|
|
|
|
|
Building infrastructure
Passage to reform |
|
|
Protect children
From Prague to Berlin
No, not the cops!
Weighing response to rural suicides
|
Building infrastructure
The
Manmohan Singh government plans to launch infrastructure projects worth Rs 1 lakh crore in six months in partnership with private companies. This may surprise analysts who see the UPA in an election mode - more interested in vote-catching welfare programmes like the food security Bill towards the end of its term rather than undertake long-term development projects. But the reformers and economists in the government have apparently not yet handed over charge to poll managers. If kicked off as proposed, such projects can activate the economy by building roads, ports, airports and highways as well as generating employment. A steering group has been set up under the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister to "guide and monitor" progress on proposed projects. The UPA government's performance does not inspire much hope. Besides, the overall environment is not very conducive to capital-intensive ventures. There is also the fear that projects could hit ministerial, bureaucratic, environmental or judicial hurdles. Land disputes, litigation and delays in environmental clearances have held up projects amounting to Rs 7 lakh crore. What is the guarantee that the new projects would not meet the same fate? One may legitimately ask: why not push the projects already approved before taking up new ones? A major constraint to infrastructure building is capital. Interest rates are already high and the RBI has shown no inclination to cut them in the near future. Infrastructure companies reel under heavy debt and are abandoning projects already undertaken, frustrated by delays causing cost-overruns. Foreign investment in development works is meagre. With the Federal Reserve hinting at raising interest rates, foreign capital parked in equities and debt is flowing out of the country. The Japanese have committed to invest in dedicated rail freight corridor projects, which are to speed up goods movement from northern India to eastern and western parts but progress has been terribly slow due to Japan's domestic problems and uncertain global conditions. Upgrading rail/road/air connectivity is a tough challenge, no doubt. Given the constraints, one hopes the UPA follows its announcements with action on the ground.
|
|
Passage to reform
A
broad immigration reforms Bill has been passed in the US Senate after months of debate. The 68-32 vote for the Bill, however, is no indication of any widespread support that it has. Rather, the Bill is expected to have a rough passage in the House of Representatives which is more conservative. The US is a land of immigrants, but it has been less than welcoming to potential immigrants in the recent past. While on the one end of the spectrum are the millions of largely poor undocumented immigrants, on the other are the numerically few highly skilled immigrants from countries like India who seek to work legally in the US. Both will be affected by the Bill. While the Bill promises a passage to citizenship for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants, it also proposes to boost spending on border security. The growing influence of Latino votes is seen as a factor in changing electoral calculations, and has helped garner support for the Bill, not only from Democrats but also from some Republicans. Indian IT firms, however, look at the proposals with a degree of concern. While the Bill proposes to increase the cap on H-1B visas from 65,000 to 1,10,000, it also has some clauses that Nasscom and Indian IT companies are finding restrictive. The outplacement clause would not allow firms with over 15 per cent of their employees on H-1B visas to deploy their human resource in American companies. Indian IT companies would be particularly affected by this clause. The proposal to double the visa fees of H1B visas, and some disclosure requirements would also pose difficulties for IT companies. In the months to come, much bipartisan jockeying will take place as the Bill is steered through the House of Representatives. It is doubtful if the Bill would be passed in its present form, and many special interest groups are already presenting their point of view to the members of the House, as are the Indian IT companies. In any case, the H1B reforms are a small part of this Bill, focused as it is on better patrolling of borders and giving illegal immigrants living in the US a legal status.
|
|
|
Protect children
In
a country where children are not safe, where the degrading and debilitating practice of corporal punishment is rampant across schools, any step to ensure the welfare of schoolchildren is more than welcome. The Maharashtra Government is considering taking to task teachers and school administrations on the issue of corporal punishment. Besides, it will cover many more significant concerns that affect school students. Its draft child policy, which seeks to expand the provisions of the Right to Education (RTE) Act, will also take into account verbal insult, discrimination of children from economically and socially backward classes and the ludicrous system of interviewing toddlers for admission. There can be no two opinions on securing the best interests of the children. But the moot question is whether more laws can usher in a change when the existing ones have failed to be effective. The RTE already classifies mental harassment as part of corporal punishment. Unfortunately, be it the NCPCR (National Commission for Protection of Child Rights) guidelines, the Supreme Court’s ban or the RTE’s definition of what constitutes corporal punishment, none of it is being implemented in letter or spirit. Time and again shocking tales of horror have brought out the brutality of misguided teachers. Outrageous acts of individual teachers as well as studies have underlined the pervasiveness of punitive measures often erroneously perceived as a disciplining tool. While there is little doubt that corporal punishment needs to be eliminated from schools, it can’t be seen as an anti-teacher measure. Unfortunately, all debates and endeavours to create a deterrent are perceived as inimical to teachers and teaching. Until teachers as well as society realise that harsh methods can only harden attitudes and undermine the confidence of children, the Supreme Court’s observation, “Children are not subjected to corporal punishment in schools and that they receive education in an environment of freedom and dignity, free from fear” will not be adhered to by those at the helm. It must also be realised that education and teaching methods are not simply a teacher-taught issue but one that needs to be addressed by the state as well.
|
|
|
Adopt the pace of nature: her secret is patience. —Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
From Prague to Berlin
Speaking
at Brandenburg Gate in Berlin in mid-June, US President Barack Obama once again outlined his vision for nuclear disarmament. He expressed his commitment to a “world without nuclear weapons – no matter how distant that dream might be.” Earlier, in a stirring speech at Prague in April 2009, Obama had called for strengthening the global effort to curb the spread of nuclear weapons, move forward on long-overdue disarmament measures and prevent nuclear terrorism. He had reiterated “clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” However, his present plans fall much short of the promises made at Prague. At Berlin, President Obama offered to work with the Russians to reduce the number of deployed nuclear warheads from 1,550 by February 2018, agreed under the New START treaty – which had reduced these from 2,200, to about 1,000. He also said that he would seek “bold reductions” in the 500 short-range nuclear weapons that are in the US arsenal at present. However, he did not mention anything about the approximately 11,000 nuclear warheads that the US and Russia hold in reserve. He could have also offered to remove from hair-trigger alert half to two-thirds of the warheads that are kept ready to be fired at a moment’s notice as such a move would have been a genuinely bold step and a huge confidence building measure. Obama paid lip service to the long-pending ratification of the CTBT by the US Senate and the stalled negotiations on the FMCT at Geneva – primarily due to Pakistan’s opposition. Because of the vested interests of the five original nuclear weapons states (NWS) in seeking to retain their arsenals for the foreseeable future, progress towards total nuclear disarmament has been frustratingly slow even though their salience in military strategy has been reduced. In February 2000, while addressing the UN Advisory Board on Disarmament, then Secretary-General Kofi Annan chided the NWS for their lack of commitment to nuclear disarmament and warned of a dangerous new arms race looming large on the horizon. He said, “If we are to even dream of a world free of nuclear weapons by the end of the 21st century, we should start taking new and effective measures for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation right now.” However, such calls continue to go unheeded and there is little urgency in the deliberations at the Conference on Disarmament at Geneva. The only good news is that more and more individuals and NGOs are now coming forward and asking why nuclear weapons should not be eliminated from the face of the earth. In January 2007, George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Henry A. Kissinger and Sam Nunn wrote a seminal article in the Wall Street Journal entitled “A World Free of Nuclear Weapons”. They recommended changing the Cold War posture of deployed nuclear weapons to reduce the danger of accidental or unauthorised detonations, continuing to reduce substantially the size of nuclear forces in all states that possess them and eliminating short-range nuclear weapons designed to be forward-deployed. Since then, seven former US secretaries of state, seven former national security advisers, and five former secretaries of defense have endorsed the Shultz-Perry-Kissinger proposal to free the world of nuclear weapons. The growing list of supporters for a nuclear-free world includes 17 former cabinet members as well as former generals, senior officials, non-proliferation scholars and politicians such as former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. India’s stand on nuclear disarmament has been consistent since the days of Jawaharlal Nehru. His successors continued to emphasise nuclear disarmament. On December 15, 1998, then Prime Minister Vajpayee had spelt out the principal elements of India’s nuclear policy in a statement in Parliament. These included, “India’s resolve to preserve its nuclear independence, minimum nuclear deterrence, no first use, non-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear powers, and a firm commitment to the elimination of nuclear weapons.” Vajpayee had also reiterated India’s willingness to sign the CTBT and re-stated India’s readiness to work towards the successful conclusion of the Fissile Materials Cut-off Treaty (FMCT). At the summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Durban in 1998, NAM leaders accepted India’s proposal for an international conference to arrive at an agreement on a phased programme for the complete elimination of all nuclear weapons. At the Millennium Summit of the United Nations in September 2000, the Indian Prime Minister had asserted that India’s policy is based on “responsibility and restraint” and that India would continue to press for universal, verifiable nuclear disarmament with undiminished commitment, even while safeguarding “our strategic space and autonomy in decision-making. International peace cannot be divorced from the need for equal and legitimate security for all.” One of the distinguishing features of India’s nuclear doctrine proposed by the NSAB in August 1999 was that it was “… anchored in India’s continued commitment to global, verifiable and non-discriminating nuclear disarmament…” that has been described as India’s national security objective. The use of nuclear weapons was considered “the gravest threat to humanity and to peace and stability in the international system.” The doctrine paper clearly pointed out India’s desire to see the world completely rid of nuclear weapons. India’s policy should work in parallel along twin tracks: continue to enhance the quality of India’s nuclear deterrence while simultaneously working to achieve total nuclear disarmament in as early a timeframe as possible. India would benefit immensely as total or universal nuclear disarmament will change the strategic equation in South Asia in India’s favour and make India an economic and military superpower to reckon with. Sooner rather than later, these individual efforts will become an unstoppable torrent and governments will be forced to sit up and take serious note of the groundswell of public opinion. The NWS will then be forced to seriously take up total nuclear disarmament – something that the Delhi Declaration of 1988 had coldly called for.n The writer is a Delhi-based strategic analyst.
|
||||
No, not the cops! Sears
or Marshal, Old Navy or Target, Fred Myer or Costco — they are all huge stores in the US. As huge as malls or even film studios. We got trapped once in Baton Rouge, the capital of the state of Louisiana, from where Bobby Jindal of Malerkotla made it to the gubernatorial office, although claiming he still loved the ‘red blood,’ rubbishing his desi roots, while his folks at home celebrated his rise in an alien land. Though I had some European experience earlier in life, the lifestyle they follow in the US came to shake hands with me as late as 2002. We were then on an official assignment to that great country. The University of Louisiana had put us in Hotel Holiday Inn on the main highway, which in the US is not at all made for the pedestrians. But we, not only risking life but being a little too audacious and adventurous, crossed it at leisure, with impunity and smoothness of an eel slipping on the silky surface, not being hurt, thankfully, though we had the motorists giving us frowns and mouthfuls too. Walmart, a middle class general store for grocery, etc, was about three kilometres away across the highway when two of us marched to it on the very first day of our landing there. We weren’t then very aware of the store-protocol of finding the stuff, payments and exiting. Deeply absorbed in trying to fit into many pairs of shoes strewn by us around, we didn’t notice when the store was to close for the day. It was a deep bay, far away from the main entry and we could not know when everyone around moved out, including the staff managing the counters. When we walked up to the counters, we noticed none there. Bamboozled, we looked around and realised that we were trapped inside the store for the night. Apprehensions came to the mind with abiding flit. We shall be taken to be trespassers! We would be held guilty of shop-lifting! We might be put through detailed ‘questioning’ by the FBI! We might be taken to be terrorists caught in the act of planting something inside a store thronged by the general public! O my God! What have we done? How to get out of here? Even if we find an outlet, the area is not safe. We had been warned of mugging and assaults while being briefed at the hotel just the previous night. What would the folks back home think of us? Newspapers would carry news about our spending time in jail while in America. All this flashed on the mind’s screen in a split second. Luckily, we reverted to the back-end office where – as if an angel and a saviour — one man finding us there exclaimed, “Hey! What are you guys doing here?” There was enough wonderment than contempt in his remark. We told him about what had happened. Finding us genuine people, he let us phone the taxi service who demanded a 15 dollars charge to which we said ‘no’. Multiply the dollar by 60 as today and you would really empathise. However, we told the man that we were cops from India. He gave us a good KPS Gill-look and enquired appearing a tad serious but with his tongue firmly in his cheek, ”‘Now, do you want me to call the cops or a taxi?” “No, not the cops!” we barked in unison. Back in the hotel, we cursed the fellow officers, swearing a thousand raw expletives we hadn’t used all our life, for they hadn’t shown any camaraderie in our
rescue.
|
||||
Weighing response to rural suicides In
February this year the Government of Punjab began the disbursal of the promised compensation/rehabilitation to the next of kin of the debt-related rural suicide victims. Suicides are a very sensitive issue in Punjab's villages and one would expect that if the Akali-led state government is now actively implementing a programme to compensate and rehabilitate the next of kin of these victims, it would strongly redound to the party's credit. Instead, villagers are as keenly aware of the programme's negative points as they are of its positive points. The first of the negative points is the way the number of eligible families was determined. After a state-wide survey (wrongly termed as a "census") to determine the number of cases, the list of suicides numbered 6,476 of which 4,687 were accepted as debt-related for the period 2000 to 2011. The number of rural families enduring severe privation on account of the suicide by the bread-winner in the debt-related cases vastly exceeds 4,687. Earlier reports by several State-sponsored research agencies point to an average of about 2,000 a year. Human rights and farmers unions' estimates are much higher. Eligibility for compensation Care needs to be taken in ascertaining eligibility. Information regarding debt is collected from the widow. If her husband owes a debt the widow may not know, or even if she knows in a general way, she may not know the specific amount and to whom it is owed. Information gathered from the panchayat at a collective meeting is more reliable. Investigation in the presence of the entire panchayat also steers the investigator clear of the sarpanch's possible party or group biases. In Bathinda and Sangrur, both badly affected by rural suicides, villagers point out that their districts were covered in a pilot study conducted in 2008. For other districts the period was 2000 to 2011. Between 2008 and 2011 many more farmers and farm labourers in these districts committed suicide but their cases were not tallied. They want a gap-filler investigation to be conducted to bring the toll for their districts up to 2011 like the rest of the state - and this second investigation should be a door-to-door census. Better yet, a real census should be repeated for the entire state, taking cases up to date. Another point is that compensation should be given to the next of kin of all debt-related suicide cases, including those in which gram panchayat affadavits were given to the government prior to the official survey. Delay in rehabilitation As early as 1990 the Punjab government received reports that economic distress was driving farmers and farm labourers to take their lives. The government examined those reports and found them to be correct. This made Punjab the first state in the country to have this information. However, Punjab was not the first state to attempt the rehabilitation of the families of suicide victims. Southern states came forward much earlier and the eligibility for compensation was dated to 1995. Compensation packages in some southern states also included a house and a job. It was not until 2001 that Punjab officially acknowledged rural suicides. In that year, the Shiromani Akali Dal-led Punjab Government Budget sanctioned Rs 2.5 lakh for the next of kin of rural suicide victims. This amount was not disbursed despite the government remaining in power for a year after the announcement. The SAD returned to power in 2007 and again in 2012. In the state's 2012 Budget, sanction was given for Rs.2 lakh compensation to the next of kin of each debt-related suicide victim. In other words, as inflation soared over the years, the SAD government reduced the amount per recipient. The state government has now paid a first installment of Rs.1 lakh up to 2006. The balance is to be paid in the following year. The state knows that inflation is eating away at the balance every day but there is no mention of adjusting for this. An approach to compensation/rehabilitation emerged from the 2006 Punjab Farmers Commission's report. The Commission recommended for the rural suicide next of kin a lumpsum payment of Rs 50,000 and a monthly pension of Rs 1,500. This recommendation was rejected by Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, as in his view "handing out Rs. 2 lakh looks better". From the political point of view, a lumpsum compensation may "look better" but other modes of compensation/rehabilitation may in fact be more advantageous for the affected families. For instance, a large lump-sum payment will surely attract the arthiyas/moneylenders. A lumpsum payment is likely to mean that the money leaves the recipient's hand on the very day it arrives - grabbed by the very creditors who drove the suicide victim to end his life in the first place. If the party's approach to rural suicides has made the Akali's appear to be willfully blind, villagers see the Punjab Congress party as the mindless slave of its "High Command" which is totally identified with national level corporate interests. It is not difficult to see why the Congress is blamed. The year 2006 saw the Prime Minister's rehabilitation package for farmers in the suicide-prone districts of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Maharashtra. Under the package, Rs. 9,650.55 crore has been allocated to Andhra Pradesh, Rs. 2,689.64 crore to Karnataka, Rs. 765.24 crore to Kerala and Rs. 3,873.26 crore to Maharashtra. Punjab has got nothing. The
debt write-off In the Union Budget of 2008-09 the Finance Minister announced a massive debt write-off to the tune of Rs.70,000 crore of farmers' outstanding loans. Punjab's share was around 1 per cent although Punjab's contribution to the central foodgrain pool is in excess of 50 per cent. The 1 per cent to Punjab in the Central package was meant to cloud the reality of rural suicides in Punjab. The reasoning of the Union Government seems to run like this: Punjab, by definition, is "the most agriculturally progressive state" and therefore "immune to suicides". The actual position is that, proportionate to the population, rural suicides in Punjab are far more than in other states Both the Centre and the Punjab government have tried many subterfuges to hide the truth about rural suicides. It has been made out that only farmers commit suicide, when in fact the entire rural sector is stricken. Labourers, village artisans and village shopkeepers are also driven to suicide because they are all tied to the economic position of the village. This is true of all rural areas in all states and not just Punjab. Again and again, the villager has seen the government tie itself in knots in its effort to evade the plain truth about Punjab's agrarian crisis. Before Khalistan everything was blamed on Naxalites. The Naxalites were wiped out and when trouble arose again it was blamed on Khalistan. Now the government wavers between declaring that agrarian unrest is 'unreal' or that it is real but it is not agrarian and sometimes the government declares that Naxalites are regrouping and sometimes it says that the Khalistanis are coming back. And all this time, Punjab's village communities are saying: 'Look at us … we are just farmers and all we want is a fair deal.' This is the basic political issue in rural Punjab no matter which election is impending. The writer is a retired Punjab
legislator and a human rights activist
What should be done
Here's what ought to be done to tackle not just the compensation issue but suicides per se
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
