Upsetting the Planning Commission: Old Wine in New Bottle

The setting of the planning commission in year 1950, an about 54 years ago and up to 12th five plan it served the nation with advising the central government and directing the states from time to time. The planning commission established to promote and protect the rights of the citizens. The development planning emerges as science which was practiced and researched while we planned for our nation. The basis of planning commission was following;

The Constitution of India has guaranteed certain Fundamental Rights to the citizens of India and enunciates certain Directive Principles of State Policy, in particular, that the State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of the national life and shall direct its policy towards securing, among other things:-
(a) that the citizens, men and women, equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood;
(b) that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to sub serve the common good; and
(c) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment.

With new government elected in May2014, there is urge to change and new direction to be sought from the organisation which now is allowed to shut and become defunct. The new regime with eyes on the growth of economy, and post libralization effects give rise to capital and market based policy making. The rights based approach subsided by the economic and employment concerns of the urban India. The rising middle class and their hopes giving way to new thinking promoting greater participation from the enterprises. 

The so called 'think tank' based approach is not new, the guards changed with planning commission paid fitting obituary to its structure and planned era by going beyond the means by extending itself too much into the political economy. India has not achieved coordinated growth among the stakeholders like the states and centre, the federal structure needs to be strengthened with states taking more responsibility in planning.

The tiff between centre and state in earlier regime and emergence of Gujarat Model with more action towards inviting the private players and high stake of state in capital investment. The sector based growth in Gujarat, with more corporate segments of government, due to emergence of companies owned and sustained by Government. The model succeeded in reducing the government department to signing authorities and release of lumpsum financial support to new organisations. The improvised management techniques minus lack of government (middle level management) helped these government run corporate to functions. But none of the corporate (of government) was evaluated for its result except their contribution and zeal in signing the MoUs with limited companies. Public-Private partnership was done in true spirit with both the parties unshackled themselves from the government systems except receiving the financial aid and decision ability. The American dream of Gujarat government to establish the brand succeeded in making the model adaptable to wider use once the ruling party came to power in India.

Now, the model needs to be tested on India's economic fate yet, failing to recognize the need there is little doubt that the re-organised decision making body will not be planning commission. This would work as disinvestment commission on one hand when government departments would give birth to state run enterprises. Eventually, PPP model bringing out the change (financial control) to their own hand for quick decision making. It would be hard to replace the planning commission, by its nature but its easy to open a new way of governance with no government in place to decide the path to development. State and local bodies now need to compete among themselves to get the wider power and investment. It would be not long before they come together to demand more assistance and thus market playing its role.

For new ideas, a clean break with the past - The Hindu

For new ideas, a clean break with the past - The Hindu

Urban Development: India 5000 v/s 100 cities

The government of India with new leader in place looks for creating 100 cities down the line for the sake of investment. The projected growth of population for the urban India stands 500 million plus in next decade. The existing 5000 plus large, medium and small towns are vying for the investment. Except 68 JnNURM cities and 140 medium size town the country did not see much of investment in rest of the towns and cities. The current population of urban India has more than 70 percent population residing in little more than 150 one lac plus towns. These towns except the metropolitan cities have very shabby infrastructure and poor connectivity. There is lack of housing, infrastructure and transportation the key drivers for the city growth. The million plus cities are readied with metro, mass transit and expanded housing sector for the population, but the reality market has not picked up since most of the expected consumers in the cities vanished during last 5 years. The empty housing stock (mostly priced high) remains the concerns for the developers who are further looking to offer the houses to the needy at reasonable prices.

The thought for the new cities might have been emerged from the multi-national investors who may not be looking for the existing cities for the key investment in infrastructure but may offer investment in new destinations. These new areas are triggered by the industrial investments, express highways and rail/road corridors. The proposed 100 towns are expected to emerge from the thin air without any serious recommendation from the Urban Development ministry itself. The government so much guided by the industrial lobby (not known) that they have given go ahead with allocation of funds for looking at it. The existing towns though trying hard to improve did not find much support from the state governments often look for the central push for the reform (which did not come during first phase of renewal mission). The small and medium where the industrial have been trying to investment owing to its proximity to large urban centres needs serious look for the infrastructure investment often face poor treatment from the decision makers.

The oversized Delhi, Mumbai , Kolkata, Chennai and other select class I towns gets more funds since it remains the power centre in most of the states. Let it be but there is need to invest in second rug towns instead for looking at fresh 100 towns. Who is going to populate the towns, why do we need this approach and why neglect the existing town? etc would be questions asked. Even after six decades we still need a well guided urban policies, the lights emerging from the urban areas of China has been source of inspiration from many of our policy makers but they seldom see the neglect of hinterland and controlled population. The country needs a serious look on its approach at the cities.

The political differences, industrial investments and lobbying by the industrial houses have directed the recent policy shift towards the 100 new towns but we have to set the methodology to improve the delivery of services.  

Gag the Civil Society and tag them Anti National

The soft spoken ex prime minister has left a harsh decision to get the intelligence report on the Non-Governmental organisation. The recently submitted report alleges lots of irregularities (financial?) and anti national activities (protesting against developmental projects and stopping exploitation of environment). These NGOs are posing threat to the governments development programs (developing private industries, and investment in corporate facilitation infrastructure) which are supposed to raise the GDP. Due to civil society protest, now say the right to information, revised land acquisition bill and forest rights etc, which was passed by parliament under the pressure from the NGOs. The activism which led to the justice and policy for the Sardar Sarovar Dam, led by supreme court. All these measures made post 1991 libralisation led government unhappy over the civil society namely the NGOs. They could only target now the internationally funded NGOs for their alleged 'Anti National' or 'Anti Development' activities. How strange the governments led by the Congress in past ten years got the service from the National Advisory Council whose member belong to these so called internationally funded NGOs!! The present IB report made these NGOs responsible for the slow growth rate. Good at least they recognised that NGOs can become a big force to effect the governments decision making.

The activism of the NGOs led to rise of a political party namely 'Aam Aadmi Party' AAP due to their struggle against the injustice done by the past governments. Governments instead of listening to these voices rose with repressive actions against the citizens. The stalemate of December 2011 upto April -May 2012 with the Anna Movement and government showed the government the power of civil society. The action now against the NGOs are targeted to supress the voice of civil society in the name of anti-nationalism. The rights based activists are wrong in assuming that government listens to their concern of environment, they only provide lip service.

The government at present is led by huge corporate supporter base who want their projects on the fast track. The more the projects cleared, the more investment, and thus the raise in GDP in two digits. Instead of focusing on the 'inclusive growth' and addressing the needs of rural and urban poor the government tries to bypass their own agenda set for the Twelfth Five Year Plan. It tries to hide its failure to improve HDI in the name of economic growth. Thats what the economists have be tought in the classes and many PhDs they do to address the macro economic issues. The lack of sensitivities towards the civil society and improper action to supress independent voice. This is gag order by the government machinary against the NGOs and civil society to support unilaterly the desires of the capitalists. Let the people now think again in the manner in which government should be going about in running the country for next decade. The political parties do not matter, its sold to the high and mighty to thawart an attempt to protest against the unjust actions.