There are alternative vendors but costs would go up. We must encourage equipment manufacture with innovation and now
Yes, the economic realities of China dominating much of our product supply chains, from electronics to drugs, weigh heavy on us. Yes, we are deeply aware of sudden disruptions, litigation and fair trade violations if we take a dramatic step of boycotting China overnight. And while building self-sufficiencies is a long-term and sustained effort, there is no reason why we cannot begin taking atma nirbharata seriously while we can. For the latest Chinese ambush at Ladakh has cost us 20 soldiers and over-tested our patience and strategic responsibility in the region. China continues to eat into our territory as it always has. It won’t settle as long as it doesn’t get what it wants and this presumed supremacy has finally got the Government thinking about reducing our dependencies on it. For the summit diplomacy, which has yielded nothing on the ground except encouraging more hostilities, has been a colossal waste of time that smartly sidestepped contentious border issues and helped China deepen its market access as part of trade deals. So Union Minister for Road Transport and MSMEs Nitin Gadkari has said that no Chinese company will be allowed to participate in any highway or MSME project either directly or indirectly, the latter implying outsourcing consultancies by the bidder company. He even suggested alternative technologies that would help us compete on cost effectiveness and gave the example of PPEs, something which we thought would have to come in bulk from Chinese factories and something which we are exporting now. The shrinkage of trade volume to India won’t impact China much, which can only be upset about being denied entry to a future vibrant market, and it is not that current commitments are not being honoured. It is just that manufacturing our own is a sovereign decision and COVID-19 and the Galwan attack have just been accelerators. Similarly, the Department of Telecommunications cancelled the much anticipated 4G upgradation tender of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) to avoid participation by Chinese companies like Huawei and ZTE. Local operators such as Airtel, Vodafone and Jio have been asked to reduce dependence on Chinese companies. Meanwhile, the Indian Railways has already cancelled a Rs 471 crore contract with the Beijing National Railway for a project on the Eastern Dedicated Freight Corridor. Of course, the US, too, has been red flagging concerns about Huawei and ZTE being a “national security risk” because of their data mining and surveillance operations while working their telecom grids. It is even exerting pressure on its allies, India now getting top billing, to comply by banning them.
But that’s not the reason why India is going for a drastic decision on telecom. It is choosing sectors where either an alternative supply chain exists or where it is possible to magnify home-grown capacities. Compared to the mobile handset industry, where replacing Chinese supply chain and products is almost impossible, in the telecom equipment market that is very much possible. There are European nations, too, in the business though supplies from here would come at a cost. The size of the telecom equipment market in India is around Rs 12,000 crore and the share of Chinese products is currently around 25 per cent, simply because their prices are attractive to operators. That’s why the 4G network of big players like Airtel and Vodafone have been built by Huawei and ZTE. Huawei alone has aggressively made inroads into nearly 25 per cent of the total telecom equipment market in India. While Bharti Airtel uses up to 30 per cent Chinese telecom equipment, including Huawei, for its networks, Vodafone Idea uses as much as 40 per cent. Reliance Jio is the only operator functioning without a Chinese vendor as its network is fuelled by South Korea’s Samsung. But replacement, be it from South Korea, Taiwan or any other Southeast Asian nation, can only work in the short-term if self sufficiency is our ultimate goal. Remember that despite the “Make in India” launch in 2015, there has been no impetus for localised equipment production. The ban comes at a time when India is seeking to raise $84 billion from a sale of airwaves, particularly for new technology, which would revolutionise connectivity. So we need to immediately ramp up existing electronic manufacturing facilities and divert them towards 5G equipment manufacturing if we are to exclude Chinese firms from 5G trials. Indian innovation has always risen to the top during crisis and we could leverage our home-grown talent to re-engineer receivers and emitters in discarded mobile devices to make 5G equipment in a cost-effective manner. We should be as enthusiastic about announcing innovations and encouraging R&D than just announcing a ban that spooks markets.
There are alternative vendors but costs would go up. We must encourage equipment manufacture with innovation and now
Yes, the economic realities of China dominating much of our product supply chains, from electronics to drugs, weigh heavy on us. Yes, we are deeply aware of sudden disruptions, litigation and fair trade violations if we take a dramatic step of boycotting China overnight. And while building self-sufficiencies is a long-term and sustained effort, there is no reason why we cannot begin taking atma nirbharata seriously while we can. For the latest Chinese ambush at Ladakh has cost us 20 soldiers and over-tested our patience and strategic responsibility in the region. China continues to eat into our territory as it always has. It won’t settle as long as it doesn’t get what it wants and this presumed supremacy has finally got the Government thinking about reducing our dependencies on it. For the summit diplomacy, which has yielded nothing on the ground except encouraging more hostilities, has been a colossal waste of time that smartly sidestepped contentious border issues and helped China deepen its market access as part of trade deals. So Union Minister for Road Transport and MSMEs Nitin Gadkari has said that no Chinese company will be allowed to participate in any highway or MSME project either directly or indirectly, the latter implying outsourcing consultancies by the bidder company. He even suggested alternative technologies that would help us compete on cost effectiveness and gave the example of PPEs, something which we thought would have to come in bulk from Chinese factories and something which we are exporting now. The shrinkage of trade volume to India won’t impact China much, which can only be upset about being denied entry to a future vibrant market, and it is not that current commitments are not being honoured. It is just that manufacturing our own is a sovereign decision and COVID-19 and the Galwan attack have just been accelerators. Similarly, the Department of Telecommunications cancelled the much anticipated 4G upgradation tender of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) to avoid participation by Chinese companies like Huawei and ZTE. Local operators such as Airtel, Vodafone and Jio have been asked to reduce dependence on Chinese companies. Meanwhile, the Indian Railways has already cancelled a Rs 471 crore contract with the Beijing National Railway for a project on the Eastern Dedicated Freight Corridor. Of course, the US, too, has been red flagging concerns about Huawei and ZTE being a “national security risk” because of their data mining and surveillance operations while working their telecom grids. It is even exerting pressure on its allies, India now getting top billing, to comply by banning them.
But that’s not the reason why India is going for a drastic decision on telecom. It is choosing sectors where either an alternative supply chain exists or where it is possible to magnify home-grown capacities. Compared to the mobile handset industry, where replacing Chinese supply chain and products is almost impossible, in the telecom equipment market that is very much possible. There are European nations, too, in the business though supplies from here would come at a cost. The size of the telecom equipment market in India is around Rs 12,000 crore and the share of Chinese products is currently around 25 per cent, simply because their prices are attractive to operators. That’s why the 4G network of big players like Airtel and Vodafone have been built by Huawei and ZTE. Huawei alone has aggressively made inroads into nearly 25 per cent of the total telecom equipment market in India. While Bharti Airtel uses up to 30 per cent Chinese telecom equipment, including Huawei, for its networks, Vodafone Idea uses as much as 40 per cent. Reliance Jio is the only operator functioning without a Chinese vendor as its network is fuelled by South Korea’s Samsung. But replacement, be it from South Korea, Taiwan or any other Southeast Asian nation, can only work in the short-term if self sufficiency is our ultimate goal. Remember that despite the “Make in India” launch in 2015, there has been no impetus for localised equipment production. The ban comes at a time when India is seeking to raise $84 billion from a sale of airwaves, particularly for new technology, which would revolutionise connectivity. So we need to immediately ramp up existing electronic manufacturing facilities and divert them towards 5G equipment manufacturing if we are to exclude Chinese firms from 5G trials. Indian innovation has always risen to the top during crisis and we could leverage our home-grown talent to re-engineer receivers and emitters in discarded mobile devices to make 5G equipment in a cost-effective manner. We should be as enthusiastic about announcing innovations and encouraging R&D than just announcing a ban that spooks markets.
In the Indian car market, the smaller you are, the better your sales. Last month has been much better for the auto sector
The past quarter has been traumatic for the Indian car and bike industry. However, after April, when companies registered zero sales, things have improved much. On the whole, for most automobile manufacturers, sales in June were around half of what they were last year, same month. While we must remember that 2019, too, had seen a decline in automobile sales, the one positive this year has been that firms have been able to recover. Sales for almost every manufacturer doubled from May to June as unlocking began. In the two-wheeler market, the largest manufacturer, Hero Motocorp, sold 450,744 units in the past month, almost three-quarters of the number it sold in June. Bajaj Auto, too, saw an increase in sales, although the manufacturer had a tough time controlling the unfortunate spread of the Chinese virus at its Waluj plant. This came just a few weeks after its boss, Rajiv Bajaj, attacked the Government for the lockdown. Most manufacturers, dealers and workshops across the country are mostly open now, other than those inside a containment zone. Yet, there are some interesting trends that are emerging from last month’s sales. The first is that rural demand has contributed much towards a sharp recovery. This is evident due to the fact that Mahindra Tractors, the largest player in the agricultural vehicle market, has seen a rapid climb in its sales figures. This is indicative of a positive monsoon so far. Similarly, for two-wheeler companies, there is a seeming rural bias, evident in greater sales of commuter motorcycles and a decline in urban-focussed scooters and 150cc plus motorcycles. For cars as well as firms such as Maruti, Hyundai and Tata, who have a larger small car portfolio, are seeing sales pick up. Larger and higher specification vehicles are seeing a commensurate decline in their aggregate demand. However, manufacturers were quick to warn against picking up too many future trends based on last months’ sales as the process of unlocking continues with a bit of confusion still reigning in major cities, such as Chennai and Mumbai, the former being a major automobile production hub.
At the same time, manufacturing remains impacted. Large-scale manufacturers have not been able to move to three-shift operations and smaller suppliers are dealing with not only a smaller labour pool but also the current Sino-India brouhaha. Several intermediate components, as well as manufacturing tools and dyes, come from across the border. Manufacturing might not stabilise before 2021 and not every manufacturer, component supplier, transporter or dealer might be able to deal with the crisis that far. Some Government support will be of great help though.
(Courtesy: The Pioneer)
Employers need to be humane and must be dealt with strictly if they fail to take care of workers in emergencies, like they did during the pandemic
India went into a nationwide lockdown on March 24 to combat the Coronavirus pandemic and the entire Government machinery was galvanised by invoking the National Disaster Management Act. However, the sudden shutdown announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi created a serious governance and humanitarian crisis as panicked migratory workers in metro cities like Delhi, Mumbai, and Ahmedabad set out for their home States on foot. The Government, before announcing the lockdown, should have asked the Labour Ministry to plan an exit route for migratory workers who are the backbone of urban India’s economy. But that was not done, leading to endless suffering for the migrant workers.
Bureaucrats enjoy tremendous clout in running the Government and advising politicians, but in this case the Government machinery, from top to bottom was in deep slumber and failed to visualise the enormity of the problem. The district-level bureaucracy however, did extremely well in properly visualising and enforcing the lockdown and contained the pandemic to a certain extent. Had the migratory workers been tackled carefully, the virus would not have spread to rural India. For over two months there was chaos on the roads as nervous labourers and daily wage workers, who lead a hand-to-mouth existence, decided to go home and cover hundreds of kilometres on foot. As a result, many died midway due to hunger, thirst, fatigue and some died in horrific road and railway accidents.
The Prime Minister and the Centre realised their mistakes quite late in the day and started running special Shramik trains to ferry the migrant workers to their hometowns, just as they began a phase-wise easing of the lockdown. As a consequence, the returning migrant workers spread the virus in their respective States. For example, in Uttarakhand there were only a few cases of COVID-19 in Dehradun and Haridwar earlier. But now the whole State is witnessing a daily spike in cases. This could have been avoided with foresight.
Most of the migrants fall in the category of the unorganised workforce and are employed by enterprises owned by individuals. Some are self-employed workers engaged in the production, sale of goods or provide services of any kind. This also includes a worker in the organised sector who is not covered by any Acts mentioned in Schedule II of the Unorganised Workers’ Social Security Act, 2008. The Government enacted the Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 to protect them but the mandarins of labour and other Ministries failed to implement the provisions. It is estimated that `31,000 crore is available under this Act for building and construction workers. Similarly, labour welfare funds are also available.
Before announcing the lockdown, the Central Government should have asked all the migratory labourers to register at the nearest Government office and prepared an online list of such people living in the cities with the help of the State machinery. Based on this list, the funds available for the welfare of labour could have been utilised to retain them at their work stations. The employers should have been asked to pay their salaries for at least three-four months, with some support from the Government. Now, the Centre has announced a `20 lakh crore stimulus package for the economy, which also includes a package for migrant workers who have returned home. Had it been done at the start of the lockdown, economic activities would have assumed without a hitch. After all, without workers, the industrial and manufacturing economy cannot work. Now the Government has eased the lockdown but people are finding it difficult to find manpower to restart manufacturing units.
The people at the helm of affairs must ponder over the fate of the 45 crore unorganised sector workers who are the backbone of the `10 lakh crore construction, industrial and agriculture sectors. The Government should constitute a committee to identify the sector-wise strength of the unorganised sector workers and their problems of finding a livelihood. The Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service) Act, 1996 had made adequate provisions for accommodation, crèche, canteen, education and healthcare. But these were never implemented by the contractors, Government engineers and other supervisors, though there is provision for penalty and punitive action. In the absence of unions, workers are not aware of their legal rights and are exploited and shunted out at the slightest protest.
The Government ought to direct all stakeholders and create an enforcement regime to ensure welfare measures for the unorganised sector workers. The recent package announced should be used to create all facilities in urban localities as per the 1996 Act provisions. It would be desirable to frame a new comprehensive Act covering all migrant/unorganised sector workers. The employers need to be humane and must be dealt with strictly if they fail to take care of workers in emergencies, like they did during the present pandemic. Labourers deserve to live with dignity. We must remember the words of Mahatma Gandhi who once said, “Man becomes great exactly in the degree in which he works for the welfare of his fellow men.”
(Writer: VK Bahuguna; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
The People’s Republic of China has proven itself to not act in good faith. This hitback was coming ever since June 15
The news that India has banned 59 Chinese-made apps did not really come as a huge surprise to many ever since the unfolding of events on June 15. Highly popular applications such as TikTok, Shareit and WeChat have been banned. Some of these apps count India among their biggest markets. For example, India is the biggest driver of the TikTok app and the ban is expected to hit its owner Bytedance hard as it had plans to invest $1 billion here. So, it would be prudent for the Government to make a watertight data security and privacy case for banning these apps, much of which have been surreptitiously used for data mining and surveillance. As it is China is countering the ban as a violation of WTO and fair trade rules. Which is why India should be thorough in making a case for national security. This wouldn’t be too difficult for some apps such as TikTok. It is unfortunate though that several Indian youth, particularly from the subaltern classes, are shedding crocodile tears. That said, two and a half decades of the rise of the internet has taught us that platforms like these come and go. So, these “creators” will clearly find something new. Already similar Indian apps like ShareChat are registering higher traffic. Of course, the banning of social platforms is a very small step to counter the Chinese aggression. Nevertheless, the step has been met with widespread approval, even by some of those who have been directly impacted.
The fact is that over the past few years, China has proven that it is not a “good faith” actor. It has been in its interest that until now India remained weak, both economically and militarily. The fact that Indian soldiers stood up to colleagues despite having lost 20 of our men gave the Chinese a dose of their own medicine. That our soldiers were able to kill many Chinese personnel is telling. Banning apps is one thing and acting against Chinese consumer products will possibly be next in the line. But extricating Indian industry from the Chinese supply chain is next to impossible. Industries in our country are heavily dependent on Chinese-made capital goods such as power-generating turbines and industrial machinery as well as China-made intermediates such as active pharmaceutical ingredients. Various sectors would collapse in the absence of Chinese products. We have only ourselves to blame for being in this situation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi should harbour some of the blame. His perceived bonhomie with Chinese President Xi Jinping was just an act for the latter. And Xi took Modi for a ride. At the same time, the entire philosophy of selling cheap products and the lowest bidder concept has led to India actively importing from China instead of building up additional capacity or even consider an alternative. Here, the Kolkata and Nagpur metro rail systems are guilty of getting new rolling stock from Dalian instead of encouraging local production lines. India must make it clear that it will not allow Chinese companies to bid for infrastructure projects. Most Chinese companies are beholden to the Chinese Communist Party and, thus, to Xi. We cannot trust the Chinese or their companies. The Ladakh standoff will continue for some time but we have to make it clear to China that India can stand on its own feet. We must reject the Chinese temptation of cheap products and consumer goods. Enough is enough. What is needed is a firm will of the Government to build our own self-sufficiencies and end this dependence.
(Courtesy: The Pioneer)
Even as States expect full and timely compensation for the shortfall in their tax revenue, vis-à-vis a given benchmark, the Union Govt has been making short payment and that too after a time lag
The dwindling tax revenue of both the Centre and States since the financial year (FY) 2019-20 has led to a piquant situation. Even as States expect “full” and “timely” compensation for the shortfall in their tax revenue (their own collection plus the amount received as their share in indirect tax collected by the Centre as per the Finance Commission’s devolution formula) vis-à-vis a given benchmark, the Union Government has been making short payments and that too, after a time lag. The compensation to States is intertwined with the Goods and Services Tax (GST) in vogue since July 1, 2017. In fact, the passage of the Constitutional Amendment Bill (August, 2016) leading to the launch of GST was predicated on the Centre giving a legally-binding commitment that it would compensate the States for the loss of revenue they would incur under the GST vis-à-vis the revenue they would get under the subsisting dispensation of excise duty, sales tax or Value Added Tax (VAT) plus other local taxes (GST was first mooted in 2006 by the then UPA Government but did not bear fruit during its term as it was unwilling to give this commitment).
Accordingly, the Modi Government enacted the GST Compensation Act (2017) to provide for compensation to the States for five years between 2017 and 2022, for the loss of revenue to be calculated as the difference between their actual collection (including transfer of their share in indirect tax collected by the Centre) and the amount they would have got with annual growth at 14 per cent over the 2015-16 level, under the erstwhile dispensation.
However, to ensure that the Centre has enough funds to pay for the shortfall faced by States, it also passed an amendment to the GST Compensation Act (2018) to levy a cess on the supply of certain goods and services. The cess is levied on demerit goods (those which fall in the highest tax slab at 28 per cent, with the other slabs being five per cent, 12 per cent and 18 per cent, besides the exempt category) such as automobiles, tobacco, alcohol and so on, with a proviso to use the proceeds for compensating States. The cess was to remain in force for five years in sync with the Centre’s obligation to compensate States for that period. The rationale behind keeping these arrangements in place for five years was that at the end of this transition, i.e. 2021-22, the GST dispensation would have acquired the much-needed “vitality” and “resilience” to yield sufficient resources for the States to meet their budgetary requirements within the prudential limit set under the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management Act (FRBM), thereby obviating the need for any extra support.
Before we proceed to do the number crunching and analyse the situation on ground zero, it should be abundantly clear that two provisions in the law viz. one relating to compensation and the other levy of cess (and collection thereof) have to be viewed in conjunction with each other. In other words, the discharge of the constitutional obligation to compensate States for the loss of revenue would be possible only when there are enough funds available.
During the first two years (since the launch of GST) viz. 2017-18/2018-19, the collection from cess was higher than the shortfall in tax revenue faced by the States. During July 2017-March 2018, the cess collected was Rs 62,600 crore against Rs 41,150 crore needed for compensating the States. During 2018-19, the cess collection was Rs 95,000 crore against Rs 69,000 crore distributed among States as compensation. As a result, even after fully meeting the compensation requirement of the States, at the beginning of 2019-20, the Centre had a surplus of about Rs 47,000 crore in the tax pool.
During 2019-20, the situation deteriorated. Against the requirement of over Rs 1,35,000 crore, proceeds from the cess were just about Rs 95,000 crore leaving a deficit of about Rs 40,000 crore. Notwithstanding this deficit, the Centre could have drawn upon the surplus from previous years to ensure timely release of the compensation amount. But, that was not to be and there was considerable delay. For instance, the compensation for October/November, 2019 about Rs 34,000 crore was released in February/April, 2020.
Now, the devastation triggered by the lockdown has led to a steep decline in tax collection of both the Centre and States (for instance, GST collection during April and May was less than 50 per cent of the amount collected during April/May, 2019). The collection from cess is also expected to go down drastically. Against monthly compensation requirement of over Rs 20,000 crore, proceeds from the cess are estimated to be just about Rs 9,500 crore leading to a deficit of Rs 10,500 crore or around Rs 1,25,000 crore for the whole of the current year.
Unlike last year when the surplus available from the previous years helped in salvaging the situation, during the current year, the Centre has nothing to fall back upon. In this backdrop and with States unwilling to relent on their claim for compensation in full, the Centre is talking of force majeur. Put simply, the latter may have expressed its inability to pay invoking an event beyond control or an “act of God” (Covid-19).
Whether or not force majeur can be invoked, thereby absolving the Centre of its obligation to compensate the States is for legal luminaries to decide. However, the latter need to appreciate that in the absence of adequate funds in the tax pool, even if the former is willing to compensate them, it may still not be able to do it. It can take recourse to additional borrowings or ask the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to print more currency but these options entail serious risk.
As regards borrowings, already the Centre has increased its borrowing programme for the current year by 50 per cent to over Rs 12,00,000 crore. While this factored in the liabilities arising from the Aatma Nirbhar Bharat Abhiyan announced by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman during May, thereafter, the Government has taken onto itself an additional expenditure commitment of Rs 90,000 crore (Rs 50,000 crore on employment scheme for migrant labour and Rs 40,000 crore additional allocation for MGNREGA).
If, to this we add Rs 1,25,000 crore required to cover the deficit in the tax pool, the Centre will need to borrow another Rs 2,15,000 crore, taking the total to more than Rs 14,00,000 crore. This will further crowd the market and increase interest rates.
Alternatively, monetising the deficit has inflationary implications; besides, it sends a wrong message to stakeholders especially rating agencies about India’s ability to protect its macro-economic fundamentals. What then is the way forward? How can the States and the Centre wriggle out of the riddle without undermining India’s economic fundamentals?
Going strictly by the spirit of the two constitutional amendments relating to compensation and cess, when there is not enough money in the tax pool, the compensation amount to the States needs to be reduced to balance the two. This means that the States should be content with what is available in the tax pool; instead, they should fund the Rs 1,25,000 crore deficit through additional borrowing on their own or rationalise their expenditure to bring about savings.
An alternative which is expected to give comfort to all stakeholders is to continue the cess on demerit products beyond the five-year period (this will require further amendment to the GST Compensation Act, 2018). The deficit in the tax pool during 2020-21 should be met from additional borrowings by the Centre with a clear stipulation that these will be serviced from the proceeds of cess during the extended period say, three years starting from 2022-23.
The States should desist from pursuing their demand made before the 15th Finance Commission for continuing with compensation for three more years. This is not only out of sync with the original intent of the amendment Act on compensation (it was meant to be a stopgap aimed at protecting their revenue till such time GST starts yielding the desired buoyancy in revenue) but also will come in the way of servicing the loan taken to fund the current year’s deficit.
When, an overwhelming portion of the proceeds from the cess during the extended period is dedicated to giving compensation to States, there won’t be any money left to service the loans taken now. Considering a special dispensation (as proposed above) to bail out the States during the current excruciating year, the GST Council should impress upon States to take urgent steps, like bringing more businesses under the tax net, reining in evasion, eliminating fraudulent claims of input tax credit and so on, to ensure that tax revenue under the new regime is self-sustaining, obviating the need for compensation at least during normal times.
(Writer: Uttam Gupta; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
If work from home is to become a sustainable strategy, there is a need to understand and plan for the effects of this on the whole urban ecosystem
Historically, high urbanisation has been one of the major drivers of economic growth. As cities grow and offer new opportunities, they become attractive to the rural population. In turn, this inflow of workers helps sustain urban economic growth. However, the COVID-19 has brought cities to a standstill and one of the crisis’ most visible effects — the shift from an office-based system to work from home (WFH) arrangements — is likely to have spillover effects on many sectors of the urban economy. With many firms planning long-term strategies for WFH and reducing office space, remote working is here to stay. For example, Infosys recently announced permanent WFH for 33 per cent of its employees.
Though adapting to this new normal may be initially difficult, white-collar workers stand to benefit from low travel costs and the stress associated with travelling in a congested and polluted environment.
However, the effect of this shift to a WFH culture on informal workers, who largely depend on formal sector demand, has not received much attention. In India, 80 to 90 per cent of the workers are employed in the informal or semi-informal sector. For many who work in the cities, livelihoods are heavily dependent on demand from an office-based working system. So, it is clear that workers who are going to be badly hit include cycle rickshaw pullers, autorickshaw and taxi drivers, and street vendors who sell food and other commodities outside offices and Metro stations. Additionally, with the lower in-person presence of professionals in the workplace, offices will also require fewer personnel for housekeeping and administrative services. Thus, remote working has created long-term uncertainty for the informal workers.
More than 10 million street vendors in India are likely to be impacted. A common sight in most cities used to be vendors selling a wide cornucopia of products outside Metro stations and large office spaces. A significant share of this workforce also relied on street-food vendors for their meals. However, the fear of COVID-19 exposure and normalisation of WFH has led many people to switch to the more contactless online ordering and the livelihoods of street vendors are now in question. Many have already chosen to go back to their villages or are at the mercy of donations and Government aid to make ends meet.
In order to provide relief to these vendors, the Government recently announced its scheme for the provision of loans. However, many vendors have not been able to avail of this benefit due to the requirements of the associated paperwork and registration process. Additionally, many vendors are not willing to take the loan scheme as it will only put an extra burden of repayment on them in a no-business scenario. Hence, apart from additional reforms to safeguard the livelihoods of street vendors, there is a need to build back consumer confidence to shop from vendors. If demand continues to stay low, the State Governments will need to rethink how alternate livelihoods and support programmes could be provided for these vendors.
The earnings of taxi, autorickshaw drivers and other informal mobility service providers have also taken a hit, even after easing up of lockdowns. The revenues of Ola and Uber driver partners have fallen significantly, and about 2,000 drivers have been removed by these platforms till date. Those still in business are struggling to stay afloat; many claim that their earnings are down by up to 80 per cent.
This situation is likely to persist, as a large volume of demand for these services came from work trips. Much before the lockdowns, cab driver earnings had already fallen due to changes in incentive schemes. Whereas a driver could earn over Rs 50,000 in the initial years of cab aggregation, their earnings have fallen to around Rs 20,000 in recent years. Most are struggling to afford basics and pay rent, and the situation is even worse for those who had purchased vehicles on EMIs.
The informal mobility services providers such as rickshaw, autorickshaw and Grameen Sewa drivers are also struggling due to lack of demand. Social distancing measures have necessitated business at reduced capacity, making the trips unaffordable for shared mobility services like Grameen Sewa and shared autos. These services were also used heavily as a last and first-mile option, and this demand is also likely to remain low with Metro services shut and public transport limited. Some State Governments had provided monetary help to all these operators when the lockdown had begun. But this could not be availed by many due to lack of paperwork. Now with the lack of demand likely to sustain due to WFH being mainstreamed and reduced leisure trips, these workers are still in need of major assistance. Since a large percentage of them also own vehicles, shifting to alternate livelihoods will also be difficult.
If remote working is to become a sustainable strategy, there is a need to understand and plan for the effects of this on the whole urban ecosystem. While WFH may benefit companies and foster some environmental benefits, it will also negatively affect other parts of the system. The most affected are from lower-income groups and those not covered by most Government safety nets. There is also likely to be very little scope to shift to alternate livelihoods with the expected economic contraction. Many people had already invested in physical capital which will now no longer be able to generate the expected income, leaving them burdened with unpayable debts. In addition to providing further loans, the Government must consider how to provide immediate relief to these sections of society. Immediate relief can be provided in terms of waiving penalties and permits such as challans for transport service providers. Many vendors also face undue evictions and are forced to bribe officials; theft of property or goods is another threat that their community faces. Hence, the regulatory systems need to be strengthened to safeguard vendors from such incidents.
The Centre needs to expand the unemployment claims programme to include the informal sector workers. They should be able to avail benefits for a certain number of days in a year, in case their businesses become unsustainable. If we can’t provide sustainable livelihoods to them, then the actual cost of the pandemic will be much higher.
(Writer: Promit Mookherjee | Aakansha jain; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
After the Chinese built up a massive industrial base, they needed markets and raw materials and this has made them imperialist
All sorts of things are being said about the happenings in Ladakh. Prime Minister Narendra Modi initially said there was no incursion into Indian territory but later modified his statement when confronted with undeniable facts about the Galwan Valley. So what is the truth? The truth is that satellite images have shown that undoubtedly Chinese troops have intruded into Galwan Valley, Pangong Tso, Hot Springs, Demchok and Fingers four to eight, which were not earlier in their control.
As Lieutenant-General Panag, former General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Northern Command and noted defence analyst pointed out, the Chinese have captured at least 40 square kilometre of Indian territory. Why? To understand this, one must go a little deeper and understand that politics is concentrated economics. So to understand politics one must see the economics behind it.
China may have been socialist at one time but today it is undoubtedly capitalist and imperialist. In fact, it is expanding imperialism and, therefore, more dangerous and aggressive than defensive imperialism (just as in the 1930s, Hitler’s expanding imperialism was more dangerous than British or French defensive imperialism).
China has built up a massive industrial base and with its huge $3.2 trillion foreign exchange reserve, it is hungrily looking for markets and raw materials and avenues for profitable investment, like an imperialist power. Mountainous areas like Tibet and Ladakh, appear barren, like Siberia, but like Siberia they are full of valuable minerals and other natural wealth. This is the reason China has captured Tibet and also parts of Ladakh. Using salami tactics, it has recently occupied Galwan Valley, Pangong Tso, Hot Springs, Demchok and other parts of Ladakh (having already occupied Aksai Chin in the 1960s). These areas have valuable minerals, needed by China’s growing industry and this is the real explanation behind the recent events. As stated above, politics is concentrated economics. There are certain iron laws of economics, which operate independent of any individual’s will. For example, why did the British conquer India? It was not for a picnic or for enjoyment. In fact, the British were miserable in the hot weather here. They conquered India because, after their industries had grown to a certain level, they needed overseas markets, raw materials and cheap labour. Similarly, what was the cause of the World War-I? It was for redivision of the world’s colonies. Since Britain and France had done their industrialisation earlier, they had grabbed most of the backward countries and made them their colonies, i.e. markets and sources of cheap raw materials and cheap labour. German industrialisation began later but soon caught up with the British and French, and then they, too, demanded more colonies. But the British and the French were unwilling to part with theirs and this resulted in the war. Why did Japan invade China and other countries ? To get raw materials and markets for its growing industry. Similarly, after the Chinese built up a massive industrial base, they needed markets and raw materials and this has made them imperialist. They have entered Asia, Africa, South America and even the developed countries.
But at present the Chinese are largely proceeding cautiously. They use largely economic measures, not military. However, they do sometimes use military measures, too, for coercion and they have built up a massive military. At present, they use salami tactics, advancing step by step.
This explains what happened recently in Ladakh in the Galwan Valley and other places they have occupied. In future, too, they will keep nibbling away parts of Ladakh and other Indian territory, obviously with an eye on the raw materials there (as they have done in the South China Sea).
It is reported that on June 22 talks took place between a Lieutenant-General of the Indian Army and a Major-General of the Chinese army, in which the former demanded a timeline for withdrawal of troops to two kms from the Line of Actual Control (LAC ) as it existed before the Chinese intrusion. The problem is where is the LAC? Whenever in the past the Chinese were asked by the Indian side to delineate the LAC on a map, they refused to do so, obviously because if they did so, their designs for future intrusion into Indian territory would be hampered. In view of what has been said above, it is highly unlikely that the Chinese will comply with the request of our Lieutenant-General. It is high time now that our leaders realise this and join hands with other countries like the US and form a united front against Chinese expansionist imperialism, just like the united front formed by Russia, the US, Britain and other countries against Hitler. That is the only way to prevent Chinese domination over us and other parts of the world.
It should be understood that China is much more economically developed than India (some people say it is five times so) and military strength comes from economic strength. China’s military is, therefore, undoubtedly superior to ours (we can’t even make our heavy weapons like artillery, tanks, aircraft and so on while the Chinese have developed the technology for it). So we will not be able to face the Chinese alone and need to join hands with the other major powers of the world. The US is already moving its forces away from Europe and into South Asia in an attempt to counter Chinese aggression. We should take advantage of this. Some say that the problem can be solved by diplomacy. This was the view of the then British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who thought that negotiating with Hitler at the Munich Conference in 1938 would avert war, not realising that appeasement only whets the appetite of the aggressor. So diplomacy will be useless.
Our Government should do two things immediately. It must expel all Chinese companies operating in India and ban sale of Chinese products in the country. It must form a united front with world powers and boldly confront Chinese imperialism. This alone can thwart Chinese aggression.
Unlike a brick-and-mortar business, the beauty of an online business is its instant reach to a huge target audience, not only locally but across borders. But you need to carve a niche first
Covid-19 has changed the world as we know it. We all have to get used to the new normal, both in our personal and professional lives. Businesses have to reinvent and re-engineer themselves to face the challenges thrown up by the Novel Coronavirus. This is especially true of entrepreneurs who are the fountainheads of innovation and creativity. Now more than ever, entrepreneurs need to think out-of-the box to survive these unprecedented times. And the first step towards this is to take advantage of the technological advancements mankind has made and go online. Gone are the days when there was a raging debate on the pros and cons of online business versus an offline one. The question now is how to convert an offline brick-and-mortar business into a click-and-mortar one.
Setting up an online business is by no means an easy task as cyberspace is a different sphere altogether. It requires careful planning, which is the same for any regular offline business. It needs vision, access to funds, hard work and plain old grit and determination. However, unlike a brick-and-mortar business, the beauty of an online business is its instant reach to a huge target audience, not only locally but across borders. But to set up a successful online business, you need to carve out a niche. For example, Amazon created a niche for itself by offering the largest collection of book titles (over one million), which was more than 10 times the range of books in the largest physical bookstores around the world. So, the first step is to develop a clear understanding of the niche you want to address as a business.
Next, try and identify your unique selling proposition (USP). Your business idea may not be totally unique but a support environment can make it exclusive. A great website, a good sales pitch, innovative marketing strategies, smooth supply chains and a responsive customer care can do wonders for a business and help a start-up carve a niche to take on well-established, deep-pocketed competitors. However, don’t become disheartened if you are unable to put a finger on your USPs, they will become obvious at the planning stage. Entrepreneurs have the habit of trying to do all things on their own. Don’t succumb to this habit. Delegation is as important as careful planning. Take the help of experts wherever required in planning, development and deployment of your online business. A successful business person can make a distinction on where and when to use external or expert resources and when to do things on their own. Developing a website, systems administration, database development among others can be such areas where external expertise is required. Employing a third party to manage and maintain your website is a good business decision, which will allow time for focussing on your other USPs. You can surely run a successful online business even if you have no inkling of technology. Outsourcing your technical requirements will cost you but having a good website is like having a great start for your online business.
Just like any business, careful planning and adequate funds can make an online business successful. There are two reasons why a meticulous business plan is necessary. One is to make your proposal attract funding and the second is to create an internal blueprint to plan, launch and execute your venture. Basically, you should develop a business plan for yourself. There are no rights and wrongs in developing a business plan and there are several online templates available to guide you. However, a well-written business plan should answer the following five questions: What are your business’ aims and goals? Why would your business satisfy or fulfil customer needs? Where will you be present? Who are your potential customers and your target audience? And how are you going to launch and continue the daily operations of your business? These five questions will cover all aspects of the venture.
Any business plan is not complete without market intelligence. Competition is a part of life and somewhere, someone would be having a similar product or service that you are planning to offer. So a competitor analysis is an absolute necessity, in terms of the products/services offered, USPs, website layout, quality of information to customers, delivery times, packaging, customer care, complaint handling and so on. Addressing any drawbacks your competitor has will make you popular and increase your consumer base.
Start-up funding and investments are an important requirement for any business. It would be prudent to combine some of the financing options available like your personal savings, loan from family and friends, bank loans, Government grants, angel investing and venture capital. Projecting your income and expense is not one of the easiest tasks. We project our income and expenses based on assumptions which tend to change. Be ready to adapt to changing income and expense figures. Once you have developed a careful plan, you are ready to execute it by establishing the online avatar.
To create a successful website, you should be clear about what you want. Make a list of all your requirements. How many pages do you need? How many products or services do you want to list? Do you want a website that changes frequently? What is the type of user interface needed? Discuss these aspects with your carefully-chosen website developer, who is your partner in one of the most important aspects of online business. You could consider previous experience, technical knowledge, client portfolio, references from clients, commitment and workload as some of the attributes of choosing a good web development partner. If you are planning to capture customer data or receive payments online, you should take responsibility and accountability to protect the information of your customers by pursuing necessary and vital checks and balances.
Once this is done, shop around to have the best payment gateway for your business. Managing content is one of the crucial aspects of online business. Writing quality content takes longer than it sounds and would make the first impression on your customers. The ordering process and experience for the customers has to be hassle-free, so make sure that the order pipeline is easy to navigate and customers do not leave your website without spending. What use is creating a wonderful website, planning and launching the products or services, if it is not monetised?
Apart from the primary source of revenue, secondary sources like advertising become important as you can take advantage of the traffic you receive on your website. Running a successful online venture requires strong backend operations and a robust supply chain mechanism. A reliable supplier network is one of the most important areas that any business should develop. Choosing a good supplier and managing good relations with them are the key to a successful online business.
The next step is to make customers aware of your online business. Search Engine Optimisation is one of the ways with which you can achieve this. The key is to make your website visible to any Search Engine by adding unique content that would be picked up by the bots. For example, Google uses a software called Googlebot to examine the internet for useful content on websites and accordingly ranks them based on that. Good quality content is very attractive to any Search Engine which can hope to satisfy the query of customers. Connecting with your customers through various ways like forums, social media platforms, emails, surveys or through telephone will help build your reputation. Also, be sure to deliver on the claims and promises you make on the website to gain their confidence. Try and go over and above customer expectation and aim for customer delight. Remember under-promise and over-deliver.
So the big question is whether this is the right time to launch your online venture? Marred with the uncertainties unleashed upon the world by the pandemic, setting up a business, particularly an online venture, can be very disheartening.
However, one should know that setting up a business in a depressed economy has its benefits. You can negotiate good terms with your vendors; hire knowledgeable staff of other companies who have been laid off, buy some companies at lower valuations and get your business off the ground. Identify the silver lining in the dark cloud, set up a strong online presence, back it up with a robust operational plan, deliver what you promised, listen to your customers and run a successful online business.
(Writer: Hima Bindu Kota; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
India must take the lead in the South Asian region by accelerating economic activities and involving other nations in integration projects. This can serve as a deterrent to China
Ever since independence, India’s stated objective in the South Asian region has been to pursue friendly relations with its immediate neighbours. An official foreign policy planning document published by the Congress regime in early 1992 states that India respects the territorial integrity of its neighbours and intends to work for mutual cooperation on a bilateral basis. Our attempts to build a solid and constructive relationship with neighbouring nations have been successful. India shares land and maritime boundaries with nine countries: Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, Maldives, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka and Afghanistan from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). In particular, Pakistan and China have come to challenge India’s sovereignty on a regular basis. The traditional friction between India and Pakistan in my estimation is the principal threat to regional stability in South Asia. Mutual distrust and lingering hostility have provoked four wars between the two countries since 1947. However, India holds superiority in military strength in the foreseeable future. A major stumbling block to long-term improvement in relations with Pakistan is its infiltration into Kashmir and regular proxy wars here in cohorts with various terrorist organisations.
On the other hand, for India, China, too, has been a long-term threat. Our security concerns with it begins at the Himalayas and our forces have steadfastly resisted all attempts of invasion by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). In recent times, China appears to be less interested in resolving boundary issues and has instead become more assertive about claiming various regions of Ladakh and the North-east. First came an attempted inroad into Doklam and more recently the face-off at the Galwan Valley. All such skirmishes have necessitated a relook at India’s Tibet policy. In particular, two unilateral concessions have been made: First, we supported the One-China policy. And second, we accepted China’s sovereignty over Tibet. However, during the British era, Tibet was an independent nation and the British Government was the guarantor of its independence from China. The rights India retained in Tibet under the Simla Convention of 1914 were adequate for us to insist upon the maintenance of its autonomy. Britain preserved all these rights in Tibet as an autonomous region was vital for British India’s safety and security. However, in 1954, Nehru conceded Tibet to China to “maintain regional stability.”
The Indo-Bhutan Treaty of Peace and Friendship of 1949 and the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship were signed in continuation with similar pacts issued by British India. The 1816 Treaty of Sugauli with Nepal, the Treaty of Punakha in 1910 with Bhutan and the Simla pact of 1914 with Tibet continued after India’s independence and it was former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s duty to uphold the listed treaties. Thus, Nehru’s decision to forego Tibet’s sovereignty and boost China’s imperialistic mindset was illegal.
On multiple accounts, India followed the “Panchsheel” principles, an agreement solely responsible for bringing instability to South Asia and the growth of China’s imperialistic mindset. The two mistakes Nehru committed in violation of the Panchsheel Agreement were: First, in 1954, he supported China’s claim to Tibet and the Aksai Chin to “maintain regional stability.” Second, in 1955, in an attempt to befriend the USSR, Nehru supported its claim over Hungary at the UN.
These two decisions have had drastic effects on India’s foreign policy, its relations with other countries and its ability to maintain sovereignty. When China attacked India in 1962, the USSR did not come to India’s aid as Nehru had expected. This because China was a communist state. The rest of the world did not help India since it had supported the USSR at the UN against NATO and its allies.
China followed a three-pronged approach to destabilise the region in the early 1950s.
Economically: China is the biggest trading partner for a number of neighbouring countries. This helps it gain political leadership in the South-Asian region. This is evident from the way it deals with Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Nepal and Afghanistan. All these nations have been provided with funds worth billions of dollars for the completion of key projects, to settle border disputes and use their sovereign land for China’s military outreach.
Militaristically: China invaded Tibet in the 1950s and has unsuccessfully attempted a similar approach with India and Bhutan during the past half-century or so. It has mocked the maritime sovereignty of other countries by expanding its borders in the South China Sea and restricting the ability of countries like Japan, Taiwan, Philippines and Vietnam to conduct trade.
Intimidation: China attempts to resolve border issues only when it feels insecure. The demarcation of the border between Russia and China started after an agreement in 2004 and the projects were completed in 2009 after war-like threats. Likewise, China and Vietnam completed demarcation of their border in 2009 in a similar fashion.
It is time that India supports Tibet’s claim of being an independent nation. Since China has not been acting in accordance with the international treaties signed by it (the Chinese agreed to grant Hong Kong autonomy till 2047), why should India act in accordance with any bilateral agreement it has with China? India can propose a Himalayan economic zone comprising Tibet, Xinjiang, Nepal, Bhutan and the Indian Himalayan regions. Common Buddhist heritage should be a factor in the creation of this economic zone. India can encourage tourism to Buddhist sites in India and build closer defence relations with Japan, Myanmar and Vietnam. Our planners should increase defence operations in Arunachal Pradesh, Ladakh, Sikkim and the joint Andaman and Nicobar as a deterrent to the Chinese moves in the Himalayas and Bay of Bengal in retaliation to India’s noble efforts.
The pace of socio-economic activities in South Asia will accelerate if India becomes a key factor of this change. The other problem in the region is uncontrolled population growth. The population of South Asia is set to increase from about 1.8 billion to over 2.5 billion by 2050. This will cause tremendous stress on the already stretched resources and create highly concentrated areas, incapable of sustaining human populations. This will also undoubtedly lead to mass starvation and inhuman living conditions. We should accelerate the process of economic cooperation and involve other nations in regional integration projects. In the light of these changes, India’s foreign policy would face several challenges and would require a broader approach.
Domestic factors will increasingly influence foreign policy and Prime Minister Narendra Modi is aware of this. He is attempting to protect the interests of the people in India’s bordering nations. He has not only been hearing and understanding people’s issues but has also addressed them. Terrorism, organised crime, human trafficking, cybersecurity and Weapons of Mass Destruction proliferation continue to pose challenges to Indian security. Dealing with such challenges requires an effective counter-terrorism policy. A forward-looking approach on cooperation with neighbours to manage the borders, cybersecurity, science and technology, agriculture, education, culture and capacity-building is needed. This will meet the challenges of terrorism and of non-traditional security.
On various fora, India has created committees dedicated to resolving issues regarding national security and regional peace. South Asia cannot remain immune to the developments in the extended neighbourhood and the world in general. Thus, our neighbourhood policy is bound to be affected by developments elsewhere. It is vital that India connects with the Gulf, Central Asia, South-East Asia, and the Indian Ocean islands to ensure that its neighbourhood policy remains unaffected.
If India is able to create regional stability in the region and raise the demand of Tibet’s independence in accordance with the Simla Pact, especially when resentment against China has increased owing to the COVID-19, it will be able to muster the support of Western and South-East Asian powers alike in its attempt to abolish China’s imperialist mindset. In the coming years, China will also find itself in the midst of an economic crisis due to numerous businesses shifting to either India or other South Asian nations. A two-pronged approach will force China to resolve border disputes with India. In the game of cricket, there is a saying, offence is the best defence. India should initiate the offensive against China for its territorial defence and for stability in South Asia.
(Writer: Nishikant Dubey; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
We need to plan for the multiple waves of the pandemic that will hit us once the Indian economy opens up completely
Pandemics historically behave in a set pattern with a few exceptions and occur in multiple sequential waves. Containment and mitigation measures, which slow the contagion’s spread, are the only options initially as there are no cures or vaccines available for new pathogens. However, these containment measures leave people vulnerable to infection once the restrictions are withdrawn, because the virus is not treated but only contained. The Spanish Flu in 1918 had a second wave a few months later and proved more deadly, causing between 20-40 million deaths. It re-emerged in 1919 causing further fatalities. Similarly, the 2009 Swine Flu also had a second wave in the US after a few months. A second wave is due to either sudden exposure of the virus to the susceptible population or possibly due to mutation in the virus’ genome. Thus, the four-pronged strategy of hand and respiratory hygiene, physical distancing, mask wearing and self-screening is vital now that the economy is opening up. The last measure is very important in the containment strategy. People should stay at home in case they are unwell and get themselves tested before they start moving out. This is crucial to break the chain of transmission of the Coronavirus.
The pandemic is still evolving in India and likely to move from high socio-economic zones in the coming days. We have to prevent this at all cost. We have now more than three lakh cases with a three to five per cent daily surge. This, when extrapolated to the total population, comes to about 224 cases per million population. However, a city like Delhi has about 1,500 cases per million population, which is seven times more than the national number. We are doing 3,800 tests per million on a national level and this varies from State to State. This is low if we compare it with the US testing close to 70,000 per million and Brazil close to 98,000 per million. The important thing now is to test more, isolate those found positive and go aggressively for contact tracing and quarantining to mitigate the virus’ spread.
Australia has been successful in combating COVID-19 with only 19 active cases admitted in the country as of today. Their numbers speak for themselves with a total of 7,290 confirmed cases, 102 deaths and 6,783 recoveries till date. This is a key comparison as Australia and India have a similar number of cases per million (286 and 224 respectively) as well as a similar number of deaths per million (four and six respectively).Though one may argue about the advantages of a smaller population, yet Australia’s strategies of aggressive testing, contact tracing and quarantine have paid dividends. Australia has conducted about 17.5 lakh tests (78,000 per million) with a positivity rate of 0.4 per cent as against our testing rate of 3,800 per million.
The average testing rate in Delhi is over 15,000 per million which is less compared to the number of cases and the national testing average. It needs to be more than 30,000 tests per million as of now and more in coming days. The positivity rate in Delhi has gone up to 30 per cent and this again is an indication for more aggressive testing. We need to involve more private labs and ease the testing eligibility criteria. In fact all high-risk individuals like doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers, paramedics and the family members of Corona patients should be tested and isolated in order to contain the surge. In view of an expected jump in cases in the near future, there would be a huge demand for beds and therefore banquet halls, indoor stadia and similar facilities should be converted into makeshift hospitals with the help of the armed forces who have the expertise in it. This was done in Wuhan, New York and in Europe.
Private hospitals need to participate in this war and can contribute by diverting 50 per cent of their ICU beds and general beds for Corona patients as against the 20 per cent right now. There must be one central system of allocating public and private hospital beds for better utilisation and greater transparency. The private healthcare system also has trained manpower to run this augmented capacity, be it testing or critical care. This revamp is crucial to saving each life. Sero-epidemiological surveys for April have revealed that less than one per cent of the general population and about 20 per cent of the people in containment zones might have acquired the virus. This indicates that the infection is still on the rise. It is important to keep the level of infections in the community low until a drug/vaccine is developed and is available for mass distribution/immunisation.
Although many countries have been successful in flattening the curve and contained the spread of the virus, they are looking at a potential resurgence of the virus spread once restrictions are eased out. China has witnessed new infections in the last few weeks, so has Singapore. Though it has been seen mainly in migrants and foreign workers in congested dwellings in Singapore but it is being seen as a second wave of the pandemic. Elsewhere, in some countries, a few COVID-19 patients are becoming positive again possibly due to reinfection, casting a doubt over the immunity gained due to this infection. We need to plan ahead for the multiple waves that will hit us once the economy opens up completely. We need to proactively chase the virus at the same time rather than the virus chasing us.
(Writer: Rajinder K Dhamija; Courtesy: The Pioneer)
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month