What is new
Indian Budget’s ‘Jan Dhan to Jan Suraksha’ initiative is much ado about nothing
- Published on 04 March 2015
(Edited image courtesy- rsby.gov.in)
The Finance Minister Arun Jaitley’s announcement of three insurance schemes for the poor is a classical case of old wine in new bottle. It is pertinently more a case of oversight of plethora of existing schemes and similar announcements made by his predecessors including two stalwarts from Atal Bihari Vajpayee Government.
Instead of consolidating diverse social security schemes, Mr. Jaitley added three more to the existing basket of social security schemes.
One can group Government-funded Social security insurance schemes into three categories – health insurance, life insurance and pension insurance.
As many as 10 statutory insurance schemes from each of these categories are already operating under the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act 2008. These include Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana (RSBY), Aam Aadmi Bima Yojna (AABY), National Family Benefit Scheme and Indira Gandhi National Old Age Pension Scheme (IGNOAPS).
The flagship scheme RSBY has ironically got a raw deal in the 2015-16 Budget through name change as well as massive cut in funds allocation.
Moreover, in his anxiety to play the social welfare card to outwit UPA, Mr. Jaitley overlooked the urgency for the much-delayed bank and non-banking deposit insurance reforms. These are urgently needed to shore up public savings and to strengthen the stability of the non-performing assets-strained financial system.
Govt should check facts before proclaiming itself as ace runner
- Published on 01 March 2015
FM arrives to present budget 2015-16. (Edited image: Courtesy PIB)
Truth is stranger than fiction. This cliché has got a fresh lease of life with Finance Minister Arun Jaitley claiming that NDA Government is being criticized for being “too fast.”
Mr. Jaitley’s observation should be viewed as Government’s response to growing chorus of disparagement from the left, the right and other quarters. The news stories have linked FM’s comment to HDFC Chairman Deepak Parekh’s observation that the businessmen are getting impatient as nothing has changed on the ground in the first nine months of Modi Government.
While Mr. Jaitley’s comment sounds more of an exercise in make-believe, the Power Minister Piyush Goel’s rebuttal to HDFC Chairman smacks of aversion for healthy criticism. Mr. Goel reportedly stated: “The shares of Deepak Parekh's companies HDFC and HDFC Bank have been doing well. If he is unhappy about some personal matter, then he should speak about it.”
Unlike Mr. Parekh, CPI (M) stalwart Sitaram Yechury has mocked at Modi Sarkar. In an interview with daily, Mr. Yechury dubbed the new Government as UPA III as it taking UPA II policies to logical culmination.
There are different set of facts available in public domain to corroborate respective views of Mr. Jaitley, Mr. Parekh and Mr. Yechury. The truth about Government’s performance would thus lie not in black and white but in different shades of grey. And the grade of the shade depends on how and with which yardstick one compares Modi Government’s performance with UPA’s.
As the Government of the day is always subject to 24x7 scrutiny by TV channels and the social media, the ministers should exhibit the statesmanship to turn criticism into an opportunity to speed up good governance and growth. They must show the political will to clear mountain of pending reforms, both mundane and complex ones. Let their concrete actions silence the critics, if not convert them into admirers.
The need for pursuing such an approach gains urgency if we factor in the feedback from within BJP, NDA partners and the BJP’s humiliating defeat at Delhi State Assembly polls.
Answering a question in a free-wheeling discussion organized by a daily in December 2014, former NDA Minister Arun Shourie stated: “I don’t want to use harsh words but the consensus seems to be that when all is said and done, more is said than done. I am sure sincere efforts are being made and they may yield results, but as Akbar Allahabadi said, ‘Plateon ke aane ki awaaz toh aa rahi hai, khaana nahin aa raha’ (The plates’ sound can be heard but the food is not coming)”.
This column builds on Mr. Shourie’s pithy observation by citing just five facts. These would prove that Mr. Jaitley’s claim of Government acting too fast is nothing but a witty remark. The list of such facts is too long to befuddle any reader.
Don’t let national development become hostage of land politics
- Published on 15 February 2015
Paddy field: edited image courtesy-FACT
The budget session of Parliament is expected to witness fresh political slugfest over the land ordinance in particular and ordinance raj in general.
The Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has justified the land ordinance on various counts, one of which is to avoid India becoming “a nation of incomplete projects.” He has contended that ordinance would help farmers earn higher price for their land.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh, on the other hand, has claimed that ordinance is a blow to farmers. He likened it with the erstwhile the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA), which NDA Government had ushered in through an Ordinance and which the UPA Government repealed through an ordinance in 2004. Mr. Jairam dubbed the land ordinance as promotion of terror against farmers.
Polemics aside, the fact is that we have been a country of incomplete projects, non-starter projects and unrealized dreams for decades. This trend emerged much before the enforcement of the new land acquisition law on 1st January 2014 and its amendment through ordinance on 31st December 2014. And this anti-development, anti-jobs phenomenon would continue as laws alone can’t facilitate rational allocation and use of scarce land including the one bearing minerals and renewable energy. Forget fresh land acquisitions, the governments have at times failed to launch or complete projects on land that they own for many years.
Thus, both UPA and NDA are at fault for their narrower agenda for land legislation. Both the alliances have neglected a holistic perspective on land to minimize the need for fresh land acquisitions and to reduce related social conflicts.
For Every Reform; there is equal & opposite counter-reform
- Published on 30 January 2015
Newton3-Edited Image courtesy: grc.nasa.gov
If Sir Isaac Newton were immortal as are his laws of motions and if he were asked to give a spin to his third law on India’s licence raj, he would have perhaps stated: For every reform; there is equal and opposite counter-reform.
He would have written this law after witnessing dismantling of industrial licence raj and its substitution with spider-web like environmental regime over the last two decades or more.
It was a crime to produce more during licence, permit quota (LPQ) raj whose phased and substantial dismantling started in mid-1991. A similar situation now exists under the environmental raj that has grown by leaps and bounds over the last 20 years to occupy space vacated by LPQ.
Under the latter regime, productivity enhancement and technological improvements without prior permission were frowned upon. Ditto under the former.
Under LPQ, the companies had to follow a strict phased manufacturing programme (PMP) that extended right up to nuts and bolts. They had to rush to erstwhile Directorate General of Technical Development (DGTD) in Udyog Bhavan for even minor alterations in their plants and manufacturing operations.
The companies hesitantly revealed their built-in additional capacity under excess capacity regularization schemes which went through few versions in the eighties. It was akin to amnesty scheme for disclosure of black money.
The companies now follow-PMP type compliance under the present regime touted as sustainable development framework. They are filing applications for amendment of environmental clearances (ECs) to take on record higher capacity of 10-20 percent over the original disclosure.
They are queuing up before environmental authorities for seeking permission for good initiatives that might be construed by green babus as violations of long-winding stipulations. The conditions are all splashed over environmental clearance, forest clearance, wildlife clearance, consent to establish, consent to operate and other such permits.