Open Forum

New Delhi, 14 April 2021

Poll Promises

MADE, NOT DELIVERED

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

Poll promises as usual pour down during elections, be it the State assemblies or Parliament. However, these are tall promises made by political parties in their manifestos, which realistically cannot be implemented fully and even 50 per cent of these seeing light of day is rather rare. Worse, those doling out assurances have no qualms as public memory turns out to be short and those not so educated tend to believe in some of these.   

At least the Madras High Court has taken cognisance of the trickery being unleashed. Dealing with a PIL recently in the matter, the two-judge bench observed political parties should be prohibited or prevented from giving election promises, which are capable of adding burden on the public exchequer. It also drew the Election Commission’s attention by inquiring how many manifestos it has vetted since 2014, what action was being taken against political parties for not implementing promises and whether the Central Government has taken any steps to bring legislation covering the issue of political manifestos, especially freebies promised in the election manifestos and governing the political parties

Undoubtedly, the court’s observations have countrywide resonance. That ‘the freebie culture makes people lazy, vitiates purity of elections, and must be viewed as a corrupt practice’, is an observation which must acted upon. Why not, the court asked “de-recognise elected political parties, who fail to implement their political promises based on which the voters are lured and the parties are elected to form the Government?”

Every political party, it observed, “is bound to make promises to voters giving their social policies and plans for improving the standard of living of the people by providing clean governance, infrastructure, especially, providing basic amenities like, water, transportation and health, which are expected in every democracy. However, the election promises made by the political parties are aimed at clinching power.”

So very apt this election season too. States such as Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Kerala and Assam, have witnessed a shower of poll promises by all parties. The BJP particularly is going all out to woo the voters with star campaigners, Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah having addressed massive rallies. The party desperately seeks to dislodge the Trinamool Congress in Bengal while in Assam it wants to get re-elected and make inroads into Tamil Nadu. And while development issues have found mention in the manifestos, West Bengal has stood out in the attention it has garnered so far.

The focus has shifted to corruption of TMC and its leaders as also the violence it has spread in the rural areas. The BJP harks on it, and TMC hits back whichever way. Much of the promises made appear to have got relegated to the background, but worth a mention. The TMC has promised more jobs, industries and MSMEs and uplifting annual per capita income for people below the poverty line. It has also assured Rs 10,000 per acre per annum to small and marginal farmers. The BJP has assured one job per family, which appears unrealistic, given the sluggishness in manufacturing activities, at least in the State and that the country is witnessing the worst unemployment rate in four decades with economists predicting not much improvement this year and the next.

It would be worth referring to JNU Professor Santosh Mehrotra, who edited a recent book, Revising Jobs: An Agenda for Growth, which points out that the unemployment rate rose from 2.32% in 2011-12 to 6.1% in 2017-18 and this may be around 8 to 10% presently. He attributed this to several factors including decline in private investment, household savings dropping to a record low of 17% and no increase in government’s spending in the social sector, where funds benefit the poor and impoverished sections of society.  

Clearly, job creation will remain stressed throughout the country and specially in Eastern States, which includes Bengal and Assam. Thus, the promise has little meaning though the voter may believe that if the BJP comes to power in Bengal, lot of Central investment may be forthcoming in future.  

Given that the TMC has done much for girls’ education, the BJP announced free education for girl child from KG to post-graduate level. But this may is not realistic as the budget allocation for school and higher education has been reduced in this fiscal to a little over Rs 93,000 crore from Rs 99,311 crore in 2020-21. What is required is that drop-outs are monitored and the government ensure girls continue to study at least till Class XII.

Then there is the health sector, which has got into the list of promises. The BJP has promised three AIIMS, one each in North Bengal, Sunderbans and Jungle Mahal area, and a medical college in every district. Plus, it announced that in the first Cabinet meeting it would focus on Pradhan Mantri Jan Aarogya Yojana, which offers up to Rs 5 lakhs in hospital expenses every year to poor households, and health and wellness centres offering free primary care, diagnostics and essential medicines. Interestingly, the TMC government hasn’t implemented PMJAY and instead introduced Swastha Sathi scheme and assured doubling health spending from 0.83% to 1.5% of the state GDP and establishing of medical college-cum-super speciality hospitals in 23 district headquarters.  

Such promises are oft-heard and welcome, but it certainly isn’t going to happen overnight and may only get to see the light of day in next five years, provided more funds are allocated. While infrastructure has been built in States to fight the corona virus, lot more funding is necessary. If at least 1.5% of GDP is allocated to health sector – much less than what 2.5% of GDP that the National Health Policy 2017 had stated -- lot more can be accomplished in rural areas where medical facilities are most needed.

According to Prof. Indranil Mukhopadhyay of O.P. Jindal Global University it would take around Rs 9400 crores per annum to support health and wellness centres. However, the proposed budget for health in the current fiscal is a mere Rs 1900 crores. Even if additional Rs 150 crores is given, it would be much less than what is required for 50,000 centres to offer entire range of services.

So instead of comparing promises, efforts must be made by civic society to raise awareness among the people about these and whether these on the basis of facts can be delivered. This would put pressure on the politicians to deliver and not be allowed to get away with their forked tongues. Plus, a more educated electorate would be in a position to comprehend and demand as has been seen in Tamil Nadu and Kerala in comparison to West Bengal, which is marred in political violence and corruption.   

The big question which needs to be addressed at election time is not which political party will win but whether its manifesto is realistic and people’s needs and demands will be victorious. The electorate must separate the wheat from chaff and keep in mind the Madras High Court’s observation: “Voters are lured to cast votes in their favour by these magical promises. Once in 5 years, this tamasha is being continued for decades together. Promises have always remained as promises...”---INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 7 April 2021 

Eroding Democratic Rights

INDIA’S PLURALITY AT STAKE?

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

Lately reports by independent and reputed agencies batting for democracy and civil rights have downgraded India’s status claiming it is gradually turning into an illiberal democracy and can be counted among the 10 autocratising countries! While the BJP-led NDA government, under fire, has rubbished all such reports, its actions as brought out by these reports and other authorities only heighten the growing concern over blatant attempts to stifle dissent in the country. Rather than ignoring or discounting criticism, the government would do well to view it as ‘constructive criticism’ and work earnestly towards changing its image. 

The V-Dem (Varieties of Democracy) Institute, an independent research organisation based in Sweden, says in ‘Autocratisation Turns Viral: Democracy Report 2021’, the ‘world’s largest democracy has turned into an electoral autocracy. India’s autocratisation process has largely followed the typical pattern for countries in the “Third Wave” over the 10 years: a gradual deterioration where freedom of media, academia, and civil society were curtailed first and to the greatest extent India has turned into an “electoral autocracy.”

Narendra Modi-led BJP to victory in India’s 2014 elections and most of the decline occurred following BJP’s victory and promotion of a Hindu-nationalist agenda, says the report, released last month in the presence of Sweden’s Deputy Foreign Minister Robert Rydberg. ‘India’s level of liberal democracy registered at 0.34 by 2020-end after a steep decline since its high at 0.57 in 2013. This makes it one of the most dramatic shifts among all countries in the world over the past 10 years, alongside autocratising countries like Brazil, Hungary, and Turkey.’

While it said that the ‘overall freedom and fairness of elections also was hard hit, with the last elections held under Modi’s reign in 2019, yet, the diminishing of freedom of expression, the media, and civil society have gone the furthest.’ The Indian government rarely, if ever, used to exercise censorship as evidenced by its score of 3.5 out of 4 before Modi became Prime Minister. By 2020, this score is close to 1.5 meaning that censorship efforts are becoming routine and no longer even restricted to sensitive (to the government) issues. India is, in this aspect, now as autocratic as is Pakistan, and worse than both its neighbours Bangladesh and Nepal.

In general, it says, the Modi-led government has used laws on sedition, defamation, and counter-terrorism to silence critics. For example, over 7,000 people have been charged with sedition after the BJP assumed power and most of the accused are critics of the ruling party.’ The law on defamation has been used frequently to silence journalists and news outlets that take exception to the government’s policies, punishments for which range from two years in prison to life imprisonment for “words, spoken or written, or signs or visible representation that can cause “hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection” toward the government.

“Modi and his party have also placed constraints on civil society and have gone against the constitution’s commitment to secularism. Recently, the UAPA is being used to harass, intimidate, and imprison political opponents, as well as people mobilising to protest government policies.” In addition it is being used to “silence dissent in academia. Universities and authorities have also punished students and activists in universities engaging in protests against the CAA. Civil society is also being muzzled in the autocratization process.”

The development comes just after democracy watchdog, Freedom House, mostly funded by the US government, dropped India from the list of ‘free’ countries and designated it as ‘partly free’. It said: “While India is a multiparty democracy, the government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Hindu nationalist BJP has presided over discriminatory policies and increased violence affecting the Muslim population. The Constitution guarantees civil liberties including freedom of expression and freedom of religion, but harassment of journalists, NGOs, and other government critics has increased significantly under Modi.”

The private media, it said are vigorous and diverse, and investigations and scrutiny of politicians do occur. However, attacks on press freedom have escalated dramatically under the Modi government, and reporting has become significantly less ambitious in recent years. Authorities have used security, defamation, sedition, and hate speech laws, as well as contempt-of-court charges, to quiet critical voices in the media. Hindu nationalist campaigns aimed at discouraging forms of expression deemed “anti-national” have exacerbated self-censorship. Online disinformation from inauthentic sources is ubiquitous in the run-up to elections. Separately, revelations of close relationships between politicians, business executives, and lobbyists, on one hand, and leading media personalities and owners of media outlets, on the other, have dented public confidence in the press.”

A wide variety of NGOs operate, says the report but some, particularly those involved in the investigation of human rights abuses, continue to face threats, legal harassment, excessive police force, and occasionally lethal violence. Since 2015, the government has deregistered nearly 15,000 associations under the FCRA, amendments to which were passed in 2020, without consulting civil society groups and tightened restrictions on foreign funding.

It also said “Academic freedom has significantly weakened in recent years, as intimidation of professors, students, and institutions over political and religious issues has increased. Members of student wing of RSS have engaged in violence on campuses across the country, including attacks on students/professors. Academics face pressure not to discuss topics deemed sensitive by the BJP government, etc.

Again, India was derided as the ‘world’s largest illiberal democracy’ under Modi during a festival of ideas organised by The Financial Times in London, watched in over 100 countries. The comment was made during an exchange between Edward Luce once the FT’s South Asian Bureau Chief and author and journalist Fareed Zakaria, recipient of Padma Bhushan in 2010. Luce said the world’s 10 leading liberal democracies, including the US, “would have to criticise it (Modi government) for turning non-Hindu citizens gradually into second class citizens.” Zakaria pointed out: “what we’re mostly seeing is the degradation of democracy from within – what is happening in Hungary, what is happening in Turkey, what happened in Russia...And what do you do in India (when it) is one of the key perpetrators of the problem rather than a solution to it?”

To a certain extent, the judiciary has been somewhat been critical of government decisions. Recently, the Supreme Court, while quashing the FIR registered against The Shillong Times Editor Patricia Mukhim, stated that free speech cannot be stifled by implicating people in criminal cases. Further, it observed: “Disapprobation of governmental inaction cannot be branded as an attempt to promote hatred between the different communities”, and noted that “India is a plural and multicultural society. The promise of liberty, enunciated in the Preamble, manifests itself in various provisions which outline each citizen’s rights”. 

In the academic realm, the situation is far more distressing as has been manifest by the resignation of two renowned scholars -- Pratap Bhanu Mehta and Arvind Subramanian, from Ashoka University. “My public writing in support of a politics that tries to honour constitutional values of freedom and equal respect for all citizens, is perceived to carry risks for the university,” said Mehta in his resignation letter. Adding “It is clear it is time for me to leave Ashoka. A liberal university will need a liberal political and social context to flourish. I hope the university will play a role in securing that environment. Nietzsche once said that ‘no living for truth is possible in a university.’ I hope that prophecy does not come true.” It is understood that around 90 faculty members expressed solidarity. Worse, 150 academics from Harvard, Yale, Columbia, LSE, MIT questioned Ashoka’s commitment to freedom.

Recall a report way back in 2017 of Pew Research Centre survey which showed 55% Indians support a ‘strongman’ unchecked by Parliament and judiciary and almost half i.e. 53% said military rule would be a good thing. Today, as seen various factors are creating even more apathy towards democracy. When populist nationalism reigns supreme and rulers shower sops and freebies at election time, who cares about democracy and holding leaders accountable? Also when public life is intensely polarised, it is almost impossible to build a consensus on what constitutes danger to freedom.

Unfortunately, Indians don’t usually punish political parties for violating democratic rights. In 1977 elections after Emergency, Indira Gandhi was defeated in North but she got 34.5% vote share in the south. Likewise, Modi government’s crackdown on dissent scarcely seems to influence voters. A national lockdown, announced at 4-hour notice, forcing millions of migrant workers to walk hundreds of miles home, did not affect the BJP’s electoral prospects, as Bihar Assembly elections showed.

In such a precarious situation, while political parties need to think of the country, various stakeholders such as academics, civil society organisations should put additional pressure on the government, both internally and globally. Unless the situation changes, the character, strength of India’s democracy and its social bonding and stratification will get further eroded.---INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 31 March 2021

Budgetary Allocations

NEGLECT OF POOR INEVITABLE!

By Dhurjati Mukherjee

Budgetary allocations are broadly made on the basis of expected revenue mobilisation for the year. Obviously, the criteria in making such allocations are decided by the ruling government in consultation with economists and industry leaders. If one examines the budget for the last 10 years or so, it will be clearly manifest that the bias is for the urban sector and pro-industry where a small segment of the of the population lives.

As is well known, the majority of the population, around 28 to 30 per cent, lives in villages and adjoining areas, but their per capita benefit in every budget is very negligible. The reason for the discrepancy is that funds being limited, allocations have to be made in sectors like defence, space research, railways, higher education etc. Another reason is that life has to be made comfortable for urban living where the upper echelons of society live and work.

India’s late President A. P. J. Kalam though written off as a visionary was also a pragmatist and felt very much for the ordinary, specially students. He talked of PURA (providing urban facilities in rural areas) but this was not possible due to resource constraints as also the mindset of politician and planners. This perhaps cannot be implemented in the coming few years as investing heavily in rural infrastructure is difficult at this juncture.

Thus the dichotomy will remain prevalent in the coming decade or so. The emphasis on technology, on mechanised systems, on largescale automated manufacturing neglected labour intensive small-scale manufacturing, not modernising agriculture – all these may increase GDP but widen inequality among people and further dent the incomes of the impoverished and marginalised sections. Moreover, it is wrong to believe that higher revenues will go the poor; these will be used for projects where the Indian mass will not be benefited by even one per cent.

In the rural and semi-urban areas of the country, the shopkeeper, the small farmer or trader, the fisher folk, and even the thekedar(contractor) will continue to suffer in the coming years. The sudden  lockdown due to the pandemic last year brought untold suffering to the poor and the situation is unlikely to improve this year or even in 2022 though the rich will continue to prosper.

One may refer here to a study released recently by the Washington based non-profit Pew Research which stated that India’s number of poor is expected to have reached 134 million, more than double the 59 million estimated during the recession. Also the country’s middle class is estimated to have shrunk by a third in and the number of the country’s poor more than doubled due to the pandemic triggered recession. As a result of the downturn, India’s middle class shrank by over 32 million from the number it may have reached if there was no pandemic. This accounts for 60 per cent of the global retreat in the number of people in the middle income tier with daily incomes between $10 and $20 or Rs 725 and Rs 140.

While even the number also, according to Pew, is now estimated to be near 66 million, the number of poor in India (with daily incomes of $2 or less i.e. Rs 145 or less) is estimated to have jumped by 75 million due to the Covid-induced recession. This too accounts for nearly 60 per cent of the global increase in poverty. The report also pointed out that the demand for work under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme has been the highest since its inception. But budgetary constraints have reduced its allocation for MGNREGS for 2021-22 though the requirement in this scheme cannot be denied.

All this clearly points to the deprivation of the rural poor, which has been happening for several years.  The induction of technology has motivated the planners to grow faster without examining how to frame a strategy for the economically weaker sections. The assurance of doubling farmers’ income has remained a jargon and even the ruling dispensation is not agreeable to make MSP mandatory for which farmers’ agitation has been continuing and attracted global attention.

Recently, a so-called educationist, writing in one of the biggest national newspapers said the need for labelling school education ‘not-for-profit’ should be changed. And the justification given was that the income generated by schools would help improve the condition of government schools and their functioning. Though the private sector wants to grab the money of the rural mass, as because of the grass-root need, the government should not allow this as social infrastructure remains its critical responsibility.

The disinvestment strategy may be understandable to raise resources to meet the budgetary deficit but the private partner has to outline the plan for increasing efficiency and modernisation through technology upgradation. But while selecting this partner, why is not a strategic plan being called for plans to increase capacity and expand, thereby creating jobs. Only then such disinvestment decisions would become acceptable and laudable.

The government’s resource crunch is understandable but for that the masses should not be made to suffer. Though the government is giving number of doles to various segments of the population, there is no target of job creation and in which sectors. One may mention here that incentives are being given for purchase of solar lights, electric vehicles etc. but no incentive for micro units, cottage industries or even agro-industries. Should not the government think seriously in this regard and evolve effective plans accordingly?

The whole exercise of budget creation by successive governments with much fanfare, introduction of various schemes – sometimes renaming previous schemes – has not been of much help to the marginalised sections. The debate and discussion goes on every year as those who are involved in this exercise are from the upper echelons of society and mostly belong to urban areas.  But such fruitless exercise is just hoodwinking the people whose deprivation and squalor continues. And this is very much evident since April last year due to the pandemic and lockdown, all of which affecting the poor due to loss of livelihood options.    

The country may not be facing a dark future but definitely the income divide will continue and the rural sector and its population will continue to be neglected. Just changing the name of Planning Commission to Niti Aayog has not altered the structure and mechanism of planning and allocation of budgetary resources. But a change is imperative and only time will tell when, if at all, this will be accomplished. But for a transformation to becoming a reality, a change in the mindset of our political leaders as also bureaucrats is imperative. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Open Forum

New Delhi, 24 March 2021

                                                                Medical Education

CAN PPP MODEL DELIVER?  

By Dr. Oishee Mukherjee

It is an unfortunate and well-known fact that the country suffers from an acute shortage of doctors and nurses. Specialists are rarely found in sub-divisions, few are located in small towns and most are concentrated in big cities. Obviously, this sends out a terse message to our policy planners the urgent need to expand health infrastructure and in fact medical education so that it can partially meet the requirements. The Centre as well as State governments have over the years decided that district hospitals should henceforth be set up with public-private participation, meaning in real terms that the private sector take over these health centres.

It is therefore pertinent and prudent to analyse what does it cost to become a doctor and the charges that those wanting to do MBBS entail. As per available data, about 28 per cent of such seats cost over Rs 10 lakh officially but around Rs 50 lakh unofficially. The high fees, obviously, makes these seats a quota for the rich, even larger than those for the SC (15 per cent), ST (7.5 per cent) or OBC (27 per cent).

In fact, about half the seats in private colleges are in the management quota or NRI quota. For all these seats, the total official amount, approved by the Medical Council of India (MCI) or the Dental Council of India (DCI) almost triples for candidates who are enrolled. Even entrance examinations, which are held in medical and dental colleges, are manipulated and those giving the extra amounts find their names in the final list. States like Karnataka, Rajasthan and West Bengal charge heavy premiums, sometimes going up to Rs 80 lakhs.

Even some government colleges, mostly in Rajasthan and Gujarat have management seats. These quota seats range above Rs 10 lakhs, going up to Rs 20 lakhs per annum. In fact, some other States are also planning to introduce management quota to meet their expenses as the official support is meager. Apart from these costs, one must also consider hostel charges and other attendant expenses.

If one considers that 80 per cent of Indian families earned around Rs 10,000 per month, the educational charges for private medical and dental colleges are affordable for the rich and the upper middle class and others would have to take recourse to bank loans. At the same time, having spent a high amount for education in private medical colleges, the doctors would concentrate on recovering the amount by opting for big hospitals in cities and not have the commitment to serve the poor and impoverished.  

The other problem of medical education is the need for its spread and this can only happen if many more such hospitals with medical colleges are set up in districts and sub-divisions. However, the PPP model wouldn’t work well as again the private sector would be looking at making profit. So the question is will private medical colleges look into the larger interest of serving the society and offer options for lower income groups.

Besides, a close look at the recent budget is necessary, where health has been allocated Rs 2.23 lakh crore for ‘health and well-being.’ But this amount includes outlays for drinking water and sanitation (Rs 60,030 crore), nutrition (Rs 2700 crore), Covid-19 vaccine related allocation (Rs 35,000 crore) and Finance Commission’s grants (Rs 48,214 crore for health and water and sanitation). The allocations reveal that the budget for health and family welfare has decreased in absolute terms by Rs 8349 crore from 2020-21 (from Rs 85,251 crore and revised estimates Rs 76,902 in 29021-22). The government’s flagship programme, Ayushman Bharat has not seen much increase while the National Health Mission (NHM) in rural and urban areas has been increased by a paltry amount.

The only silver lining is that the PM Atmanirbhar Swasth Bharat Yojana shall have an outlay of over Rs 64,000 crore over a period of six years to upgrade primary, secondary and tertiary care facilities, strengthen existing heal institutions, building new institutions for research etc. However, all these are at the announcement stage with no reflected in the budget document.

In such a situation, the government has virtually no plans or programmes to set up hospitals to impart medical education on a bigger scale. The need for medical education being within the reach of the lower segments of society is what it needs to ponder over. This also brings to the fore the bigger challenge of various health facilities being made available to the marginalised sections.

The elitist character of successive governments, and including the NDA, sadly has not given the health sector the attention it deserves so that prevalent communicable and non-communicable diseases are brought under control. Moreover, if students from low income groups of rural and semi-urban areas get medical education, the shortage of doctors in the countryside will no longer be a problem and adequate health facilities could in the near future in rural health centres may become a reality.

It is indeed tragic that while we boast of being an emerging economy, the allocation towards health has been much less than most countries in spite of repeated promises. Even in the recent Economic Survey it has been pointed out that India should increase its spending on health from an average of 1 per cent to 2.5 per cent of GDP, as aspired in the National Health Policy of 2017. Earlier also, during the last decade or so, experts have repeatedly pointed out that at least 2 per cent of GDP should be allotted towards health but this has never been dome.

There is also no sustained action plan about the geographical spread of diseases and the need to set up health centres in rural areas and hospitals in blocks of backward regions. Though figures are dished out regarding shortage of doctors and nurses, precious little has been done, except privatising medical education and facilities that help the upper middle class. For a country of India’s stature, the scenario speaks very poorly of the political leadership and its reluctance to go all out to a lot more as desired.   

The government must ask itself whether it really wants that the lower echelons of society to enter the field of medical education as also ensuring that these are not deprived of their rightful due. The elitist and pro-capitalist outlook needs to change so that the silent majority can enter the mainstream of life and activity and ensure a healthy and robust society, at every level. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)