|
|
|
|
|
Status of
Khalsa College NATO in
Libya |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tiger
count goes up
Breach
of House privilege
Mother
HALF-TRUTHS
IN PUNJAB BUDGET Devoid
of vision for development
|
|
NATO in Libya
With
the entry of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) in Libya, replacing the troops of the US and its Western allies, the intervention by the international community has taken a new turn. Now the Libyan dictator’s argument will have no meaning that it is not fair for foreign forces to meddle in the “internal affairs” of a sovereign nation. NATO’s action comes after the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973 to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya and to prevent the killing of civilians by Col Muammar Gaddafi’s forces. The Security Council has also imposed an arms embargo on Libya, which will be enforced strictly now. NATO’s involvement, however, does not mean an end to the military role of the US, France, Britain and other Western powers. However, they will not be able to use their military-related activities in Libya for reaping political capital back home. This was a major charge against French President Nicolas Sarkozy, as France is slated to have elections soon. One question that seems to have divided the international community is whether NATO’s intervention will remain impartial. Will NATO not provide cover to the Libyan rebels, who are disorganized and unable to consolidate the gains they initially made? First it was Turkey which expressed doubts over the real purpose of bringing NATO in the Libyan war theatre. Now Russia has warned the world that foreign intervention in a sovereign country has not been mandated by Resolution 1973. These questions have found mention at the on-going London conference of the UN, NATO, the African Union and the Arab League on Libya. The truth is that the global community indirectly wants regime change in Libya but no one is prepared to admit, not even President Barack Obama, that all that is being done under the cover of Resolution 1973 is aimed at ending the dictatorship of Colonel Gaddafi. The US appears to be under tremendous pressure from its allies in West Asia like Saudi Arabia not to take any step which may make people get the impression that the Western forces are there in the Arab world to instal rulers of their choice in the garb of bringing about democracy. The ideal course can be to create a situation in which Colonel Gaddafi is forced to leave the country to the people of Libya as it has happened in Tunisia, Egypt and Morocco.
|
|
|
Tiger count goes up
The
dwindling number of tigers, which stood at a dismal 1,411 in the last census, has been a cause of concern for some time. In the light of the plummeting tiger population, the recent figures that show a perceptible increase is indeed reassuring. According to the latest tiger census, there are 1,706 big cats in the wild. While the growing number, which indicates that conservation efforts in the recent past have paid some dividends, is likely to gladden the hearts of conservationists, much more needs to be done to save the species on the verge of extinction. Nearly a century ago India’s tiger population stood at a heartening 40,000. Over the years, poaching, deforestation and general apathy towards the majestic animal have threatened its existence. Despite ambitious projects like the Tiger Project launched way back in 1973, the big cat has been fighting for its survival. Fortunately, while earlier only the news of tiger killings would wake up the authorities, more recently there has been an attempt to drive home the tiger’s crucial role in the ecosystem and the impending ecological catastrophe, if it disappears. Nevertheless, indiscriminate deforestation has deprived the tiger of its home. The latest census report which the Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh has rightly called a “mixed bag” too points at the shrinking habitats which could decrease further and put more pressure on the wild animal. There is little doubt that saving forests could translate into saving tigers. However, to counter the threat, which the endangered species is facing, both poachers and encroachers have to be dealt with severely. The skepticism of tiger experts over the new figures may be taken with a pinch of salt for the 2010 tiger census is more accurate than the ones in the past as it has used scientific methods like camera trapping and DNA tests. However, they are dead right in asserting that better ways to conserve tigers have to be found. If the Global Tiger Recovery Programme has to meet its target of doubling the tiger population by 2022, the efforts to protect the National Animal too have to be doubled. Challenges enroute tiger conservation are many and have to be tackled head-on.
|
|
|
Don’t mistake pleasure for happiness. They are a different breed of dogs. — Josh Billings
|
Breach of House privilege
IN Parliament one often comes across complaints from members of a “breach of privilege”. Experience says that many of these complaints do not disclose any breach of any of the privileges of either the members or of the House. The world outside the legislature is confused quite a bit about the exact meaning or implications of this term. Ignorance of parliamentary law of privileges has landed many in trouble. Since it is not a codified law, the ignorance of and confusion about the privileges of the legislature persist. Privileges of a legislature are the special rights of the House and its members which are essential for its functioning. These rights are required to maintain the authority and dignity of the House which is the highest representative body of the people. So every democratic parliament in the world enjoys these privileges. Any individual or institution doing anything or saying anything having the effect of challenging the authority or violating the dignity of the House will be committing a breach of privilege of the House and is punished by the House. Article 105 of the Constitution of India confers certain privileges and immunities on the members of Parliament. The most important and crucial privilege which is specified in the Article is freedom of speech in the House. This right enables a member of Parliament to speak freely and fearlessly on the floor of the House. This right, of course, is subject to the other provisions of the Constitution and the rules of the House. The intensity and dimensions of this right can be best perceived when one takes a close look at the immunity which is provided to a member of the House. Article 105(2) says that no member shall be liable to any proceedings in any court of law for anything said or any vote given in Parliament or its committees. This immunity is absolute and it has been confirmed by the Supreme Court in the JMM case. Although many eyebrows were raised at this judgement, the position today is that even when a member is proved to have taken bribe which has a nexus with his vote in the House, he is not liable to be prosecuted under the law on corruption. Privileges are not defined by the Rules of Procedure of the House. The Constitution says that in respect of privileges other than freedom of speech, one has to refer to the House which existed prior to 20-06-1979. In fact, before the Constitution was amended in 1978, the reference was to the House of Commons which was omitted through this amendment. Nevertheless, the privileges, other than freedom of speech, of the Indian Parliament and its members are those which were enjoyed by the members of the House of Commons at the time when the Constitution of India came into force. The Rules of the House merely lay down the procedure to be followed in dealing with a question of breach of privilege. So, to understand the nature of privileges enjoyed by Indian parliamentarians, one has to look into the privileges of the members of the House of Commons as they existed on January 26, 1950. However, the purpose of this article is not to expatiate on the privileges of the House of Commons. Suffice it to say that some of the privileges of the House of Commons have no relevance to India, but most others have been adopted by us by virtue of Article 105(3). The notices of breach of privilege against the Prime Minister given by Mrs Sushma Swaraj, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and others accuse the Prime Minister of misleading the House by the statement he made in the House on March 18 in connection with the WikiLeaks disclosure of an alleged attempt to bribe MPs of the 14th Lok Sabha in the context of the confidence motion. As could be gathered from the newspapers, the relevant part of the statement which forms the basis of the notice is as follows: “The allegations of bribery were investigated by a committee constituted by the 14th Lok Sabha. The committee had concluded that there was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion of bribery.” The committee referred to by the Prime Minister in his statement quoted above was appointed by Speaker Somnath Chatterjee to “inquire into the complaint made by some members regarding alleged offer of money to them in connection with voting on the motion of confidence”. This committee was appointed subsequent to the display of Rs 1 crore in Parliament by some members of the Opposition who complained to the Speaker that this money was paid to them by a member of the Rajya Sabha for voting or absenting from voting in favour of the government on the confidence motion. Thus, this committee was appointed basically to investigate the truth of the complaints that money was paid to the three members, Mr Ashok Argal, Mr Faggan Singh Kulaste and Mr Mahavir Bhagora by Mr Amar Singh, a member of the Rajya Sabha. If it is found as a fact that these members were bribed in an attempt to influence them in their parliamentary conduct it would be a breach of privilege. Bribing a member of Parliament for the purpose of influencing his conduct as a member entails two consequences — breach of privilege of the member and legal action for the criminal act of bribery. The remit of a fact-finding committee of Parliament is to investigate the matter to find out the fact of bribery for the purpose of establishing the breach of privilege. As regards the criminality of the transaction, it has to be dealt with by the investigating agencies of the government and the court. The committee headed by eminent parliamentarian V. Kishore Chandra Deo after a detailed investigation came to the conclusion that “the material on record does not conclusively prove that the money contained in the bag, which was eventually displayed in the House, was actually sent by Shri Amar Singh for the purpose of winning over Shri Ashok Argal, Shri Faggan Singh Kulaste and Shri Mahavir Bhagora to vote in favour of motion of confidence.” Now, the question arises whether the Prime Minister can be accused of misleading the House when he stated that there was insufficient evidence to draw the conclusion of bribery. The committee says that material on record does not conclusively prove that the money was sent to win over the members. A perusal of these two statements clearly shows that the Prime Minister’s statement in the Lok Sabha on March 18, accurately reflects the conclusion reached by the committee in this regard. Accuracy of the statement knocks the bottom out of a charge of breach of privilege. However, the committee made a significant observation after reaching the above conclusion in respect of Mr Amar Singh’s role. This observation is with regard to the role of one Sanjeev Saxena who was an active participant in the bribe giving operation. The committee said in para 141 (xv), “He could very well be giving bribe with a view to influencing the members in their parliamentary conduct…Therefore, his role in the matter needs to be investigated.” The members of the Opposition who gave notices of breach of privilege perhaps rely on this observation of the committee to contend that the statement made by the Prime Minister is misleading in the sense that the issue of bribing the members has not been conclusively disproved. The House has the inherent right to get correct and true facts from its members and the government. So, misleading the House deliberately is a breach of privilege. But to bring a statement within the mischief of breach of privilege, it needs to be shown that the person who made the statement had deliberately done it with the intention of misleading the House. Eminent speakers of the Lok Sabha have given rulings on this point. The following ruling was given by Sardar Hukan Singh on August 17, 1966, in the Lok Sabha: “Incorrect statements made by a minister cannot make any basis for a breach of privilege. It is only a deliberate lie, if it can be substantiated, that would certainly bring the offence within the meaning of breach of privilege.” The above ruling by the Speaker makes it clear that it is only a deliberate lie which attracts the charge of breach of privilege. One cannot even imagine that the Prime Minister of the country will utter a “deliberate lie” and mislead the House. It is axiomatic that malice cannot be attributed to the actions of the government. In fact, no case of breach of privilege against a minister or the Prime Minister on the ground of misleading the House has ever been proved. The reason is that there is a presumption that the government will not deliberately and intentionally mislead the House. There can be a case of inaccuracy or inadequacy in a statement made by a minister. The Rules of the House have a provision for correcting such
statements. The writer is a former Secretary-General, Lok Sabha.
|
||||||
Mother My
mother is not recognising anyone, not even me. Can there be anything more painful than that? She is bed-ridden and lost. I see her helplessly withering away.” This status on Facebook of a dear friend shook me. Senior in age and years, he has been a picture of serenity and strength. But then even the most powerful are distressed on such occasions. I was far away to console him in person. I rather needed help myself. His status brought out the greatest fear I had since I became conscious of life and death. It is the fear of losing my mother. No one is bigger to a person than his mother. No one is more important. No one knows you better in and out than her. No one smiles at your lies and no one tells you to remain rooted to the ground when you fly high at minor successes. Since childhood, I had this fear. And no amount of sermonising has diminished it. I often used to cry at the dead of night at the thought of my mom’s death. I stuck to her. And she tried her best to console quoting from Guru Granth Sahib and other religious books. As I grew old, I read some on my own. I learnt nothing dies in this world. It just changes form. And I learnt soul is never destroyed. I recently read psychologist Dr Brian Weiss and his regression therapy quoting real life rebirth experiences and the joy and traumas and debts we carry to our next birth. Rebirth stories pleased and comforted me a little. I read: “Death be not proud” of John Donne again and again. All those gave me temporary relief. My fear of losing my mother persisted. Even now I talk to her about the fear I still carry. She strokes my hair and calls me “paagal” (mad). At 65, she is hale and hearty. I want her to be like that for all times. She is contended. She wants to leave early. I want to tell her that the womb was the safest place I ever was. Since my birth, I am used to touching her cold elbow. It has lulled me to sleep. It is heavenly soothing. My troubles vanish when I hold her elbow. And it is always cold. Who would soothe me when she is not there? She just has to be there. I want to tell her all this when she is in a position to recognise me and understand it. I want to tell her that I knew and remembered how many times she slept on a hungry stomach to feed us. And how much she denied herself of certain essential things to provide us education and clothes and good diet! The need to earn and make a career forces us away from our mothers. Distances do not affect this bond. She is happy if you are happy. I have a strong urge to rush to her and hold the elbow again. I want to go on and on telling her my stories and ambitions, which many, including my father, term as “Sheikhchili dreams”, while she listens with all interest and sparkle in her eyes. All the while I am with her, I want to live every moment. For, when she won’t be around, I would never have the strength to visit our house in Patiala where she lives. Wish you a long long life, mother. And I wish that for all
mothers.
|
||||||
HALF-TRUTHS IN PUNJAB BUDGET The Finance Minister, Dr Upinderjit Kaur, claims that Punjab is without problems and stridently marching to becoming the proverbial "land of milk and honey". According to her budget, we live in one of the fastest-growing states in the country, which is close to becoming power surplus and has already provided the people with world-class infrastructure, education and healthcare. What actually stares us in the face is stagnant agriculture, dangerously declining industry, our cities buried in filth, abysmal infrastructure and a financially (and morally) bankrupt government. It is this dichotomy between the government's bravado and the grim reality that I exposed through my interventions during the general discussion on the budget in the Vidhan Sabha. And it was in this context that we demanded a White Paper to establish the true state of Punjab's finances and enable all of us to contribute to retrieving the terrible state of our economy. Instead of accepting our suggestions and opening a healthy forum for discussion the government's response is laughable. While the Chief Minister insists the budget is itself a White Paper, the Deputy Chief Minister incredulously eulogises it as the "best ever presented", and the Finance Minister feebly attempts to refute our stand by citing the same fudged figures from her budget, bizarrely trying to cover a fudge with another fudge! In reality, the budget is nothing more than the culmination of the Akali-BJP combine's "patron-client" model of governance, which assumes that people are not citizens, who demand good governance as a matter of right, but supplicants. The Badals, it seems, believe that people only deserve government handouts in exchange for votes, which for them are an "irritating" but constitutional necessity to remain in office. Hence, we witness the great election year budget fudge! Having said so, we are not oblivious of the fact that the budget is no more than the annual financial statement of government income and expenditure. Obviously, we do not expect it to offer magical solutions to all our woes. But what was required, and what this budget lacks, is directional guidance, or imaginative strategies to ward off a despondent and dark future. Budget estimates and actual figures do not have to necessarily conform. There could be and there usually is a variance of 5 to 10 per cent. But violent variations immediately raise questions about the integrity of the budget. Consider, for instance, the variation in the budgeted revenue/fiscal deficit and actual. If the budgeted revenue deficit of Rs. 3,787.73 crore during 2009-10 actually turns out to be Rs. 5,251.36 crore, (variance of 40%) and is then projected even lower at Rs. 3,705.18 crore in the BE 2010-11, and at a still lower level of Rs. 3,378.99 crore in the BE 2011-12, it certainly smacks of tampering. There are more riddles. While the revenue deficit is projected to come down from an actual of Rs. 5,251.36 crore for 2009-10 to Rs. 3,378.99 crore as per the budget 2011-12, the fiscal deficit is slated to sharply increase from Rs. 6,170.09 crore to Rs. 8,801.33 crore for the same period. This government evidently plans to rely heavily on debt, not only to fund the revenue deficit, but also the annual plan of Rs. 11,500 crore for the year 2011-12. The impossible-to-achieve Plan is built on a sandcastle as most of the debt the government will need to raise, will go towards meeting its committed expenditure. On the face of it the government implemented a Plan of Rs. 4,974 crore against an approved Plan of Rs. 8,625 crore for 2009-10, so one must possess an overstretched imagination to believe that a Plan of Rs. 11,500 crore is feasible during 2011-12. The government's claim of fast growth is equally hollow. Not only did the rate of growth tumble a few notches between the Governor's Address and the budget, the claimed rate of growth of 9.25%, 6.55% and 7.84% during 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10, respectively, is way below the corresponding national average! Punjab's debt position is also grossly misrepresented. Apart from the government's public debt, contingent liabilities arising out of the government-guaranteed debt, deferred liabilities and loans raised by various parastatal entities by mortgaging assets and future revenues have to be reckoned with. This critical aspect has not even been mentioned in the budget. There is more. A gallant, albeit foolhardy, attempt has been made to prove Punjab is on its way to fiscal recovery and targets have been set out in the 13th Finance Commission's fiscal correction path. For this budgetary figures have been fudged and various fiscal ratios worked out with reference to an enhanced GDP, which is due to the change in the base year from 1999-2000 to 2004-05. If the state is truly on the path of fiscal recovery, why have the arrears of revised pay and pension not been paid to employees? Why has the Punjab State Power Corporation been paid subsidy for free power by loan adjustment and not in cash? Why is the government seeking the enhancement of its loan limit while simultaneously seeking a waiver of the previous loans? The projected Rs. 35,405 crore revenue expenditure in the BE 2011-12 compared to the last fiscal is a mere increase of under 4 per cent against an annual trend of 15 per cent. The entire increase is attributable to education, medical and public health, social security and welfare and the police, which means grossly inadequate provisions under other heads. The cat is truly out of the bag when one considers provisions for power - down from Rs. 3,375.59 crore in BE 2010-11 to Rs 3,020 crore - and under the head "Others", showing a decrease of Rs. 613 crore compared to the previous year. These two heads relate to salaries and pensions, interest on loans and subsidy to Powercom. Does this government mean to stop employee remunerations, to default on debt servicing or to rollback the free power to farmers? The actual expenditure under these heads will inescapably be far higher than what has been provided. Thus, neither are the enhanced outlays for education, health and social security nor the plan of Rs. 11500 crore likely to be implemented. The budget as presented to the Vidhan Sabha on March 14 can serve little purpose. We had, therefore, suggested that the government should seek a three-month vote-on-account and fruitfully employ the time to prepare and present a White Paper on Punjab's true fiscal health alongside plausible recuperative remedies. We would readily join a special Vidhan Sabha session for this crucial undertaking. In explanation, since the government chose not to accept our sincere suggestions, we considered it futile to further associate ourselves with the academic ritual of passing this budget in its original, dishonest form. We are now intent on taking these issues to the people, who, we believe, will reject the culture of corruption, nepotism and unprecedented deceit perpetuated by the Akali-BJP government. There has been criticism, inspired by the government, of my Vidhan Sabha speech as being "academic", curiously forgetting that budgets are in fact a serious academic exercise that cannot be wished away in frivolous political rhetoric. Another critic, who used the expression "insipid", was perhaps looking for more flavour and aroma in fiscal numbers. The writer is a former Chief Minister of Punjab and the president of the Punjab Pradesh Congress Committee
|
|
Devoid of vision for development The
Punjab Finance Minister said in her budget speech: "Budget is a vision document that seeks to address the hopes and aspirations of all stake-holders and sections of society". It, therefore, becomes imperative to seek what the budget holds for the future overall development and prosperity, which is sustainable. The SAD-BJP government's budget for 2011-12 was its last in view of the coming assembly polls. The budget does not impose any fresh taxes, though it has not compromised on expenditure. In an annual plan size of Rs. 11,500 crore, the fiscal deficit will be Rs. 8,801.33 crore, but the resource mobilization for this has relied just on "expectations" of an increase in revenue receipts. It is pertinent to mention here that the fiscal deficit as a percentage of gross state domestic product is higher than the previous year. Instead of innovating revenue raising ways, the Finance Minister has preferred to put the entire blame on the Union government for worsening the debt burden of the state. Focussing on specific sectors, the approved plan outlay as a percentage of the total plan outlay has declined as compared to 2010-11 for agriculture and allied services, rural development, transport and social services, while it has marginally improved for science and technology and remained almost the same for energy. Further, the all-important agriculture sector has been allotted a sum of Rs. 453 crore. It includes commendable steps like relief bonus to farmers for paddy crop, productivity bonus equal to payments to power bill and restoration of free electricity supply to agricultural pump sets. But there has been on mention of the harrowing tale of indebtedness of farmers, particularly from non-institutional sources. The FM's resolve to (I quote) "impress upon the Government of India to provide incentives to our farmers who make timely payments of their installments to banks and cooperative institutions" did not divulge details of the incentive sought and conveniently deleted the already announced relief of a lower rate of interest chargeable to such farmers in the Union budget just two weeks before her own state budget presentation. And if the Central budget did not make a mention of farmer indebtedness from informal sources or of providing any relief to the kin of farmers who had committed suicide due to indebtedness, the state budget is equally at fault by not taking any moral responsibility or initiative for the same. Education has figured prominently in the budget, with heart-warming schemes like free education till Class XII, free bicycles for them, free uniforms for BC and EWS children. For higher education, the state's share in the budget of the state universities has been increased by 50 per cent, but it must be pointed out that the state's share in the total budgets of the universities is miniscule and will not contribute much to the financial health of these "state-run privately funded" universities. Further, a paltry sum of Rs. 1.5 crore for each of the 17 new government colleges has been assigned and that too to the university concerned. This is not sufficient to set up even the basic infrastructure. Alongside, the already existing colleges are starved of funds and faculty. The major onus for the payment of 60 per cent of arrears to the government employees (in which category do university and college teachers fall?) has been conveniently shifted to whichever party forms the next government in 2012. In the health and social security sector, the brighter side of the picture is the extension of financial benefits in healthcare, institutional deliveries, insurance policy of newborn girl child and the lowering of age for old age pension benefits for women. But pray, will the government hospitals and other healthcare centres get a face-lift in terms of state-of-the-art infrastructure as well as adequate regular doctors and other staff not to speak of assured supply of free medicines? On the whole, the state budget for 2011-12 has several popular proposals but it lacks vision for bringing Punjab to the forefront of sustainable economic development. A budget can, understandably, never be a please-all-statement but it should carefully set out a visionary approach to future development. Resorting to Centre-bashing only for the state's financial mess will not lead anywhere. It has to be realised that we have to make efforts on our own to rise to the occasion and set out on the path of development. The writer is a Professor of Economics, Department of Distance Education, Punjabi University, Patiala
|
|
|
| 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 | |
I
