Governments are the party's property?

After years of democratic efforts to form the government the political parties in power have realized that its party's owned government or personalities owned govt. Is this what has been enshrined in the constitution. Whether representatives of people in form of MLA's or MPs are nothing before the rule which now supersedes party and later personalities? The debate is important since the governments are now addressed as congress or BJP governments, and prime ministers becomes the proprietary of a particular party. During last months there has been several instances when spokes person of the party in power also defends the government. Any question raised to the government is defended or responded by the party in power. Is it an attempt to shy away from the constitutional clarity that government belong to everybody and its the government or its representative which are answerable to the people not the party in power. There has been opinion made to supersede the party structure and officials over the government. The party forgets that its representation of people act which allows them to functions at the tops, they represent a group of people who support similar ideologies.

The position of the highest chair in the government does not belong to a party he must be representing the government in all times till he is in the chair. In the mode of opposition the representatives from the public also started to blame the parties rather than the government. A government is not merely contributed from the representatives of the people, rather other two arms too contributes for the success and failures of the programs. The agenda of political parties are to voice the opinion in the forum where other two section has equal chance to participate in administration. In todays time there is notion of supremacy by the political class not among the citizens but also among the functionaries of the governments.

The operation difficulties and understanding of the sectors are limited within the political parties but the latest tradition of enforcing the decision to functionaries of the government is not healthy. The recent cases of health disaster where targets are given by the secretaries are often enforced to the health officers leading to negligence by the doctors while performing their duties. Whether the officials have power to say no? There is amount of fear and anxiety when the voice of the functionaries other than the political class is not heard.

There is total take over of the government by the political class which in many a times not bound to take decision for the interest of the citizens. Often the political class is bound by the ideologies which binds the thoughts, which may not be rationale for implementation of the schemes. The recent cancellation of the planning commission, low lying knowledge commission, and missions by earlier government also points out that there will not be now policy consistency when the government is changed and ruled by different parties.

Majority must prevail in action, but this must also bring the political uncertainity and paralysis more frequent in the country. How does the development planning and schemes going to suffer in such frequent change of governments run by the political parties?

Cleaning Urban India: More System Failure than People

Nearly a month is near to end since our PM started campaign to clean India. Though it started from Valmiki Colony in Delhi, the Page 3 celebraties invited for the cleaning opearation inclucing many wealthy attracted eye balls from media. The publicity and oops moments of the stars are seen near the nallas of Mumbai to Bangalore and Kolkata. Does this intigated the citizens, check the reality facts at least in cities 60-80 of the streets are supposed to be cleaned by employees of Municipalities (of course street dust and occassional wastes), door to door collection of waste is done, citizens have come out to give waste to collectors. Whereever there is lack of services the waste is still lying on the floors. Of course media cannot go beyond India Gate and Lutians Delhi to show case clean roads and yards of Bunglow sprite clean by the NDMC. The accidental street sweepers did not like themselves to be photographed with regular employees but carried out their own schedule for the photo-ops.

Batting for Investment: Smart City and Make in India

The world might have moved on after sudden demise of market economy in Europe and US, and slow improvement shows a teething problem due to market over actions. The imbalance in the trade does not allow the Indian traders to open their business abroad. The protective layers to security provided by the european government to their industries is immense. They help them to establish anywhere in the world provided there is surity of good and cheper production and low carbon footprints. The burden which the American and European cities laid on themselves due to exposure to manufacturing the products that are sold in Indian and Chinese markets is immense. The companies presence in India over the period has increased, more and more large traders wants to open their enterprise in India, and surely they would like to sell products manufactured in India, like IKEA or WALLMART, they can be sure of imports as the basis of investment in trading. They are better off if their suppliers can open manufacturing centres in India.

They are set to establish the manufacturing, but as we all know till recently its difficult to open Indian small and medium scale manufacturing of goods. The ease of investment in these daily consumables would allow them to bring technology and capital to harness the cheap labour and market. The potential markets does not allow them to move away in order to survive in consumer driven markets. The cities which are also termed as SMART which are likely to have more areas with like minded consumers and class which can consume at least half of the products readily is prepared to welcome.

We would surely have cities within A CITY. The new consumer landscape would provide opportunities to manufacture and market the brands which are premium as well as bulk in nature to induce consumer markets. The in competitive home products would be left to deal with rest of India, mostly which would be beyond projected 100 smart cities. The 'Make in India' essentially been driven by market turns out to be good investment destinations, the companies who needs to be competitive would survive but the majority communities where trade and commerce would fall.

The youth seeking employment would be trained to service the new FDI (misnomer changed to 'First Develop India') seeks wider acceptance or they would seek investment in the communities which are outcome of new urbanism, mostly emerging out of sub-urbia (Indian version-satellite towns). The cities in India is large in numbers with more than 90 million plus cities and even if the quarter of the population is served and rest utilized to produce products which needs to be sold back to them would generate revenue for manufactures in coming times.

The immense potential of human labour is to be directed by the state actions for providing labourers which are cheap and unprotected through state, would be a boon to investors looking for Make in India products. The ease of business is good till the conditionals are favourable for the Foreign Direct Investment. Forget about trade balance its win win for FDI, for us to stake the claim to be largest coolie population in the world.

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.