions laid out at COP26?
Very unlikely. Coal’s current surge in demand is an outcome of disruptions catalysed by Covid-19. Global coal production fell by 4.8% in 2020. Since then, the fast-paced return to normalcy has exacerbated shortages. It’s the rise in the contribution of renewables to power supply that underpins net-zero visions. IEA data shows that renewables contributed 29% of global power supply in 2020 and are the source that’s growing fast. The coal sidelight may not be anything more than a blip.
The one billion Covid-19 vaccine dose landmark is a significant achievement, but it shouldn’t eclipse the long way ahead. The government plans to fully vaccinate the entire adult population by December. This represents 940 million people or 1.8 billion doses — not including potential booster doses or children’s vaccination. At the current pace, it will take five months to complete this target. But the more the vaccination rate increases, the more challenging it becomes to vaccinate the remaining groups.
It is essential to understand which populations are unvaccinated across geographic, socioeconomic and demographic factors. First, we know from the routine immunisation programme for children in India that the vaccination rate is highly correlated with socio-economic status. The immunisation coverage of children in the wealthiest quintile (70%) is higher than in the lowest quintile (53%). This data, on an economic basis, is lacking for Covid-19 vaccination.
Second, some states, such as Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, still have about a third of their eligible population fully unvaccinated. These states should be given additional resources to scale-up their campaign. Tamil Nadu has been singled out for having high rates of vaccine hesitancy, but further research is needed to better understand the reasons behind the numbers in all these states.
Third, only 60% of the 45-59-year-old category has received one dose or more of the vaccine, while they represent a higher risk group than the better vaccinated 18-44 age group. Finally, research we conducted in West Bengal earlier this year pointed to an urban/rural divide.
In parallel, we should encourage partially vaccinated individuals to complete their vaccination schedule. They represent over 700 million people. As with most multiple-dose vaccine regimens, drop-outs are expected after the first dose. For instance, coverage for the measles vaccine is 79% for the first dose and 27% for the second dose due after six months.
For both unvaccinated and partially vaccinated populations, the main challenge is vaccine indifference. As the number of Covid-19 cases decreases, people lose the motivation to protect themselves. In a vaccine hesitancy research we conducted before the second wave, returning to school, restarting the economy and returning to normalcy were listed as much higher incentives than the health benefits of getting vaccinated. Now that schools and businesses have reopened, the motivation to get vaccinated may shrink.
Vaccine demand can be generated for each of these under-vaccinated populations through the development of targeted action plans addressing both vaccine access issues and vaccine hesitancy.
The main access issues include lack of information, inability to travel, and the digital divide. This has been partially addressed recently but setting up vaccination points in multiple places (pharmacies, markets, religious places) to make information, registration and vaccination easily available for everyone is important.
Regarding vaccine hesitancy, our studies show it is mainly driven by the fear of side-effects and a general sense of distrust and fear of going to a hospital. In addition, some believe they do not need the vaccine as they are healthy or because Covid-19 is not a serious health concern. Addressing vaccine hesitancy requires launching both campaigns to encourage complete vaccination and targeted campaigns for unvaccinated populations. These campaigns should be informed by regular research as people’s attitudes and perceptions of the vaccines can evolve rapidly. Most importantly, identifying the right channels of information is crucial to ensure that messages reach their audience. Community leaders, local doctors and NGOs and vaccinated community members were often cited as reliable sources of information on vaccines.
The number of first doses administered has already started to drop — from over 30 million first doses administered weekly in August and September to 20 million in October. With only a third of the eligible population fully vaccinated, we don’t have the luxury of time. The second wave was a harsh reminder that complacency is not an option during a crisis.
Sofia Imad is a junior fellow and Anushka Bhansali is an analyst at the IDFC InstituteThe views expressed are personal
Perhaps because it’s the only language I know properly, I am fascinated by the idiosyncrasies of English. Its pronunciation is often inexplicable, its spelling mystifying and the same word can have different meanings, including some that are the opposite of each other. How many other languages can boast of such a cornucopia of eccentricities?
For instance, we’re familiar with antonyms, words that are the opposite of each other. But what do you make of the following six, where the word can be the opposite of itself, depending on how you use it? They’re sometimes called contronyms, although I haven’t found that term in the Oxford Dictionary.
The first is “dust”: It can mean “to add fine particles” (like dusting a cake with castor sugar) or “to remove fine particles” (which you have to do every day in Delhi). Then there’s “left”. It can mean both “remaining” and “departed”. Or “off”. It can mean you’ve “activated” something (as in “set off”) or ‘deactivated’ (as in “switch off”). There’s also “oversight”, meaning either “watchful care” or “an inadvertent or careless error”. Yet another is “screen”, meaning both “to show” and “to hide”. And, finally, “sanction”, which can either be “a penalty for disobeying the law” or “official permission for action”.
Now isn’t that delightful ambiguity? It makes English a fascinating language for those who know it but exasperating for those struggling to learn it. And there are multiple such idiosyncrasies English-speakers need to grapple with.
Another is what’s sometimes called capitonyms, although, again, I haven’t found that term in the dictionary. What it means is a word whose meaning changes when the first letter is in capitals. I know that sounds odd but you’ll soon realise it’s not. In fact, without being aware of it, you’ve probably been making this distinction for years.
Let me list eight examples and you’ll immediately get the point. Consider march/March? Can you spot how the meaning has changed? You’ll see it happening again with: polish/Polish, august/August, china/China, lent/Lent, fiat/Fiat and mark/Mark.
Actually, there was a further twist in some of the pairs of words you’ve just read. In the case of two, the pronunciation changes when the first letter is in capitals. I’m referring to polish/Polish and august/August.
Let me now turn to something else. This won’t be new but I doubt if it’s something you’ve actually thought about. We use these words unthinkingly. Yet each time you’re converting a part of the human body into a verb or, to be more technical, you’re changing a noun into a verb. Could that be called “verbalising”? Yes, it can!
You can “head” a company, “shoulder” the blame when things go wrong, and then “face” the music. Of course, a good leader will “back” his colleagues but if they don’t “toe” the line or they “muscle” their way into closed meetings you might resort to strong “arm” tactics. The truth is few bosses can “stomach” dissent. However, in the evening the same person, if he finds a pretty colleague trying to “thumb” a ride, might give her a glad “eye” and “mouth” sweet pleasantries.
Now, if that’s put you off the English language, let me offer some comfort. When you’re fed up with your auto-correct spell-checker changing what you’ve written into something quite different to what you intended, here’s a four-sentence poem that could defeat the arrogant devil. “Eye halve a spelling chequer, it came with my pea sea, it plainly marques four my revue Miss steaks eye kin knot sea. Eye strike a key and type a word, and weight four it two say weather eye am wrong oar write, it shows me strait a weigh. As soon as a mist ache is maid, it nose bee fore two long, and eye can put the error rite, its rare lea ever wrong. Eye have run this poem threw it, I am shore your pleased two no, it’s letter perfect awl the weigh – My chequer tolled me sew.”
Karan Thapar is the author of Devil’s Advocate: The Untold Story