|
|
|
|
|
PM owns
responsibility Monsoon misery |
|
|
Health unattended
A flawed reasoning
Gifted tumblers
Water policies
remain on paper
|
|
Monsoon misery The monsoon in India is a complex phenomenon, even if it comes on time, which it did not this year. While one part of the nation suffers from rain deficit almost to the point of being declared a drought-affected area, another part faces the problem of too much rain. Be it floods, water-logging, a road caving in, streets turning into streams, or buildings collapsing, rains bring in their share of misery even as they provide the much-needed succour to millions of people in the subcontinent. The farmer in rural India is most dependent on rainwater for agricultural use, and thus sees rain as a blessing, unless it turns into a deluge, overflowing the embankments of canals and inundating vast areas, destroying crops. Urban India too is at the mercy of the rain gods. It is the rains that replenish reservoirs that provide water to cities, and rivers which are harnessed for hydroelectric power. However, for many urbanites, the monsoon is also the time when they see instances of infrastructural collapse that affect day-to-day life. Even the nation’s Capital is not spared, as was seen recently when a part of a recently built road collapsed, mercifully without loss of life, causing great inconvenience to thousands of commuters. In small towns, rainwater simply sweeps away everything in its path. Diseases like gastroenteritis follow. It is unfortunate that the administrators all over India have still not evolved effective means to harvest rainwater. Rainwater harnessing would give back to the earth the much-needed water and rejuvenate depleted groundwater aquifers even in urban areas. Proper drainage would ensure that people’s everyday life continues to function as normally as possible. The Indian economy still depends, to a large extent, on the monsoon. There is no reason that the nation should seem to be ill-prepared to tackle the monsoon every year. Proper assessment of issues, and action plan and its swift execution will ensure that the nation that calls itself developed is also seen as one.
|
|
|
Health unattended As
with education, so with health care. Basic services in the public sector in Punjab are being utilised only by the poorest, who cannot afford private facilities. In fact, in health, many government centres have empty corridors, as there are neither doctors nor the equipment required to conduct medical investigations. This means many poor patients go without treatment altogether, as they cannot afford private hospitals. The primary health centres provide pain relief and first aid, and little beyond that. Maternity care is about the only exception that is available at government facilities, that too of the most elementary kind. An HIV-positive mother allegedly being left unattended at Ropar Civil Hospital was not only a reflection of the calloused system but also that doctors there did not feel equipped enough to handle a case like that. One major reason for the state of affairs is lack of doctors. This is an irony, as many a medical graduate is unable to find an opening. For years, Punjab had a large number of rural doctors on contract on paltry sums, till they were regularised. Now, a hundred of them have quit in the past year because they do not see career progression opportunities, as they are employed by the Rural Development and Panchayat Department, and not Health. Penny-pinching by the impoverished state government is laying to waste even the infrastructure that exists, as it has either no money to maintain it, or lacks the staff to man it. A round of inspections by the Punjab Health Systems Corporation MD revealed the ugly state of hygiene at government hospitals. The problems have been listed in a report, but there is little even the well-meaning top official would be able to achieve, for cleaning a hospital requires staff and disinfectants, neither of which is available. Were it not for the National Rural Health Mission, under which there have been some funds forthcoming, even the facade of health services in the rural areas would have been hard to maintain. The state has a resource crunch. Under the circumstances, it is imperative that it seriously reconsidered its expenditure priorities.
|
|
|
There is nothing permanent except change. — Heraclitus
|
A flawed reasoning The
BJP seems intent on destroying parliamentary democracy in India, whatever the arguments it employs in a barrage of bizarre rhetoric. Its logic is fascist: whatever I say is right and I shall prevail. This comes days after celebrating Independence Day and the hard-won triumph of freedom and democracy it symbolises. Having disrupted the winter session, it is at it again, insisting that the Prime Minister must resign for the so-called Coalgate scam before Parliament is allowed to function. Led by Arun Jaitley and Sushma Swaraj in the presence of Advani and cheered on by Nitin Gadkari from outside, it rejects a debate in Parliament as the matter will merely be talked. A non-confidence motion is, however, ruled out as the numbers do not favour them. Meanwhile, disruption of Parliament is being paraded as a national duty. The argument is that similar disruption alone forced the resignation of Raja and Maran following the CAG’s 2-G Report. And if Raja could resign as Minister for Telcom, Dr Manmohan Singh must resign as he held additional charge of the Coal Ministry during the years when Coalgate occurred. The reasoning is flawed. Raja did not resign because of or to end disruption. And the resignation of a minister is very different from the forced resignation of a Prime Minister. The latter implies the fall of the government with all its attendant consequences. So, what Jaitley is seeking is the overthrow of the government through street action noisily enacted on the floor of Parliament till the totally unconstitutional demand of a boisterous and unruly minority is met. This is dangerous politics and to cite previous disruptions by the Congress is to argue ever so crudely that one murder justifies all murders, and damn the judicial process. The CAG has submitted a report on the Coal Ministry which is now the property of Parliament. Instead of allowing Parliament to debate the matter and send it to the Public Accounts Committee for detailed scrutiny before the House takes a final view on the matter, the Jaitley argument is that the party is entitled to trump the whole, thus enabling a strident minority in the House to impose its will on the majority, and that too without the requisite parliamentary debate and investigation, in violation of every rule and canon of democratic process and conscience. This is the kernel of the matter, not the bogus, political spiel spewed out by the BJP and other persons before TV channels looking for meaningless but high-TRP-rated gladiatorial fights night after night. The CAG has clearly overreached himself, making recommendations on policy as much as reporting on performance and then computing presumptive loss under various hypotheses on the basis of hindsight. From these findings, political partisans have sought to interpret genuine errors of judgement or innocent misappraisal of future market trends as acts of deliberate mala fides on the part of officials and ministers who are held accountable long after the event. Who in the government then will take clear and timely decisions without procrastination and seeking immunity by securing a multiplicity of irrelevant signatures? Both decision-making and governance have grievously suffered while the opportunity cost of delay has been truly enormous. Even in the 1950s, the politically juiciest section of any PAC report was “procedural irregularities”. These were the “scams” of those days, outcomes be damned. Indeed, official reports routinely indicted industries that produced in excess of their licensed capacities, not by clandestinely adding to production capacity but by improving systems and process efficiency. More recently, the Vajpayee government was gleefully slammed by the Congress for the “Kargil coffin-gate scam”. Since the wooden caskets carrying the bodies of those killed in action to their homes for the last rites were found oozing body fluids, emergency purchases were made of metal caskets. The Kargil war ended too soon for the auditors and the number of fatal casualties had, therefore, by audit calculations been grossly underestimated by the Defence Ministry. This was the “coffin-gate scam”. Imagine the unstated reasoning: excessive caskets and a dearth of dead bodies for audit; no proper tendering for competitive rates and quality; nor a timely forecast of the Kargil war, its duration and unique features, or any prudent estimate of when the next war might occur and how many fatalities there might be to justify such a huge and hurried purchase! The media and political class fell on “coffin-gate” like vultures. The same thing happened over 2-G and Coalgate, except that the BJP and Congress have exchanged positions. The CVG’s estimates are “presumptive” losses based on different sets of assumptions and timelines. In the 2-G case, the lowest estimated loss was but a third of the highest figure, which was uncritically accepted. Why? And the huge social and even indirect revenue gain and empowerment from the dynamic growth of telephony with falling call rates was simply ignored in the calculus. Some money was possibly made by a few original allottees through the resale of spectrum but the astronomic “loss” linked to the 2-G “scam” is a chimera. The same is true of Coalgate with its Rs 1,83 lakh crore “loss”. The original figure leaked was almost six or seven times larger but was recalled by the CAG’s office itself. But who has made this illicit gain if only one out of 57 relevant coal blocks has actually been mined up to date. Otherwise too, as Surjit Bhalla cogently explained in a recent article, the CAG based his “losses” for 2006 allocations at 2010 prices without discounting them, nor did he take into account the 30 per cent corporate tax that would have accrued to the exchequer. Earlier, the Opposition was baying for Chidambaram’s resignation on the ground that he colluded with Raja in the 2-G matter. This caused disruption of the House. But now the Supreme Court has dismissed the two plaints preferred before it, indicting the minister. In the Coalgate matter, four Opposition-led state governments (Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Rajasthan and West Bengal) and Jharkhand had opposed coal auctions as proposed by the Centre and recommended allocations of coal blocks in their states for local power and cement manufacture. Taking federal sensitivities into account, the Centre did not press its case for open auctions, a factor indirectly noted with some approval by the Chief Justice of India in a lecture delivered in Delhi last Sunday. Yet, despite all this, Jaitley insists the Prime Minister must resign without a Lok Sabha debate or PAC scrutiny in accordance with the normal parliamentary procedure. The argument has nothing to do with the so-called Coalgate scam. The calculation is that the UPA is on the back-foot regarding corruption and the economic slow-down. But the Congress still has the numbers in the Lok Sabha as its allies and some others do not want early polls. Even the BJP was not in favour of early polls as it is a house divided; but now it sees an opportunity to strike before Narendra Modi has time to become a real challenger to the old guard at the Centre. Whatever happens, as before over Ayodhya, the BJP is riding a tiger. And it will
lose.
|
|||||
Gifted tumblers He
was at that time among the world’s well-known medical experts dealing with mental health. He was the chief architect of the Department of Psychiatry at the PGI, Chandigarh. Psychiatrists trained under him felt especially blessed. I was one of those fortunate medical residents who received training under his guidance and supervision. He cherished strong ethics and principles. He was of the firm belief that the moral value system was an integral part of any professional training. In those days it was customary for patients to bring small gifts as a token of gratitude for their treating doctors. Dr N.N. Wig had given very clear instructions in the department that no faculty member or any other staff member would accept gifts from patients and their family members. It was 1980 when I was a junior resident in the department, and Dr Wig went abroad for a month on an assignment. One day a businessman gifted a box of glass tumblers to one of the faculty members in the department whose wife was under his treatment. The consultant strictly refused to accept the gift, but the businessman was adamant not to carry it back. The box kept on lying unopened in the department till Dr Wig returned from his foreign assignment. We used to have regular departmental meetings to discuss various administrative issues, and every member of the department participated in these meetings. The issue of the gift was brought up in one of the meetings. Dr Wig expressed his displeasure and suggested that the concerned faculty member should not have accepted the gift and advised him to return it. The businessman refused to take back the box and asked the faculty member to do whatever he wanted. The issue of the glasses remained alive for a couple of months and during each meeting members made various suggestions about what should be done. Finally, it was unanimously decided that the glass tumblers should be sold within the department and the money thus received should be donated to the poor patients’ fund. Years have passed but the seriousness with which the issue was handled continues to be alive in my mind. In the present times when materialistic pursuits have become so important for all of us, Dr Wig’s example continues to influence the thinking of all those fortunate doctors who were trained during those days. The seniors had imbibed idealism as a way of life. Fortunately, the department continues to have very high ethical standards under the leadership of Dr Wig’s successors. Going down memory lane, I feel that to most of young medical residents who were witness to the way the gift issue was handled, the unending discussion about the gift might not have appeared of much significance then. But today one realises that there was a big lesson for all of us to learn — honesty and sincerity begin with a small step
only.
|
|||||
Water policies remain on paper
The experience of the last two decades is a testimony to the growing clout of the corporate sector to gain control over natural resources of the country. Privatisation of water will be very quick and easy if water is transferred from the State List to the Concurrent List
The recent high pace of economic progress, fast urbanisation, growing energy-intensive lifestyle, expansion of water-intensive agriculture, industry and power generation (thermal) have made large parts of India water stressed, facing an acute shortage. Along with five decades of emphasis on chemical farming, unregulated throwing of industrial/chemical and poisonous effluents in fresh waters and mixing of untreated urban sewerage and garbage have poisoned fresh water resources. Experts have been discussing these issues in professional journals, books and also in the electronic and print media. Public concerns shown by iconic figures and experts have made water and environment topical issues. At the national level the Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India, has issued National Water Policy documents three times within the period of a quarter century. The first draft was issued in 1987 which was followed by another in 2002. The recent draft has been issued in 2012. The latest draft of the National Water Policy is quite comprehensive and demonstrates improvement over the earlier drafts. The stated objective of the policy has been “to take cognizance of the existing situation and to propose a framework for creation of an over-arching system of laws and institutions and for a plan of action with a unified national perspective”.
Water quality and quantity are interlinked and need to be managed in an integrated manner with broader environment approaches, including incentives and penalties to reduce pollution and wastage; and climate change must be factored into water management related issues. The Draft National Water Policy suggests a broad over-arching national framework of general principles on water for essential legislation on water governance in every state and devolution of necessary authority to local governments to deal with local water situation. It is also suggested to modify the Indian Easement Act, 1882, which gives proprietary rights to the land owners on ground-water for his/her land. The legislation has to be comprehensive for optimum development of inter-state rivers and river valleys to facilitate inter-state coordination through basin authority for scientific planning of land and water resources. The policy draft gives first priority to ensure minimum access to potable water for health and hygiene of all citizens followed by ecological needs. The economic needs such as agriculture for food security and sustainable development come next in priority. In the earlier policy documents industrial use of water is the last priority.
Accepting basin as the basic unit of water management and planning and inter-country agreements are suggested for international rivers. Considerable emphasis has been given to the generation of authentic data base and information system and strengthening of research and training to address issues in the water sector in a scientific manner and rewarding of innovations.
Water as a state subject Serious policy documents on such a vital issue of water scarcity and its fast declining quality so essential for sustainable development and human and animal existence remain non-consequential. There are several factors which are responsible for this. The most important point is that various drafts of the National Water Policy require a change in the constitution. In the policy it is suggested that there should be a national perspective on water whereas water is a state subject. Even in countries like the US water is a state subject. It is also suggested that there should be a river basin authority for water management for optimum/efficient use of water. In many cases it will be an inter-state body with the union government having a major say. This is not acceptable to states like Punjab, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Jammu and Kashmir. It is well known that the West Bengal Chief Minister did not allow the Government of India and the Government of Bangladesh to enact the Tista River Water Treaty. Secondly, the various water policy drafts are suggesting the change of role of the state governments from a water service provider to a regulator. Several states in the country ruled by different political parties are using the provision of free/concessional water and electricity to build their vote banks. This change in the role of the state will affect adversely the fortune of several political parties. The third major issue relates to the exclusive right of the land owners on ground water of their land. The small section of big farmers (around 5.0 per cent) operating above 10 acres of land are the major beneficiaries of this right. This class of land holders calls the shots in state political parties. They control the lever of political power at the state level and do not allow any change of their exclusive rights over ground water resources.
Water pricing Water being scarce in most of these states, these policy documents require a change in the allocation of water from existing use by various states to those states within the basin or outside to meet drinking water and development requirements. Already disputes on water between various states (Karnataka-Tamil Nadu; Kerala-Tamil Nadu; Punjab and Haryana) remain unsettled. The policy drafts suggest the application of water pricing reflecting water scarcity. The pricing of water on the ground of availability requires raising it very high, making it beyond the access of the marginal and small farmers. Thus, it reflects a contradiction between the declared principles of equity and social justice and the suggested policy options. This is used by an influential section in the farming community to build widespread opposition to the National Water Policy.
Service provider or regulator? The latest Draft National Water Policy has allowed the concept of “Public Private Partnership” to transfer water management to the private sector especially for changing the role of the state from a provider of water services to a regulator of water. This has enhanced the suspicion of a large number of people that this policy has a hidden agenda of privatisation of the country’s water resources. In view of the growing role of private sector companies in the supply of bottled drinking water and the mining sector, it is feared that the private corporate sector is in for grabbing water resources along with land.
The experience of the last two decade is a testimony to the growing clout of the corporate sector to gain control over natural resources of the country. The privatisation of water will be very quick and easy if water is transferred from the State List to the Concurrent List. The transfer of water to the Concurrent List is being aired by an influential section of policy makers, especially in the Planning Commission.
Inefficient use of water The major user of water is agriculture for irrigation to provide food security for the population. There cannot be any improvement in the quantity and quality of water if water policy and agricultural policies do not synchronise. Different drafts of the National Water Policy have been issued and no attempt has been made by the Union Government to incentivise an efficient use of water in agriculture. On the contrary, several states have been encouraging an inefficient use of water through free water and electricity for irrigation purposes. Similarly, energy policy both in power generation and distribution has to be complimentary to the National Water Policy. But actually both agriculture policy and energy policy have been promoting water-intensive crops and an inefficient use of water. Under the new economic policy regime, the private industrial sector has become less regulated as in the case of pollution control. It has been a major contributor to the poisoning of fresh water. Thus, agricultural policy, energy policy and industrial policy are moving in opposite direction of the National Water Policy, making various drafts as paper exercises. This policy cannot operate in isolation. At the same time it is difficult to implement this policy if there is an absence of cooperative federalism, lack of effective governance and a high level of trust deficit in the intentions of the government and policy makers. The writer is the Director General, Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development (CRRID), Chandigarh
|
|
| 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 | |
The policy documents contain many good suggestions for mitigation of climate change challenges; enhancing efficient use of the available water; preservation of river corridors, water bodies and infrastructure; project planning; resettlement and rehabilitation of project affected families; preparedness for flood and droughts; changes in institutional arrangements such as setting of a water regulatory authority in every state, a forum at the national level for deliberation of water issues, changing role of the state from a service provider to a water regulator and incentivisation of reforms for innovations, conservation and an efficient utilization of water.