CMYK

ND-ND

SATURDAY, JANUARY 3, 2015

8 THE HINDU SATURDAY, JANUARY 3, 2015NOIDA/DELHI

EDITORIAL

In line with the Government of Indias approach

of less government and a move away from cen-

tralised planning, the NITI Aayog with a new

structure and focus on policy will replace the

64-year old Planning Commission that was seen as a

vestige of the socialist era. The new body, conceived

more in the nature of a think-tank that will provide

strategic and technical advice, will be helmed by the

Prime Minister with a Governing Council of Chief Min-

isters and Lt. Governors, similar to the National Devel-

opment Council that set the objectives for the Planning

Commission. The NITI Aayog seeks substitute cen-

tralised planning with a bottom-up approach where

the body will support formulation of plans at the village

level and aggregate them at higher levels of government.

In short, the new body is envisaged to follow the norm

of cooperative federalism, giving room to States to tailor

schemes to suit their unique needs rather than be dic-

tated to by the Centre. This is meant to be a recognition

of the countrys diversity. The needs of a State such as

Kerala with its highly developed social indicators may

not be the same as that of, say, Jharkhand, which scores

relatively low on this count. If indeed the body does

function as has been envisaged now and the jury will

be out on that States will, for the first time, have a say

in setting their own development priorities.

One significant change of note is that one of the

functions of the body will be to address the needs of

national security in economic strategy. Nowhere is this

more relevant than in the area of energy security where

India, unlike China, has failed to evolve a coherent

policy over the years. Similarly, networking with other

national and international think-tanks and with ex-

perts and practitioners, as has been envisaged, will add

heft to the advice that the NITI Aayog will provide. To

deflect criticism that this will be a free-market in-

stitution that ignores the deprived, the government has

taken care to make the point that the body will pay

special attention to the sections of society that may not

benefit enough from economic progress. How this oper-

ates in practice will bear close watching. Interestingly,

though it will not be formulating Central plans any

more, the NITI Aayog will be vested with the responsib-

ility of monitoring and evaluating the implementation

of programmes. Thus, while the advisory and monitor-

ing functions of the erstwhile Planning Commission

have been retained in the new body, the executive

function of framing Plans and allocating funds for Plan-

assisted schemes has been taken away. But who will

now be responsible for the critical function of allocating

Plan funds? Hopefully, there will be greater clarity on

this aspect in the days ahead.

Birth of a newinstitution

Professor Amartya Sen is probably themost renowned Indian intellectualanywhere today. His contribution todevelopment thinking has been sem-

inal and his work on moral philosophy, withinthe analytic tradition, stands among the verybest. Books such as On Ethics and Economics,Development as Freedom, and his Introduc-tion to Adam Smiths The Theory of MoralSentiments, along with his extensive articleson rational choice and human capability,show his ability to bridge disciplines and, inthe process, foreground important issuesabout the nature of what Malraux called theHuman Estate. He deservedly enjoys a placeamong the most innovative and influentialthinkers of the last 50 years. These stellarqualities of mind, and of public engagement,earned him the Mastership of Trinity College,Cambridge, the Thomas W. Lamont profes-sorship, and professorship of economics andphilosophy at Harvard, the Bharat Ratna, andthe Nobel Prize in Economics. His fine dis-tinction between beings and functionings,as key components of the idea of human devel-opment has given us, at just the right level ofabstraction, crucial conceptual pegs by whichto assess the working of Indian democracy.Prof. Sen has written extensively on India.

Views on Modi

With this formidable reputation it is nowonder that the questions asked of him at theExpress Adda, transcribed and posted onthe web on December 22, 2014, were so tame.While most of what he said has been saidbefore and has become part of our common-sense, one statement, which has several parts,was new and calls for our critical engagement.It concerns his view on the current PrimeMinister. I quote: One of the things that Mr.Modi did do is to give people a sense of faiththat things can happen. It may not have beenexactly the things that I would have liked but Ithink this is an achievement. This wouldntmake my differences with Mr. Modi on issueslike secularism go away but, on the otherhand, if we dont recognize it, were missingout on something very important. The paperheadlined the above statement. They toothought it was the key statement of the Adda.

There was no mention of the controversies,on Ghar Vapsi that have drawn headlinesover the last few weeks, or of the ordinance onland acquisition and its implications fortribal communities, or on communal violenceas an electoral strategy such as in Trilokpuri,or on declaring December 25 as Good Gov-

ernance day. These issues which have causedmany of us much anxiety, were missing fromthe published statement. He mentioned hisdifferences with the current regime but didnot elaborate.

Both his statement and his silences requireour critical scrutiny. Analytical philosophersdo not make casual statements. Their state-ments have a certain economy of languagewhich does not compromise on substance.When they articulate a position, we can as-sume that that position is significant for them.It derives from their conception of the justand the good. When they refer to an issue inbrief we can also assume that the issue is lesssignificant because it has not deserved elab-oration. When they ignore issues, these havelower priority in their scheme of things. Ana-lytical moral philosophers evaluate and judge.

When they do so in the case of India, they giveus some sense of How is India Doing? (toborrow the title of a 1982 NYRB article of Prof.Sen.)

Which people?

There are five parts to the statement thatneed our attention. The first is to give peoplea sense of faith that things can happen. Thesecond is not exactly the things that I wouldhave liked The third is but I think it is anachievement. The fourth is wont make mydifferences with Mr. Modi go away, and thefifth is if we dont recognize it were missingout on something very important. Each of thefive parts of his statement calls for a publicdiscussion. Let us discuss them in sequence.

What was Prof. Sen referring to when hesaid to give people a sense of faith that things

can happen? Who are these people? Thosethat filled Madison Square Garden or the Syd-ney Stadium or are they the Adivasis whoselands are now going to be taken away moreeasily with the amendments to the ForestRights Act? One has only to look at the reportof the high-level committee (the Xaxa Com-mittee Report) to get a sense of the conditionof Adivasi communities and the further im-pact on them of the new policy on mining andmineral extraction. Perhaps the people re-ferred to are the minorities whom the Parivaraffiliates target, and the Prime Minister doesnothing to control, in their Ghar Vapsi pro-gramme? Surely he did not mean those whowill be most affected by the cut in allocation tohealth and education, by as much as 20 percent in health, by the Narendra Modi govern-ment, because the cut goes against his entire

argument of investment in these two (out ofthe three) pillars of human development. Per-haps the people refers to the corporates buteven they, as per Bloomberg releases reportedin Livemint of December 22, are beginning tofeel disenchanted. So while it is unclear whothe people are who have been given a senseof faith that things can happen, was thisstatement based on a public opinion survey,which he had access to, or is it just impres-sionistic? But analytic philosophers do notmake casual statements.

The second part, not exactly the thingsthat I would have liked, can be read in twoways. It could be seen as language use, belong-ing to another culture a British understate-ment meaning instead not the things I likeor support and are things which I, in fact,oppose, or it could be Indian English, mean-

ing a position close to what I would haveliked, but not exactly the same. The twomeanings are very different. They have differ-ent political implications. Which one did Prof.Sen have in mind? This we will only know if weget a list of the things on which Mr. Modi hasgiven people a sense of faith and anothercontrasting list which Prof. Sen would preferto see. Since both lists are unavailable we haveto move to the third part of his statement, butI think it is an achievement. He refers in thesentence following this one, to the Prime Min-isters statement at the Red Fort where thePrime Minister talked about toilets and san-itation, etc, but Prof. Sen also mentions thatlittle has so far been achieved.

He applauds the Prime Minister on twoachievements: giving faith and raising is-sues. Coming from a moral philosopher, thisis high praise. This apparent endorsement istroublesome because what some of us, such asGopal Gandhi and Romila Thapar, see as theunravelling of the nation the banning ofbooks, rewriting of textbooks, the grant of aone billion dollar sanction by the State Bankof India to Mr. Adani for investments inmining in Australia, a cutback of a similaramount in allocations to health and educationsectors, major laws being passed through theordinance route, a proposed all India anti-conversion law, rejection of some recommen-dations of the Collegium of the SupremeCourt for appointment of judges to the Court,etc. Prof. Sen does not discuss.

Second order issues

The fourth, wont make my differenceswith Mr. Modi go away. This part belongs tothe second order issues, what I have referredto as the issue in brief. In other words, hisdifferences with Mr. Modi are not significantenough for him, at a major public discussion,after some months of the National Democrat-ic Alliance government, to dwell upon. Onefeels let down by this brevity since a publicintellectual, of global standing such as Prof.Sen, must use the occasion to speak truth topower. The dissenting tradition in India needssuch leadership. Noam Chomsky does sowhen he speaks about the excesses of Israeland the U.S. When an eminent public intellec-tual speaks, the legitimacy of the governmentstands either diminished or enhanced. Whenhe criticises policies, he initiates a new publicdiscussion which lesser commentators, suchas us, can draw upon and develop. When amoral philosopher of high standing awards acertificate of achievement to a government,opposing voices lose courage. Our disquietnow has to climb a higher mountain to beheard. There are times in the life of a societywhen moral philosophers are called upon tospeak, not in brief, not by ignoring crucialissues, but forthrightly by identifying the is-sues that define our times. They help the crit-ical voices within society to speak becausethey carry so much moral and philosophicalauthority. This is what an Adda essentially is.

The fifth part of his statement, if we dontrecognize it were missing out on somethingvery important, addresses our scholarly sen-sibilities. He seems to be saying that we areclosed minds, caught in ideological fixations,prone not to recognize it, inattentive to thechanged reality. It is both a critique of ourexisting intellectual attitude and an invitationto acknowledge that the ground has changedbecause of the achievements of the PrimeMinister. We need to have open minds or elsewe will miss something very important.Does this it refer to the tectonic shift insociety, to the Hindu Rashtra? If it is, then yes,it is something very important, but we havenot missed it. We have, in fact, been drawingattention to it. So what was the point we weremissing?

The analytical moral philosopher needs tobe interrogated in the manner we have justdone. If his statements are casual, then he willissue a clarification. If his statements are cod-ed, then he will issue an elaboration. Eitherway our public discourse will benefit from theresponse of this quintessential argumentativeIndian.

(Peter Ronald deSouza is Professor at theCentre for The Study of Developing Societies.The views expressed are personal.)

Speaking truth to powerWhen an eminent public intellectual like AmartyaSen speaks, the legitimacy of the governmentstands either diminished or enhanced. In hiscriticism, he initiates a new public discussion wecan draw upon. In his certificate of achievement,opposing voices lose courage. Disquiet now has toclimb a higher mountain to be heard

Peter Ronald deSouza

The dissenting tradition in India needs leadership. Noam

Chomsky does so when he speaks about the excesses of Israeland the U.S.

New policy bodyWith the setting up of the NITIAayog or National Institution forTransforming India (Jan.2) as asuccessor to the PlanningCommission, there must be a newspirit and wisdom in planning thedevelopment of the country. It mustproceed on the lines of the thinktank or policy institute in the U.S. Itwas Jawaharlal Nehru who said thatplanning is a continuousmovement towards desired goals.The governments goals must besimilar to this.

A.J. Rangarajan,Chennai

Changing nomenclatures, if theintent is to only stamp onessupremacy, is a sign of poorgovernance. The people of Indiavoted for change and not forunsettling settled areas ofparamount importance. Whychange for changes sake, givingfodder to the Opposition? DoesNITI Aayog have any revolutionaryidea? There has to be a balance andbreadth of vision in accepting goodthings irrespective of the period.Let the government not vieweverything with suspicion.

Balasubramaniam Pavani,Secunderabad

It was the Planning Commissionthat gave India a mixed economicoutlook, where public sectorenterprises existed alongside theprivate sector to achieve a socialistpattern of society in a welfare state.While the efficacy of the PlanningCommission was criticised by

many, one should not forget that theIndian economy is among thefastest growing, an achievementmade possible mainly because ofthe vision and mission laid down bythe Commission from time to time.It is clear that with the PrimeMinister focussing more oneconomic policies, and NITI Aayogseemingly fuelled by suchideologies, the welfarist approachwill be undermined soon.

Vishnu K.,Thrissur

Merely renaming the PlanningCommission wont work wonders.The present dispensation at theCentre is only focussing on slogansand rhetoric. The very structure ofNITI Aayog is a threat tofederalism. Minimising the role ofthe government to being that of anenabler reaffirms the newgovernments neo-liberal and pro-corporate agenda. It is strange thatthe government believes thetrickle-down theory will solve theproblems of the nation.

Kiran Jose,Pala, Kerala

Under the scannerThe report, Govt. targets climategroups (Jan.2), and the MHAstating that it would notcompromise on the nationalinterest must be looked at from thegeneral view that NGOs are meantto help the underdevelopedsections in developing countries.But the last decade and a half hasseen NGOs opposing every possibleproject aimed at progress in ourcountry. Yes, the rehabilitation of

land-affected people is needed, butthe diehard opposition to everyproject is unfathomable. India isbeing looked upon as a country thatwill be in the forefront in the nearfuture. For this to happen,accelerating progress will be key.The international funding of NGOsis suspect and there are manyquestions about their work.

Maya Hemant Bhatkar,Chennai

Taking on the TalibanPakistan will continue to fosterterror groups (Taking on good,bad, all Taliban, Jan.2). It is a statemuch like North Korea, gripped byparanoia that constantly feeds intoimagined threats of facing greatinjustice from the world and ofthere being threats to its religion. Itis said that school textbooks therecontain all kinds of distortedhistory and lead on young minds toimbibe religious hatred. Ageneration of Pakistanis is said tohave received this education, ofpromoting religious intoleranceand Indophobia. This is the crudeoil on which the terror economyruns in Pakistan. If Pakistan is toprogress, it must teach its childrenabout secularism and peace, aboutthe need for friendship withneighbours and a correct history.Otherwise, names such as JeM,LeT, LeJ or TTP will only keeprecurring and mutating andcontinuing to strike terror.

Apurv Lall,Ernakulam

It is wishful thinking that Pakistanwill finally awaken and start

eliminating terror on its soil.Hafeez Sayeed and DawoodIbrahim will continue to stay inPakistan with dignity, honour andimpunity. There is no guaranteethat India will not be struck by themagain. It is a fact that Pakistan isalways at the controls of anapparatus to wage a proxy waragainst India. India should declarePakistan as a terrorist state and indoing so have faith and confidencein itself than depending on the U.S.to help. No Indian government hastaken any action like this so far andinstead has been absorbing severalterror body blows.

S.P. Sharma.Mumbai

Critiquing PKThe article, Who is really offendedwith PK? (Jan.2), did well inanalysing the common thread in 3Idiots and PK. However, 3Idiots was a critique of theeducational system. PK is entirelyabout the commercialisation ofreligion, and adverse references toHindu deities are made throughoutthe film. The film is at best asimplistic take on a complex set ofsubjects. As for revenue collections,mindless films in the recent pasthave also earned money in figuresthat match what has been quoted.

N. Sridhar,Secunderabad

Every rational-minded Hinduknows that the core element ofHinduism is not about a bunch ofrituals, beliefs or ceremonies. If afilm-maker sends this message outthrough his medium for the

awareness of society at large, whatis so reprehensible about it? A trueHindu will never take up cudgelsagainst films with a purpose.

Vijaya Krishna Pillai G.,Alappuzha

Films are a source of entertainmentand should be seen that way.Political factions should not try tochurn butter out of the milk toaccrue gains. The film is a mix ofthe need to shun a superstitiousattitude, creating awareness aboutthe melodrama by godmen andtheir followers and enabling ascientific bent of mind, all in ahilarious way. Instead ofappreciating such films, we seem tobe intent on discouraging them.

Sherry Ahluwalia,Chandigarh

I went to see the film without anyidea about the story. I am a middle-class, broadminded Hindusecularist and a fan of Aamir Khan. Iexpected something classic andoriginal. As long as the director hadstuck to the subject of fake godmenit would have been fine, but what Isaw was not alright. The sceneinvolving Shiva was uncalled for,and questioning idol worship,pilgrimages and rituals amountedto hitting below the belt. Millions ofHindus are hurt by this constantbashing by Bollywood, which wouldnever dare to produce films thatwould offend or denigrate theminority communities. It is timepeople made movies that displayeda little more sensitivity.

Ramdas Naik,Chennai

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Letters emailed to letters@thehindu.co.in must carry the fullpostal address and the full name or the name with initials.

Yet another bold initiative was taken on the last

day of 2014 when the Union government made

public the draft National Health Policy 2015.

The policy is a first step in achieving universal

health coverage by advocating health as a fundamental

right, whose denial will be justiciable. While it makes

a strong case for moving towards universal access to

affordable health-care services, there are innumerable

challenges to be overcome before the objectives become

a reality. The current government spending on health

care is a dismal 1.04 per cent of gross domestic product

(GDP), one of the lowest in the world; this translates to

Rs.957 per capita in absolute terms. The draft policy has

addressed this critical issue by championing an increase

in government spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP

(Rs.3,800 per capita) in the next five years. But even this

increase in allocation falls short of the requirement to

set right the dysfunctional health-care services in the

country. Citing the health-care systems low absorption

capacity and inefficient utilisation of funding as an alibi

for not raising the spending to 3 per cent of GDP is

nothing but a specious argument. Insufficient funding

over the years combined with other faulty practices

have led to a dysfunctional health-care system in the

country. Undivided focus is an imperative to strengthen

all the elements of health-care delivery. The failure of

the public health-care system to provide affordable

services has been the main reason that has led to in-

creased out-of-pocket expenditure on health care. As a

result, nearly 63 million people are driven into poverty

every year. The Ebola crisis in Liberia, Guinea and

Sierra Leone, which underlined the repercussions of a

weak public health-care system, should serve as a grim

reminder of this.

The national programmes provide universal coverage

only with respect to certain interventions such as ma-

ternal ailments, that account for less than 10 per cent of

all mortalities. Over 75 per cent of the communicable

diseases are outside their purview and only a limited

number of non-communicable diseases are covered. It

is, therefore, crucial for the Union government to un-

dertake proactive measures to upgrade the health-care

services of poorly performing States such as Bihar and

Uttar Pradesh. As it stands, health will be recognised as

a fundamental right through a National Health Rights

Act only when three or more States request it. Since

health is a State subject, adoption by the respective

States will be voluntary. Though a different approach

has been taken to improve adoption and implementa-

tion by States, the very objective of universal health

coverage that hinges on portability will be defeated in

the absence of uniform adoption across India.

A step in the right direction

CARTOONSCAPE