 |
|
Oh, Kolkata! Police in the dock |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Enough is enough Karnataka must go in for fresh polls With Karnataka having come under President’s rule for the second time on Tuesday in less than one and a half months, there is a clear case for fresh elections in the southern state. There is no point in trying to form a coalition government again if the situation is such that it cannot last even for a few days.
N-deal — one more
step forward
In spite of my
tooth
Record numbers seek
new lives abroad Overseas students
boost UK economy Stem cell debate
may get reshaped Freebies land
Punjab in trouble
|
|
Police in the dock The
Punjab Police frequently gets a dressing-down from the Punjab and Haryana High Court and, despite harsh strictures, its functioning does not show any signs of improvement. On Tuesday the court heard a complaint from a woman who was an eyewitness to her father’s murder. An inquiry by one gazetted officer of the police gave findings in favour of one party, while the findings of another inquiry by a gazetted officer went in favour of the other party. Such multiple inquiries often help the accused escape punishment. “This is a very unfortunate and sorry state of affairs, which should be looked into and remedied by the powers-that-be”, observed Justice L. N. Mittal. It is common for even very senior police officers entrusted with the task of holding inquiries to give clean chits to their erring colleagues. This makes the aggrieved parties to demand a CBI inquiry and even courts, on finding shoddy or biased investigations, hand over cases to the Central agency. Quite often police officers indicted for acts of omission or commission get away lightly because of political protection they enjoy. The Punjab Police is heavily politicised and is used by ruling politicians for settling personal scores with opponents. Rivalry among officers also results in the non-professional functioning of the force. Custodial deaths are not uncommon in the state lock-ups. Punjab has been flat-footed in implementing the police reforms ordered by the Supreme Court. The state government and its bloated bureaucracy chunk which is in uniform do not want to let go the hold on the police. If the investigation and prosecution wings of the police are separated, the senior officers are given a fixed posting for at least three years and all postings and appointments are made on merit, the rot can be checked considerably. What is also wanted is a change in the attitude of the police which is often found hostile to the people whom it is supposed to serve. |
|
Enough is enough With
Karnataka having come under President’s rule for the second time on Tuesday in less than one and a half months, there is a clear case for fresh elections in the southern state. There is no point in trying to form a coalition government again if the situation is such that it cannot last even for a few days. It would be in the interest of the state to ignore senior JD (S) leader M. P. Prakash’s latest claim that at least 35 MLAs belonging to his 57-member party were ready to support the Congress if it initiates a government-forming drive in Bangalore. A marriage of convenience with the Congress is not a new idea. It was thrown up earlier too, but without success. The JD (S) of former Prime Minister H. D. Deve Gowda ditched the Congress in the midst of the talks and agreed to form a government with the BJP. The Congress will burn its fingers as has the BJP. No new experiment is possible under the circumstances. What came to be described as the first BJP-led ministry in the South had to go even before it faced the confidence vote on the floor of the Assembly. Mr Deve Gowda’s party came up with a 12-point MOU to be signed between the two partners, but it was not acceptable to the BJP. The saffron party wanted the JD (S) to support its government in the manner it did after the two came together in January last year as part of a 20-20 power-sharing formula. This was rejected by the JD (S) and the result is the dead lock in the Assembly. Karnataka, one of the country’s leading states, has been suffering since October when the H. D. Kumaraswamy-led JD (S) ministry could not be replaced by a BJP-led government as could be expected in view of the 20-20 formula. The BJP had to suffer for pinpricking the JD (S). The state came under Central rule on October 9, but efforts for political rapprochement led to the formation of the B. S. Yeddyurappa ministry on November 12. It, however, resigned on November 20 without getting a chance to govern. The truth is that all parties have played their role in muddying Karnataka politics. Enough is enough. There seems to be no alternative to dissolving the Assembly and going in for fresh elections to let the people throw out the junk and the fickle. |
|
Every man desires to live long; but no man would be old.
— Jonathan Swift |
N-deal — one more step forward
It has apparently been decided that Parliament will discuss the Indo-US nuclear agreement on November 27 if, of course, it is able to discuss any issue at all, given the MPs’ performance nowadays. In the meanwhile, the UPA-Left consultations appear to have resulted in some sort of a partial compromise with the Left “allowing” the government to start negotiations with the IAEA on an “India-specific” safeguards agreement. The situation is reminiscent of a hostage drama with the government as hostage. The objections to the agreement are by now well known: the BJP’s concern that the 123 Agreement will adversely affect India’s weapons programme and India’s ability to test in the future, and the Left’s continuing opposition to the Agreement because it is with the US. In spite of several articles on these subjects by individuals for and against the deal, it has to be recognised that the government itself did not adequately prepare public opinion on the reasons why the deal was seen as so important for the country. Responses have either been technical or legalistic, making sense and being of interest to only to a very small group of persons who have been diligently following the two-year journey of the Agreement. The steps taken so far in the process of freeing India from the technology denial regimes have included the separation plan: a proposal by India to separate its civilian and non-civilian nuclear facilities by 2014 (to enable international cooperation with the civilian facilities), the waiver by the US Congress of restrictions on the US Administration to enter into cooperative relations with India in the civil nuclear area, and in August this year a bilateral agreement between the US and India on such cooperation. The next equally difficult steps are also known: India has to enter into safeguards agreements with the IAEA, the 45-member NSG has to agree to “exceptionalise” India from the global restrictions on nuclear and other dual-use trade in all high-tech trade and commerce that may have applications in India’s military nuclear programme, and a final approval from the US Congress and the Indian Cabinet to all the steps negotiated. Implementation of the Agreement can only then begin. The current approach by the Indian Government to the IAEA is, therefore, only one more step. Before commenting on the safeguards agreements, it is necessary to recall that India already has four of its reactors, including two indigenously built ones, under IAEA safeguards; the two new Russian-aided reactors coming up at Koodankulam will also be under safeguards. At a very basic level, these safeguards entail inspections by IAEA inspectors to ensure that none of the material safeguarded, or the reactor itself if it is safeguarded, is diverted to the military programme. Non-nuclear-weapon states, members of the NPT cannot have any military programmes; the inspections are, therefore, to ensure that no clandestine activity is taking place. In the case of the NPT nuclear-weapon States, which have offered facilities for safeguards, their military programmes are recognised by the NPT. India’s will be a special case: as a non-signatory to the NPT, its military programme has been recognised by the very fact of its having a separation plan. However, the IAEA will presumably have to ensure that there is no “leakage” from one programme to another as in the case of the NPT nuclear-weapon states. In addition, India is likely to ask for some assurances of fuel supplies to those facilities that will be put under safeguards. This is not usual in safeguards agreements but could be a precedent. For some time now, the world has been grappling with the problem of the disposal of huge quantities of weapons grade fissile material released from the dismantling of weapons and produced as waste from nuclear reactors and the rising demand for civilian nuclear energy in a market where oil prices have reached the $ 100 bbl mark. The US has proposed a programme called GNEP; the Russians have offered, particularly in the context of the Iranian problem, to convert the waste into fuel for energy and to export the energy to meet the requirements of the countries that need it. The IAEA itself has a proposal for a fuel “bank”, which would make the availability of energy more equitable and avoid the pitfalls of the NPT-type discrimination. India’s request for fuel supply in perpetuity could very well be adjusted into this context, perhaps as an addendum to the safeguards agreement. The safeguards agreement to be negotiated with the IAEA is likely to follow the usual “facility-specific” or “item-specific” pattern. An additional requirement that India is likely to insist on in the safeguards agreement is that of “corrective measures” that India might be forced to undertake should fuel supplies be disrupted for whatever reason. (This is clear in the 123 Agreement). What would this mean? Would this imply a termination clause for the safeguards agreement? Should this be left for negotiation at a later date? Since it is linked to the concept of safeguards “in perpetuity”, the issue is likely to be an extremely difficult one to overcome. The objections of the political parties in India will remain despite the Prime Minister’s hope for a viable consensus. The solution to these challenges lies in the political and not the substantive
domain. The writer is a former Ambassador of India to the UN at Geneva
|
In spite of my tooth I could not sleep the other night because my molar was paining. The English Digest says that toothache is a pain that drives you to extraction, so I made up my mind to get it pulled out next morning. While in excruciating pain, my first thought revolved around cause and effect theory because “nothing prompts the payment of an old dental bill like a new toothache.” I checked and found that the dentist page in my Account Book was in my favour. Like all mortals in agony, I remembered God too. But with my wisdom tooth intact, I also chanted, “dukh mein sumiran sab karen….” “All remember Him in times of sorrow and grief, but none during ease and comfort. Had we remembered Him in happy times, than why would there be unhappiness.” I promised to the Almighty to spend longer hours in daily pooja, once I am relieved of this pain. I also thought of legendry Lukman Hakim. Lukman, it is said, had panacea for all illnesses. But when a person swimming in the same filth, in which I was on the dreadful night, approached Lukman, he advised him to get the tooth extracted. Even the Solomon of Hakims had no remedy for aching tooth except to get it pulled out. Lastly, I wished to borrow Hanuman’s powers tofly towards the sun and pull it to the horizon so that the dentist opened up his clinic early. If wishes were horses! I, of necessity, showed patient’s patience and entered the clinic on my turn and swearing ABCD at the tooth asked the doctor to do away with the awful, blasted, cursed, darned tooth. My dentist is a witty fellow. He asked me to desist from singing out and jovially remarked that the profession in which he was, everybody showed him the teeth, despite that he never lost his cool. He objected to the use of expletives that I had used for the tooth and said, “We have to save it. We are here to save the teeth and not to make your mouth look like one of the caves of Ajanta without paintings.” He then gave me a million dollar advice, “A tooth in the socket is better than a diamond in the pocket.” I said, “Doctor, the number of sittings that I will have to give for the tooth to be in the socket, the diamond will move from mine to your pocket.” He smiled. I also smiled — in spite of my
tooth. |
Record numbers seek new lives abroad For
decades it has been the dream of millions, but for an increasing number of Britons it is becoming a reality. New figures show the number of people leaving the country to start a new life abroad has reached record levels, with almost 600 emigrating every day. Attracted by the prospect of better pay or warmer climes, 207,000 UK nationals left the country for good last year in search of a better quality of life. Australia, Spain and France were the most popular destinations, with the US and New Zealand also proving popular. Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that with 591,000 people settling in this country in 2006, the UK's overall population grew by 191,000 in 2006. The figures were hailed as proof that Britain in the 21st century has become a global hub for the mass movement of people, with record numbers moving in and out of the country. Danny Sriskandarajah, the head of migration at the Institute for Public Policy Research, said: "More people are on the move than ever before, with a million emigrants and immigrants crossing our borders last year. This suggests the UK is seeing revolving turnstiles and not overrun floodgates." The figures illustrate the pressures that ministers face as they try to defuse the politically explosive issue of immigration. With newcomers heading for all parts of the country, the report underlined the challenge that many communities face in absorbing immigrants. But Mr Sriskandarajah said politicians needed to beware of reacting hastily amid an increasingly heated debate. "The challenge for policymakers is to make the most of the opportunities that migration presents while minimising any negative impacts," he said. The ONS said 207,000 UK nationals left Britain last year, equivalent to 567 every day. Another 193,000 foreigners returned home after settling in this country. The total number of people leaving Britain – 400,000 – was the highest recorded by the ONS. Just over 100,000 were taking up a new job, with another 82,000 emigrating to find work. The rest were retiring, moving to be with relatives abroad or studying overseas. In the majority of cases, the moves – in and out of the country – were driven by financial reasons. "It is clear immigration is an economic phenomenon, with almost half of those immigrating and emigrating doing so for work-related reasons," said Mr Sriskandarajah. "This mobility will be increasingly important for the UK's long-term economic prospects." Australia was by far the most popular destination, with 100,000 heading Down Under, Australians returning home after working in Britain and UK nationals emigrating. Some 56,000 people moved to Spain and 40,000 to France. More than 20,000 east European workers returned home, predominantly to Poland. More people are on the move around the world than ever before and Britain is top of the list for many English-speaking migrants. Equally, the rise of multi-national companies is tempting more UK workers to take jobs abroad. And soaring numbers of British "baby boomers", retiring on comfortable pensions, are opting to join thousands of expatriate Britons already abroad. The ONS statistics showed that 591,000 people arrived in 2006 – an increase of 5,000 on the year before. This prompted criticism from Tories of the Government's immigration policy and calls from anti-immigration campaigners for a tightening of border controls. But there were calls elsewhere for a more balanced approach. Jeremy Browne, for the Liberal Democrats, accused the Tories of being "small in their outlook", adding: "We should celebrate the contribution that has been made by people from outside the UK while at the same time recognising the pressures on some public services." By arrangement with
The Independent |
|
Overseas students boost UK economy A
record 157,000 overseas students took up places in British universities and colleges last year. The Home Office said yesterday that international students boosted the economy by almost £8.5bn a year. More than 25 per cent of immigrants to Britain are students, compared with 20 per cent five years ago. The influx follows concerted efforts by many higher education institutions to market their wares abroad and boost their income. Fierce competition has developed between vice-chancellors to sell places on their courses to foreigners. The battle rages as UK universities prove increasingly popular, with demand being driven by strong performances in international league tables and a growing number of English speakers around the world. The number of foreign students has doubled since 1998, when 77,000 arrived. Last year's total was an 18,000 increase on 2005. Each foreign student is estimated to be worth more than £15,000 to the UK in fees and living expenses. But there are fears that the income stream may slow as new rules on student visas come into force next year. China is by far the largest source of foreign students studying at British universities, with more than 52,000 people coming to study in the UK in 2005-06. Indian students make up the second-largest group with nearly 16,000 students, ahead of the US, with 14,000. Business and administration was the most popular subject among students from abroad, followed by engineering and technology. University College London was the largest recruiter of overseas students, with nearly 6,000 on its books, but the London School of Economics topped the list of universities dominated by overseas undergraduates and postgraduates, with 64 per cent coming from overseas. A spokesman for Universities UK hailed the rising number of students and academics choosing to work and study in Britain. He said: " International students and academics also provide an immeasurable academic, cultural, and social benefit to the UK generally. By contrast, 19,000 people left Britain last year to study overseas, a number that has stayed broadly similar for a decade.
|
|
|
Stem cell debate may get reshaped The
discovery that it is possible to create equivalents to embryonic stem cells without destroying embryos has the potential to reshape – and perhaps defuse – the acrimonious political debate that has raged ever since human embryonic stem cells were discovered in 1998. Even before the research was officially published on Tuesday, White House officials began making the case that the studies vindicated the President's unwavering six-year opposition to funding for embryo cell research and his longstanding position that scientific progress is possible without offending the morality of millions of Americans. "The science has overtaken the politics," Karl Zinsmeister, the chief domestic policy adviser to President Bush, said in an interview on Tuesday. "If you set reasonable parameters and offer a lot of encouragement and public funding, science will solve this dilemma and you don't have to have a culture war about this." Others involved in the stem cell debate cautioned that much work remains to be done to prove the value of the new cells. No one yet knows, for example, whether conventional embryonic stem cells may ultimately prove more effective than the new cells against certain diseases, or whether the new cells will even prove safe for use in people. For those reasons, several said, it would be wrong to halt efforts to loosen the president's controversial restrictions on federal funding for stem cell research, which prevent federal dollars from going to research on cells from embryos destroyed after August 9, 2001. "I don't think this changes the debate," said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., a key participant in the House debate. "We still need to encourage all types of research, and we need to put ethical oversight in place." "While this is exciting basic research, it could still take years to get this to work in humans in a way that could be used clinically," said Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer of Advanced Cell Technology in Worcester, Mass. "I cannot overstate that this is early stage research, and that we should not abandon other areas of stem cell research." Still, even skeptics of the president's approach acknowledged that the new findings could make it more difficult to keep up the political momentum for embryo research, even if scientists say it is too soon to abandon it. Most immediately, some said, it could hurt the effort to override Bush's June veto of a bill that would have loosened the rules on federal funding. Although the House is far short of the votes needed for an override, the Senate has for some time been within one vote of accomplishing it, and Democratic leaders had hoped to make that symbolic gesture as an election year slap against the Bush administration. With a viable alternative to embryonic cells now possibly available, the likelihood of finding a 67th vote may be lower, advocates acknowledged. President Bush has been signaling for some time his hope that science may help find a way out of the ethical issues surrounding the enormously versatile cells that scientists say can be used to treat diseases like Parkinson's or diabetes. His aides said the new reports represent precisely the kind of research the president has in mind, and they noted that one of the studies received federal funding from the National Institutes of Health. Zinsmeister said he hoped congressional critics of the president's policy would now pull back. "We are hopeful that people will now let go of this," he said. But that seemed unlikely Tuesday. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., hailed the new reports as "extraordinary scientific breakthroughs" but said embryonic stem cell research must continue. "Instead of aiding that fight, the Bush administration is hampering it through needless restrictions on stem cell research and by denying NIH the funds it needs to capitalize on new advances," he said. One of the researchers involved in Tuesday's reports said the Bush restrictions may have slowed discovery of the new method, since scientists first had to study embryonic cells to find out how to accomplish the same thing without embryos. "My feeling is that the political controversy set the field back four or five years," said James Thomson, who led a team at the University of Wisconsin that turned ordinary human skin cells into what are effectively embryonic stem cells without using embryos or women's eggs. By arrangement with
LA Times-Washington Post |
|
Freebies land Punjab in trouble In
Punjab free power to the farm sector was among the many freebies promised by the two main political parties on the eve of elections. Now when the state exchequer is languishing, the Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB) bleeding and other sections are also demanding incentives, the decision to provide subsidies and other sops, especially free power, does need a relook. In 2006-07 the agriculture sector consumed 8,229 million units of power. If calculated at the rate of Rs 3 per unit, the combined power consumption of farmers works out to Rs 2,469 crore. Earlier, the farmers were paying their bills at the rate of Rs 60 per horse power, which for 9.7 lakh tubewells amounted to Rs 524 crore a year. Thus they were paying around 60 paise per unit of the electricity consumed, being only 20 per cent of the normal rate charged. At this rate running a tubewell by a 7.5 h.p. motor costs only Rs 4 to 5 per hour. On the other hand, if a farmer has to run the same tubewell by his own dieselrun generator set, which most of the farmers now own in Punjab, it consumes 3.5 litres of diesel per hour and costs him more than Rs 100 per hour, 20 times more than the cost paid to the PSEB for the subsidised power. The farmers realise this and a vast of majority of farmers, who were interviewed to know their opinion on free power, want power but not absolutely free. They are willing to pay for it at subsidised rates. The Bharti Kisan Union, Lakhowal and Rajewal groups, whose comments were sought, also stated that free power had never been their demand. In their opinion, if the prices were index linked, farmers are more than willing to pay the bills. The cost factor apart, farmers of Punjab are now better placed economically compared to a couple of years earlier as a result of considerable hike in the MSP of both wheat and paddy. The aggregate income of farmers from wheat last season jumped by around Rs 2,900 crore as a result of the increase of Rs 190 per quintal in the MSP of wheat. Another Rs 2,190 crore will be gained by them next year due to this year’s hike of Rs 150 per quintal if the output is the same as this year. In contrast, the subsidised annual bill of electricity amounting to Rs 524 crore seems peanuts. Even an individual farmer cultivating five acres of land, termed as a small farmer and having only one electricity-run pump in his fields, will have a hike of Rs 4,000 to 5,000 per acre from wheat alone. The bill which he has to pay for his 7.5 h.p. motor at the subsidised rate for the whole year works out to Rs 4,800, just equivalent to the additional income from one acre of wheat crop only. Already this future hike in the farmer’s income has jacked up the land rent by Rs 2,000 to 3,000 per acre in Punjab. This speaks of his affordability to pay for electricity. Freebies are also worrisome because apart from the economic crisis, they have created a political trouble in the state. The ruling coalition partner, BJP, cried foul over the hike in the electricity charges from the industrial and other consumers considering that to be its vote bank and has managed the rollback by pressure tactics, putting an additional burden of Rs 292 crore on the already beleaguered state exchequer. This competitive politics of populism may throw the state into an economic and then a political crisis, either of which is unaffordable at this stage. Had the giving of free power, waiving of bills, abolition of octroi and similar sops been an appropriate solution to the problems of people, the SAD and the Congress would not have lost the elections of 2002 and 2007 respectively. It clearly indicates that the people want something different from what is being offered to them by the political parties. The question of quality education, proper health care, employment generation, world-class infrastructure, good governance and a quick grievance redressing mechanism are far more important. Nobel laureate and champion of micro credit, Prof Muhammad Yunus, who transformed Bangladesh through his Grameen Bank and small loans, says that charity is not the correct way to alleviate poverty. It only perpetuates poverty by taking the initiative away from the poor. Giving charity is rather shrugging off our responsibility. The state is duty bound to uplift the downtrodden. But giving doles to all and sundry without differentiating the needy is neither good for the economy nor for the beneficiary. Mixing the deserving with the non-deserving while giving sops is a sure way to failure as after sometime the less deserving elbows out the more deserving and corners all benefits meant for the latter. Due to this reason most of the anti-poverty programmes have failed and only 18 paise out of one rupee reaches the targeted beneficiary. An enabling environment in the form of good infrastructure, modern educational and training institutions, cheap credit and proper markets is much more advantageous for the poor and the deprived to pull themselves out of poverty than the freebies. People are amused at the vision of having a metro rail, airports, flyovers and huge power plants envisaged by the ruling party but all of it needs money, which cannot be arranged except by effectively collecting taxes from all the beneficiaries. Giving everything free would one day destroy the very foundations of production facilities. Moreover, we should remember the age-old saying that instead of giving fish to a hungry, teaching him to catch one is always better. Thus it is time to review some of the subsidies and freebies in the larger economic and political interests of the state. |
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
