As a growing number of CMs takes umbrage at being criticised, they'd better understand that getting flak is a professional hazard in public life
The recent judgment of the Allahabad High Court upholding the freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and chiding the State of Uttar Pradesh (UP) for malicious prosecution of a person who had criticised the Chief Minister for “poor handling of law and order in his State”, should hopefully have a salutary effect on the State Governments which have been recklessly using penal provisions in our laws against those who express dissent.
The case pertained to a First Information Report (FIR) lodged in August 2020 against Yashwant Singh, who put out a tweet criticising the Chief Minister for transforming the State “into a jungle raj in which no law and order prevails”. The tweet also made reference to various incidents of abduction, demand of ransom and murders. He was accused of violating two provisions in the law — Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) pertaining to defamation and Section 66D of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2008, which pertains to personation, or what is commonly understood as impersonation. Yashwant Singh petitioned the High Court and sought the quashing of the FIR.
The petitioner’s counsel contended that the right to comment on the affairs of the State was well within Yashwant Singh’s constitutional right envisaged under Article 19 of the Constitution of India and that “mere dissent does not amount to criminality”. Hence, the FIR registered against him was mala fide “and was meant only to coerce him to stop expressing his dissent against the State Government”. He also contended that no offence had been made out and that the FIR should be quashed.
A Division Bench, comprising Justices Pankaj Naqvi and Vivek Agarwal of the Allahabad High Court, has made a succinct but significant observation while quashing the FIR and other proceedings against the petitioner. Referring to the charge of “defamation” under Section 500 of the IPC, the judges said that no case had been made out “as the alleged tweet cannot be said to fall within the mischief of defamation”. The judges struck a blow for democracy when they said that “expressing dissent on the law and order situation in the State is a hallmark of a constitutional liberal democracy like ours, constitutionally protected under Article 19 of the Constitution”.
The second charge against the petitioner pertained to violation of Section 66D of the IT Act, 2008, which states: “Whoever, by means of any communication device or computer resource, cheats by personation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to a fine which may extend to Rs 1 lakh.” The judges analysed these provisions vis-à-vis the allegation made in the FIR and said that they did not find “even remotely” a commission of offence under Section 66D, as the said provision relates to cheating by personation and it is not the case of prosecution that while committing the overt act, the petitioner tweeted using somebody else’s twitter handle nor was there any allegation of cheating. Hence, the court concluded that no offence had been made out under this Section as well.
As far as the State is concerned, this is indeed a damning indictment of the Government and the police. To prosecute a citizen for criminal defamation — which can entail a fine or a jail term which can extend up to two years — because he is disappointed with the Chief Minister’s handling of the law and order situation is something unheard of in this country, and the judges have rightly ticked off the State for doing so.
But this scenario is not confined to UP only. Several other Chief Ministers and State Governments have begun challenging the basic freedoms given to all citizens by the Constitution. The State of West Bengal would head this list, not only for the sheer number of such cases but also for starting this trend of jailing its critics. It all started with the Mamata Banerjee Government arresting Prof Ambikesh Mahapatra of Jadavpur University and his friend in 2012 and charging them with offences under the IT Act for circulating cartoons lampooning the Chief Minister. Following his arrest, Prof Mahapatra moved the State Human Rights Commission, which criticised their arrest and directed the State Government to pay each of them a compensation of Rs 50,000. The State did not comply with the directions of the commission, compelling the Professor to move the Calcutta High Court. The court upheld the rights commission’s order and enhanced the amount of compensation payable to Prof Mahapatra and his friend to Rs 75,000 each.
Even more absurd was the sedition charge slapped on a folk singer in Tamil Nadu in 2015 for criticising the then Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa’s policy on the issue of prohibition.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist)-led Kerala Government was unhappy with the State Lalithakala Akademi’s decision to select a cartoon, which mocked a Bishop accused of rape, for its annual awards. Several Christian outfits and the State Government wanted the autonomous body to re-consider its decision. The Akademi, however, did not relent.
Those of us who are senior citizens, have lived and thrived in a healthy democratic environment in this country in which we have said much harsher things against the persons in power. At the height of the controversy over the kickbacks paid by Bofors, the Swedish arms manufacturer, to Indian politicians and others, the Indian Express ran Ram Jethmalani’s famous 10 questions to Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi every day. Reading those questions, Rajiv must have squirmed every morning but he had to grin and bear it!
In fact, many of these Chief Ministers must look at how Prime Minister Narendra Modi deals with those who abuse him on the social media. The Modi-baiters constantly upload cartoons and memes seeking to ridicule him on Twitter and Facebook. They often generate hashtags like “#WorstPrime-Minister” or some such and begin a trend along with their camp followers. On his last birthday, they created a hashtag, “#NationalUnemploymentDay”, and kept it going the whole day. He is probably the most trolled Indian. Often, his political enemies cross the limits of decency. As Modi himself said at a public meeting during the last Lok Sabha elections, a Congress leader called him “gandi naali ka keeda” (a gutter insect) while another said that he was a “mad dog”. Can there be anything more defamatory and abusive than this? If the Prime Minister’s Office were to prosecute all these people, Modi would need to create a full-fledged department to handle these prosecutions.
In fact, this is one of the professional hazards of being in public life in a democracy and, over the years, and especially in the age of social media, the politicians across democratic countries — including India — have learnt to develop a thick hide. Some of our Chief Ministers must follow suit.
(The writer is an author specialising in democracy studies. The views expressed are personal.)
The Maharashtra government is planning to hold the current Academic Year (AY 2020-2021) HSC and SSC Board examinations in mid-April and early May, Education Minister Varsha Gaikwad said here on Monday.
"We are considering holding HSC exams after April 15 and SSC exams after May 1," Gaikwad tweeted late on Sunday.
The Minister added that the government is consulting the health officials on the possibility of reopening schools for classes 5 to 8, and decision would soon be taken on this.
Normally, the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education (MSBSHSE) conducts the crucial HSC exams in February followed by SSC in March.
This year, owing to the Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown, the state schools are shut since the past 10 months and students have been attending online classes.
While endorsing the Minister's announcement, the Mumbai Principals Association (MPA) has said that the exams should be pushed back even more since students will not get sufficient time to prepare for these critical exams.
"The online classes are just okay and not very efficient. There is no decision on reopening the schools for regular classes so far. January-Febebruary 2021 may be a washout.
"That leaves only March-April for the students to prepare for the exams, which is not sufficient," MPA Secretary, Principal Prashant Redij told IANS.
Moreover, many people from urban areas are still stuck in their native villages, and there could be further delays hampering their efforts to prepare for exams.
Redij expressed concerns that given the feedback received on the online education, "there could be a drop in academic standards, students' performance and the overall Board results this year".
According to MPA's estimates there are a little more than 150,000 schools in the state attended by over 10 million students who are taught by around one million teachers in the public and private sector.
Parents and students also apprehend that they stand to lose a second consecutive year of the much-awaited annual summer vacations, and they would be compelled to cancel their holiday plans even this year.
(Courtesy: IANS)
Apart from the fiscal expectations from Budget-2021, the educationists want more autonomy in developing regulations, norms and standards for schools
The stakeholders of school education are anxiously waiting to see what the Union Budget of 2021 has in store for the stratum. Since we have got a new National Education Policy in July 2020 (NEP 2020), it is expected that funds will be allocated for the establishment of a statutory body by the name of School Education Commission (SEC) for streamlining the schooling sector, and that there will be rational disbursement of the budget pie. The NEP may not be able to bring about any positive difference in the absence of a professional body for running schools across the nation. It is expected that Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman will consult educationists from the higher and school education fields separately and then reach a decision rationally.
There are nearly 33 crore children in schools and approximately 8 crore students engaged in higher education in India. The school education consists of 12 years of education whereas higher education consists of three years of undergraduate and two years of master’s programme. Besides, a few select students opt for the research degree programme. Higher education, thus, consists of at least three to five years of studies. Once the recommendations of the NEP 2020 are implemented, the total period of schooling — after the three years of pre-school are added — will consist of 15 years and the duration of higher education will shrink to just four years.
Similarly, there are nearly 1 crore teachers engaged in schools and, after the three years of pre-schooling are added, nearly 18 lakh new teachers will be added to the total number of existing teachers. The number of teachers in higher education, however, is much less. To decide the norms and standards of higher education in the country, we have a University Grants Commission (UGC) but we rarely realise that there is no such organisation which decides the norms and standards for education in schools. To put it simply, school education is for the masses whereas higher education is largely for the elite.
The Schooling Network
We have been examining the various education boards for assessing and certifying learners for the secondary and senior secondary levels. The Central Government has two boards — the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) for general students and the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) for non-formal learners. Most States in India have their own examination board for assessing and certifying learners in their State. The mandate of the boards is to conduct examinations and certify the students taking the tests. These boards are not academic bodies which have the domain knowledge to design and develop curriculum or textbooks. The CBSE also assesses learners for admission to technical institutes. Some State examination boards as well as private institutes conduct entrance tests for admission to technical colleges of their respective States.
It is apparent that these boards are established to conduct examinations but they are not organisations with the academic domain knowledge which can help them decide about the academic content and the norms of these examinations. To decide on the content and pedagogy, we have the National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) which is an “autonomous” but subordinate body of the Ministry of Education (MOE). The NCERT works under the direct supervision of the Education Ministry. Since it may not be prudent to comment on the functioning of the NCERT, suffice it to say that we have not been able to produce children who feel proud of our country and wish to serve this great nation.
According to a recent report, most board topping students are settled abroad. The first desire and dream of every school pass out, it seems, is to migrate to a developed country. The design of curriculum and the curriculum framework, one of the major responsibilities of the NCERT, is definitely under question. Similarly, the research on schooling, another major responsibility of the NCERT, is questionable.
None of these organisations is a “statutory” body, so the norms designed by these are not mandatory for enforcement by the rule of law. We need a statutory body (created by an Act of Parliament) to decide on the regulations related to schools.
The Government School Network
It may not be incorrect to say that overall, the Government schools have not performed well, with the exception of the Kendriya Vidyalayas (KVs) and the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas (JNVs). From time to time, a few Government schools in some States show promise but, with the passage of time, they again plunge into mediocrity as the administrator is transferred out. The first choice of most parents invariably is a private school for the education of their children.
The Governments make their own norms and implement them through their own schools but they have failed to compete with the private schools. The expenditure per child in an average Government school is much higher than per child studying in private schools; however, the learning outcome is quite the opposite.
In other words, the Government has not provided a level playing field for all schools. There should be an external agency which should decide on the norms and standards and force the Government as well as private school managements to adhere to the regulations. The system of the Government being both the regulator and the player has resulted in the failure of the public school system. The countries with the best performing schools — like Finland, Sweden and Norway — have least Government control. The school regulators in the best performing countries are completely autonomous.
Budget Disbursement
The Budget allocated for education is bifurcated into two parts: One for higher education, which goes to the UGC for disbursement to universities and institutes of higher education; and the Budget allocated for school education is disbursed by the Ministries of Central and State Governments.
We are all aware that a major reason behind establishing the UGC was rational disbursement of the “grants”. If the disbursement of grants needs rationalisation in higher education, then why is it not the case in school education? Some States have raised the issue of disbursement of funds for school education, which is done through the Programme Implementation Committee (PIC) of the Ministry of Education, Government of India, and called it “arbitrary and politically motivated”. We have often brushed this demand under the carpet but we need to seriously think about it if we need good education to reach down to the last child.
Prayer to Finance Minister
It is not suggested that the Government’s control should be completely withdrawn but there must be autonomy in developing regulations, norms and standards, which can be enforced upon the Government and private schools alike.
In a recent judgment, the Allahabad High Court (Writ — Case No. — 19287 of 2020) has pronounced a verdict against the decision of the CBSE not to permit change in name, saying: “…the Rules as framed by the CBSE do not have any statutory flavour and cannot be considered to be the ‘law’ as required for placing reasonable restrictions on the rights enshrined under Article (19)(1)(a), in terms of Article (19)(2) of the Constitution of India.”
Therefore, autonomy from the Government’s interference is required but, at the same time, there should be regulations in place which give freedom to the teachers and principals of private schools to work in an “exploitation-free” environment. The teachers and principals in a large number of privately managed schools (and some Government schools as well) work under severe exploitative conditions. This will end only if there is a statutory body to regulate the schooling system. This may not suit the political party in power but this is urgently and desperately required to build a strong nation. It is expected that the Union Finance Minister will consider allocating a separate Budget for the establishment of the School Education Commission in the upcoming budget and mark a landmark change towards formulating a Bharat-centric education.
(The author teaches at the School of Education, IGNOU. The views expressed are personal.)
Had it not been for martyr Soleimani’s valuable efforts, ISIS would have spread its rule of terror throughout a wider part of the region. The late General’s anti-terror drive was also beneficial for India’s national interests. His efforts were key to the rescue of Indian nationals, including a group of 11 Indian nurses, trapped by ISIS terrorists in Iraq
The year 2020 had just begun. While people were engaged in the New Year’s celebrations, on January 3, the sad news of the assassination of Major General Qasem Soleimani, the great commander of anti-terrorism forces, shocked the world. US President Donald Trump’s admission of this act of terror added to the global bewilderment.
Now, ahead of the first anniversary of the dastardly assassination of martyr General Soleimani and Arabaeen or Chehellom (40 days following martyrdom) of martyr Professor Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, people in Iran and around the world are holding commemoration ceremonies to pay tribute to these late Iranian icons.
Respected both by friends and foes as a major military tactician, General Soleimani was the world’s most talented military figure in the field of counter-terrorism.
For many people worldwide, General Qasem Soleimani was an anti-terror hero, who played a key role in defeating Daesh (ISIS) in Iraq and Syria. However, US President Donald Trump ordered his assassination in an air strike during his official visit to Baghdad and while being received by the Iraqi authorities at the International Baghdad Airport. This cowardly terror act was the biggest gift from the US to takfiri terrorism and its supporters.
General Soleimani had played a major role in defending the region against Daesh’s terror campaign. As foreign-backed takfiri outfits raised their heads in 2014, the late commander emerged as a key strategist and ingenious commander leading Iranian military advisers assisting Syrian and Iraqi troops in battles against terrorists.
He assisted the Baghdad Government in operations to retake the strategic oil-rich city of Tikrit from Daesh in 2015. General Soleimani was on the front line of anti-terrorism operations, from Iraq’s Mosul to Syria’s Aleppo. The General also took personal command of the battle against takfiri militants in the Syrian city of Bukamal, located in Dayr al-Zawr Province, in November 2017.
Finally, in November 2017, he declared the end of Daesh’s territorial rule in a letter addressed to the leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.
The late General’s anti-terror drive was also beneficial for India’s national interests. His efforts were key to the rescue of Indian nationals, including a group of 11 Indian nurses, trapped by Daesh in Iraq. In fact, from General Soleimani’s point of view, terrorism recognises no religion or specific country and it may take victims from all corners of the world, irrespective of their religion, faith or nationality. For this great man, delivering relief and rescue to all people of the world by fighting against terrorism and extending support to victims of terror was a basic principle.
Martyr Soleimani had a humble and kind face in his encounter and interactions not only with military officers but also with the common people and that is why he was so popular with the people of region and many memorial functions were spontaneously erected to observe his martyrdom after his sudden demise. Inside Iran, in his farewell funeral, millions of people in different cities poured to the streets to attend this ceremony.
Martyr Professor Mohsen Fakhrizadeh had also an outstanding role in different peaceful scientific projects in Iran, the most recent example of which is the development of the first indigenous Covid-19 test kit and vaccine, which is a great contribution to Iran’s national efforts in curbing the Covid-19 pandemic and production of its vaccine at a time when Iran is under the inhumane, unjust and unilaterally imposed sanctions by the United States.
These dastardly acts are committed against Iran which itself has so far been at the forefront of the fight against terrorism in order to establish and contribute to peace and stability in the region and the world and such acts are a flagrant violation of international rules and humanitarian principles. The US’ criminal move to target General Soleimani has once again proved to the people of the world who is really backing the terrorists and that the US definition of terrorism is defined by its self-interests and is rooted on double standards.
It goes without saying that had it not been for martyr Soleimani’s valuable efforts, Daesh would have spread its rule of terror throughout a wider part of the region. Curbing of Daesh also prevented the takfiri terrorists from causing terror in other parts of the world, including South Asia. By giving a severe blow to the foundation of Daesh, more recruitments for this terrorist group from other countries were also prevented.
To honour the memory of martyr General Soleimani and pay tribute to all scarifying their lives for the peace and tranquility in the region and beyond, the Islamic Republic of Iran proposes the following: designation of January 3 as “World Counter-Terrorism Day” by the international community and dedicating an annual International Martyr Soleimani Award to the heroes of fighting with terror.
Last but not least, it is hoped that 2021 may be a year of peace, tranquility, health, prosperity and development for the people of our region and the entire world.
(The writer is the Ambassador of Iran to India)
It now depends on how the team Boris takes the UK forward, without any hangover of the Brussels bureaucracy. And as the UK started its long solitary journey on January 1, 2021, the future of the UK lies in the hands of the Britons only
The United Kingdom (UK) has finally left the European Union (EU). The latest Brexit withdrawal agreement is officially titled the “Agreement on the Withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Island from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community”. This historic treaty was concluded between the EU, the European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC or Euratom) and the UK on January 24, 2020. The three main signatories of the agreement are: Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the UK, and Charles Michael and Ursula von der Leyen for the EU and the Euratom respectively.
It’s a divorce, a bitter one, after four and a half years of hard bargaining accompanied by high-level diplomatic and political negotiations since June 23, 2016. The UK officially left the trading bloc on January 31, 2020, despite the EU being the nearest and largest trading partner. What the UK claims is that decades of tension with the neighbouring EU member-nations has been resolved amicably with a deal. Johnson said, “Having taken back the control of our money, our borders, our laws and our waters by leaving the European Union by January 31, we now seize this moment to forge a fantastic relationship with our European neighbours, based on free trade and friendly cooperation”. Further he reiterated that “at the heart of this bill is one of the biggest free trade agreements in the world”.
Now only time will tell whether the implementation of the deal has been fruitful, and what the UK could achieve from the dissociation from the trading bloc.
For Johnson, signing the agreement after the lawmakers from across the board gave their approval on the trade pact is a historic moment. It’s a hard-fought 1,200 pages document which landed in London after receiving the signature of EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen in Brussels.
The lawmakers in the House of Commons voted 521-73 in favour of the agreement sealed between the UK and the EU a day before the Christmas eve.
However, the pro-Europeans have lamented the departure of the UK from the EU. For them, this divorce will be too expensive and it might herald a doom for the country. It is bringing an end to the seamless trade and decades of partnership with the EU. But the vast majority of the MPs in the British Parliament voice that despite having all the odds ahead the post-Brexit, the current deal is much better than a chaotic rupture from the EU.
The EU claims it has respected the major red lines between both the signatories of the agreement. The EU has finally avoided the hard border on the island of Ireland. Thus it has been able to preserve the four freedoms of its cherished “single market” which are free movement of goods, services, capital and people. The UK gets its zero tariffs, zero quota goods trade with the EU that finally prevents the European Court of Justice in settling any trade disputes. On fisheries, the EU has agreed to give up 25 per cent of its existing quotas in the UK waters for a transition period of five and a half years after which annual renegotiation will be initiated. However, the free movement of people will be hit the hardest ever.
How is Brexit affecting India’s relations with the UK as well as the EU? En route to realise the vision of “Global Britain”, the relationship between the UK and India is turning to be more complex. Considering the growing change in the traditional UK-India ties, then UK Prime Minister Theresa May had visited Delhi as early in November 2016. In 2016, the UK was the fifth largest export partner of India behind the US, the UAE, Hong Kong and China.
However, it accounted for only 3.3 per cent of total exports, valued at USD 8.66. Whereas India’s exports to other European countries were almost 16 per cent in the year the Brexit referendum took place. And in the import zone, the UK is not a potential country for Indian goods. But the pragmatists say that much more than the formal export-import relations, overall bond between the two nations depends on investment from both the countries into each other and the level of shared innovation and research projects carried out by various entities in either of the nations.
By the end of the big deal signed between the EU and the UK, the bigger concern is whether it will end the special relationship between the two. The provisions relating to trade in the historic deal are almost entirely devoted to goods. This further implies that the agreement has hardly left any space for services which, in fact, consists of more than 80 per cent of Britain’s economy. And interestingly, this is the fastest growing area of global exports.
The major concern is that the EU is yet to deliver an equivalence ruling for financial services regulation. Even if such regulation is declared, it can be withdrawn within a short span of 30 days notice period. The global and the European economic experts say that what is more urgently required is an EU data adequacy decision to allow free flow of data, which is there at the centre of cross-country or cross-border trade regimes across the globalised world.
Another sticky area which is missing in the deal is the mutual recognition of qualifications demanded for professional services in the EU member nations and the UK.
Besides, the new deal has nowhere mentioned anything related to foreign policy cooperation between the EU and the UK. It seems the current British Government has hardly paid any attention to building a more robust foreign policy dialogue with the EU in the near future. It has mentioned some provisions about domestic security but the experts feel that Britain will probably have not much leverage on its access to the EU security database and the Europol system of police like before. Once the deal is operationalised, the UK will lose its natural way of using the European Arrest Warrant (EAW). This arrest warrant is valid in all the member countries of the EU. Once such a warrant is issued, it demands other members to arrest and transfer a criminal or an offender to the issuing nation so that the detainee can be put on trial. Such a system of arrest helps fast-tracking the legal process and enhances mutual understanding and trust among the EU member countries. Now, of course, the UK will not have unhindered rights on this particular front.
Clearly, what comes into the immediate picture is the loss of free movement of the British citizens across the EU member nations. This deal will bring home some travel and work restrictions in the EU nations and the existing facilities in regard to health insurance and car insurance regime are likely to be over now.
Though some kinds of scientific and research collaborations will continue, what hits hard Britain is its immediate exclusion from the Galileo Satellite Positioning Network. Even the uncertainties hovering over the participation in the “Horizon Europe” research programme is bringing more disillusionment to the scientific fraternity of Britain. EU’s next funding programme for research and innovation will run from 2021 to 2027, covering a proposed budget of 100 billion Euros. The participation of the scientific community from Britain in this signature research project would have opened much more space for collaboration, innovation and trust building in future for an immediate help, on the event of any crisis situation.
Again, the British student community will also be dropped from the much-acclaimed student exchange programme, called Erasmus Programme (European Region Section Scheme for the Mobility of University Students). It is an EU-funded programme that organises student exchange across all the EU nations. Unlike the UK, Northern Island will have full access to the EU single market and to the Customs Union. Many experts opine that the customs and border checkpoints on the Irish Sea are going to become future bone of contention between Britain and Northern Ireland.
Are we all going to experience a “Global Britain”? Succinctly, Boris Johnson will find it too tough to craft a new role for Britain. It is better for him to sustain first as his country is badly affected by the Covid-19. Today Britain’s economy is seriously paralysed. He must try bringing the country’s economic powerhouse back on track. Besides, a pandemic, accompanied by a looming trade war between the US and China is disturbing the global power calculus. And it’s going to continue.
“The destiny of this great country now resides firmly in our hands,’’ Johnson said moments after the post-Brexit trade deal received the Royal Assent on December 31. It now depends on how the team Boris takes the UK forward. And as the UK started its long solitary journey on January 1, 2021, the future of the UK lies in the hands of the Britons.
(The writer is an expert on international affairs)
Suneet Sharma on Friday took over the charge as new Railway Board Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Indian Railways and ex-officio Principal Secretary to the government, officials said. The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet had approved the appointment of Sharma as Chairman and CEO of the Railway Board on Thursday.
Prior to this, Sharma worked as the General Manager of Eastern Railway since September 2019. Sharma joined the Indian Railways in 1979 as a Special Class Apprentice while he was studying engineering at IIT Kanpur.
According to railway ministry officials, Sharma, a graduate in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering has more than 40 years of experience in serving in the Indian Railways in various capacities. He has done stints in operational working, maintenance in sheds, depots and workshops.
He was Chief Workshop Manager, Parel workshop in Mumbai where he was instrumental in manufacturing narrow gauge locomotives for hill railways. He also restored old steam narrow gauge locomotive for the heritage Matheran line near Mumbai.
"During the 2006 Mumbai suburban train blasts, he was part of the team which put the suburban network on track within a few hours after the terror attack," ministry official said.
As ADRM, Mumbai CST, he is credited with increasing the services of the suburban network, which is considered the life-line of Mumbai. "During the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, he was part of the team that managed the aftermath of the attacks at Mumbai CST, Central Railway," the official said.
The official said as DRM, Pune he was instrumental in adding infrastructure which brought about operational efficiency. As Chief Mechanical Engineer Diesel Locomotive Works, Varanasi he was a team leader for starting the electric locomotive production. Conversion of diesel to electric locomotives took place under his leadership in a record time and for the first time anywhere in the world.
As General Manager Modern Coach Factory, Raebareli, he set a record by doubling the out turn of the much required modern passenger coaches in one year. During his stint as the General Manager of Eastern Railway, he took initiative in increasing the speed of goods trains to a record level and for completing a number of infrastructure projects of new lines and electrification which not only resulted in operational efficiency but developed the local areas. He is known for bringing about systemic changes for ease of working and administrative reforms.
Sharma in his three decade long career has won many professional awards. As General Manager (Modern Coach Factory Raebareli) and Chief Mechanical Engineer (Banaras Locomotive Works)) the factories won the award for best production units.
Sharma has attended professional training in Germany and France and he has done an advanced leadership and management course at Carnegie Mellon University in the US. He has visited Iran as a consultant for manufacture of locomotives.
He is also an avid sportsman and has played Billiards and Snooker at competitive levels. He is also a keen golfer and a badminton and squash player.
(Courtesy: IANS)
According to UNESCO, in 2020, one billion students, two-thirds of the global student population, faced either school closures or uncertainty. The most vulnerable populations, particularly girls, remained especially at risk. 2020 brought remote, virtual learning to the horizon at a pace and scale never before. Is this to be carried forward into 2021?
As per Antonius Raghubansie, Director of Learning Services, British Council India. the year 2020 saw people turning to online resources to pursue their love for reading in the ongoing challenges posed by the pandemic, this was fuelled by the need for safety and reduced access to physical libraries and stores.
"The British Council online library content witnessed a 67 per cent increase in subscription over the last year (as of November '20). We are also seeing users above the age of 18 show increased preference for audiobooks - evident through a 192 per cent increase in checkouts over 2019 for our online library members. E-resources available through online library memberships gained popularity, especially among young readers, owing to the convenience of accessing them safely from personal devices at home. We foresee this trend continuing in 2021, as readers including families, professionals and young kids, would continue to prefer online resources for infotainment. In view of the current situation, we anticipate both E-books and audiobooks to continue gaining favor among learners in a digital-first world," Raghubansie told IANSlife.
"One thing that will remain in 2021 is blended pedagogy. We have seen the flexibility that the online mode has provided and there is no denying of its advantages. Entire industries have shifted to the virtual platform and the education sector will also have to continue in a blended format. Institutes must develop their digital infrastructures to match up in this post digital era. Meetings, seminars and such activities will remain online. However, in terms some experientials, campuses will have to be opened up for these activities, but a blended pedagogy is here to stay. This will also have a long-term impact, especially on valuable programs. The institutions that adopt the new method, new mode and new model will flourish while the others may perish. The quality of educational institutions will get enhanced and the number of students enrolled will only increase in the digital mode," said Prof. Mahadeo Jaiswal, Director of IIM Sambalpur.
"COVID-19 has taught our teachers and the education sector to use technology to seamlessly impart education to all students. This trend will continue in the coming year and more smart campuses and digital libraries will be implemented to cater to the new-age learner. This digitization of the education sector will have a long-term impact, democratizing education globally. We will also continue to see a hybrid learning model, which will pave the way for the future of education with access to both classroom teaching and online education, catering to each student's unique needs while giving them the best of both worlds," said Rahul V Karad, the Visionary Educationist, and the Managing Trustee & Executive President, MAEER's MIT Group of Institutions & Executive President, MIT World Peace University (MIT-WPU), Pune.
(Courtesy: IANSLife)
The new decade may witness a more advanced stage of digitisation of health sector infrastructure and services
The year 2020 was an extremely eventful one for the healthcare and pharma industry, and for humanity as well. The world faced the deadliest pandemic in recent history which killed 18,00,114 people worldwide and, it seems, will continue to wreak havoc in 2021, too. As we enter the new year, it is time to look at some of the trends that could dominate in terms of health technologies, organisations, businesses, regulatory authorities, products and services. One overarching theme that flows right through this whole transformative process is technology in the form of Artificial Intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), big data, robotics and cloud computing, among others.
The new decade may be witness to a more advanced stage of digitisation of healthcare infrastructure and services. With the Government and private players, both ploughing in a substantial amount of money with the intention of wholesale overhauling of legacy Information Technology (IT) systems, hitherto chiefly used for recording payment of bills, the next decade will be marked by a greater number of services related to healthcare being delivered through advanced IT-based systems. While digital therapeutics could increasingly underpin remote diagnosis and treatment, digital solutions such as Electronic Health Records (EHRs) and Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) would become more routine. Purely in terms of infrastructure, a combination of traditional brick-and-mortar hospitals and a modular and scalable network of healthcare givers and community healthcare hubs will come into being. Traditional hospital buildings would more likely be fronted by unmanned reception facilities, face recognition systems and automated disease screening kiosks. There could even be robotic and autonomous healthcare assistants in hospitals, a phenomenon highly likely in developing countries which typically face a shortage of healthcare professionals. At the same time, remotely guided tele-ICUs and Smart ICUs would become more common. Although foldable and portable hospital units have already been developed in our country, they would become more sophisticated and advanced in the coming decade. Rising on the back of connected devices — remote monitoring devices and wearables, combined with applications and software — the resultant Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) would increasingly become the change agent in the coming decade. With wireless technologies such as Wi-Fi and Bluetooth establishing a 24X7 connection between patients (using stationary medical devices, implanted and wearable external ones) and practitioners and caregivers, virtual/remote care would visibly become more commonplace. Some of these devices such as blood pressure monitors, pulse oximeters and blood glucose monitors would also give a fillip to self-monitoring of health. Significantly, AI-based mental wellness medical-grade chatbots are already being used to help people with psychiatric disorders such as anxiety and stress. They would become more commonplace in the coming decade.
Also, with increasing digitisation and application of advanced analytics across the value chain including research and development (R&D), manufacturing, quality, supply chain and sales, the pharma industry is set to wear a new look. With the need for instant delivery of pharma products regardless of the location and time, companies would need to strengthen their supply chains and align with hospitals and care centres evolving a new integrated model for ePharma. The coming decade would see a large-scale shift to digital marketing tools such as videos, mobile marketing, digital content, social media, high impact visuals and live sessions on social media for pharma products and services. The new decade would also witness a greater collaboration and partnership between drug companies and health technology firms. This would be a natural development. Technologies such as AI, big data and ML would not only compress the time required between drug research and product development, including clinical trials, testing and so on, these would also be able to churn a staggering amount of data previously unheard of for R&D while also streamlining processes and reducing wastage. In the coming decade, drug R&D would also entail more of gene-based experimenting which would map how the genetic makeup of a person responds to a medicine. Related to the above, genomics in combination with AI and big data would be increasingly deployed for treatment of a patient accounting for the individual characteristics of a person in terms of variability in genes, environment and lifestyle. By the next decade, these technologies would have to a great extent found answers to several forms of cancer, neuro-degenerative diseases and so on. At the same time, as R&D in biotechnology and biopharma including vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics get spurred by the unprecedented pandemics, AI and big data would also be used in epidemiological research and forecasting on a larger scale.
The coming decade will see the legalisation of medical marijuana by more countries in addition to the existing ones. Finally, taking lessons from the outbreak of Covid-19, given the commonality of the challenge posed to humanity, the pharma regulatory authorities across the world would increasingly evolve a more cooperative framework to deal with any future pandemic.
(The writer is president, Council for Healthcare and Pharma. The views expressed are personal.)
Both India and China must shed their nationalistic stand; else the border dispute would remain unresolved. A lot of confusion was caused by politics after the Galwan incident
Amid the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown in India, the month of June brought a rude shock for the country when Chinese and Indian soldiers confronted each other in the disputed area on the Galwan river valley. There were casualties on both sides and a violation of decades of mutual faith and understanding between the countries on the use of firearms.
The Indian perspective: New Delhi maintains that the territorial dispute has been elevated by China by claiming that it was related to the latter’s sovereignty. Further, Beijing’s negative comments on the abrogation of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and terming of the creation of Ladakh as a Union Territory as “illegal” have not gone down well with New Delhi. For India, these are all internal issues. It calls for fairness in understanding of the situation as India did not react when China reorganised the Tibetan provinces in 1965. India is also concerned about the repeated mention of Arunachal Pradesh as southern Tibet since 2005.
China has also expressed its criticism over India building a feeder line from Daulat Beg Oldi to Darbuk-Shyok in 2019. On the other hand, China has continued to build such feeder lines for the last 20 years. Hence, New Delhi does not understand the logic behind Chinese objections to India’s construction activities. It realises that China would not want the Indian Armed Forces to reach the Line of Actual Control (LAC) swiftly.
However, Beijing wants smooth movement of Chinese patrol personnel belonging to the People’s Liberation Army. If China continues with such a stance, India believes that the border negotiations would not be very fruitful.
Another area of contention is Chinese investment in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in the Gilgit-Baltistan area which is a sovereign territory of India and the subject of a long-running conflict between Pakistan and India. Beijing has retorted that these are commercial investments but India is not convinced because China has deployed over 36,000 security personnel in this area.
There is a feeling in New Delhi that China wants to teach a lesson to India because it has decided against joining the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and instead focussed on improving US-India ties, especially amid the 2+2 dialogue process, foundational defence agreements, Quadrilateral Security Dialogue or QUAD and other such arrangements. Also, because of the asymmetry in power relations, China is showing its military might to India.
The Chinese perspective: While the June event was acknowledged as being unfortunate, the official position of the Chinese leadership was that the Indian side triggered the confrontation, which raised tensions. Unlike New Delhi, Beijing did not announce the casualties on its side in the Galwan clash because of the understanding that the situation would be blown out of proportion through the media.
The fundamental reason that the border continues to be a disputed matter between India and China is the asymmetry in the thinking that prevails on both sides. While India seeks to verify the LAC first and then engage in discussing veritable solutions, China’s thinking is top-down. It wishes to arrive at a mutual understanding first and then build a mutual political consensus to demarcate the LAC. Beijing fears that if it agrees to the Indian line of thinking, then China would lose a large part of the territory.
In China’s strategic calculations, India’s position is that of a rising power guided by its increasing national military strength. Despite this, for Beijing, India is not a competitor, especially after the US has become a strategic challenger for China. Further, its aims to maintain peaceful ties with New Delhi because its BRI network has to pass through India on land and in the Indian Ocean.
In fact, during a webinar conducted by the RAND Centre for Asia Pacific Policy, it was clear that the Chinese have refuted the prevailing narrative in the international western media that China was making use of the pandemic to become more assertive and aggressive.
A renewed vigour in the QUAD ties arising out of concerns of aggression by China has also been dismissed by Beijing, as each of the four countries, India, Australia, Japan and the US would not compromise their bilateral relations with it.
The warmth in Indo-US ties has also been downplayed by China as “superficial.” According to Chinese analysts, China does not want US involvement in the dispute.
While there is no need for China to make use of its military strength to prevail over India at any time through border skirmishes, yet with all clarity it subscribes to the notion that the size of the territory is immaterial but what holds immense value in its strategic calculations is honour, interest and fear.
The way forward: According to the Indian perspective, it is important to respect the previous agreements of 1993, 1996, 2005 and 2013 and to ensure disengagement and tranquillity along the border by ensuring the retreat of 60,000 troops in violation of the previous agreements.
There is a need to define and clarify the LAC to avoid such incidents again. It is necessary to have new Confidence Building Measures as was decided in the Xiamen BRICS meeting of 2017.
However, the Chinese think that under no circumstances should either side fire in the sky or at each other. They must reduce frontline deployment of troops unlike the current situation. There has to be an increased coordination of the soldiers at the frontier to avoid confrontation by giving them authority to resolve tensions. And finally, setting up a hotline between the two countries is pertinent as China has such a communication channel with the US, Russia and other countries.
Conclusion: India and China must take a step forward and shed their nationalistic stand; else the border dispute would remain unresolved. A lot of confusion was caused by politics after the Galwan incident. Therefore, it is important to understand the situation with a bipartisan view. Perhaps, they can take lessons from their own recent history, wherein they had demonstrated their maturity to resolve border disputes in exchange of peace and tranquility.
For instance, India peacefully resolved its border disputes with Bangladesh. China settled border disputes peacefully with Russia and Tajikistan, among other countries. While both India and China recognise the clarification of the LAC as a crucial step in dispute resolution, yet, since 2002, China has been unwilling to continue with exchange of maps with India. New Delhi says that this has been deliberately discontinued by China to occupy more land under the garb of ambiguity.
A major concern in India is trying to understand why China has been so strident in occupying disputed territory. India’s position that the Galwan incident was a premeditated action by the Chinese troops is the reason behind the comprehensive economic consequences on bilateral relations, for example, ban on some mobile applications, restrictions on infrastructure investments and so on.
This demonstrates an opposing official position and this has been at the core of non-resolution of disputes. As a reaction, India has increased its military capabilities to thwart Chinese incursions into its territory and must continue with its preparedness, especially with the change in guard of the Western Theatre Command (WTC) and appointment of General Zhang Xudong.
For India, it is important that the leadership does not give in to the pressures of vertical or horizontal escalation and continues with negotiations at the highest level. It must institutionalise the conflict resolution mechanism in order to settle the dispute once and for all, so that Galwan-like incidents do not recur. If China continues with its expansionist autocratic tendencies vis-à-vis India, New Delhi must go to the International Court of Justice for arbitration of land under dispute.
(The writer is CEO and Editorial Director, IMPRI. The views expressed are personal.)
Chennai, Dec 31 (IANS) The priority for the year 2021 will be to usher in increased space sector reforms by putting in place a permanent Indian National Space Promotion and Authorisation Centre (IN-SPACe) and other sectoral policies, said K.Sivan, Secretary, Department of Space (DoS). Sivan is also the Chairman of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and the Space Commission.
He said an interim IN-SPACe, which was set up, has received 28 applications from the private sector companies -- small and big -- startups, and academic institutions for various space related activities. The IN-SPACe is the regulator for the private sector space industry players in India. It would also provide a level playing field for private companies to use Indian space infrastructure. "We want to install the IN-SPACe next year. The existing space related policies are being modified or new one brought in," Sivan added.
As per current scheme of things, IN-SPACe will have its own directorates for technical, legal, safety and security, monitoring as well as activities promotion for assessing the private sector's needs and coordination of the activities. IN-SPACe would have a board and representatives from industry, academia and the government.
Till date, the DoS has also come out with three draft policies -- Draft Space Based Communication Policy of India 2020 (Spacecom Policy-2020), Draft Space Based Remote Sensing Policy and Revised Technology Transfer Policy Guidelines -- to enable the private sector to play a greater role in the space field. A policy for launch vehicles or rockets, space exploration and also a comprehensive Space Act will also be announced, Sivan had said earlier.
According to him the other priority areas for 2021 will be the Gaganyaan mission (India's human space mission), third moon mission-Chandrayaan-3, development of high thrust launcher, advanced satellites, electrical propulsion for satellites, realisation of Small Satellite Launch Vehicle (SSLV). Sivan said the liquid fuel powered engine for the Gaganyaan rocket was tested. "The crew module design phase is over," he added.
Earlier Sivan had said Team ISRO has a busy schedule ahead for the launch of Aditya L1 satellite, third moon mission Chandrayaan-3, Gaganyaaan -- India's human space mission, and realisation of small rocket Small Satellite Launch Vehicle (SSLV). He also said the SSLV will carry EOS-02 (Earth Observation Satellite), and Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle-F10 (GSLV) carrying EOS-3.
The other Indian satellites that are ready for launch are GISAT and Microsat-2A.
New Delhi, Dec 18 (IANS) Minister of State for Finance and Corporate Affairs Anurag Thakur, who comes from Himachal Pradesh, has an understanding of farm issues. He provides the government's point of view on the contentious farm laws which have seen farmers laying siege to Delhi. Minister strongly supports the new farms laws and he is sure that through new laws, the promise to double the farmers income is possible.
Excerpts from the interview:
Q: Farmers are apprehensive that the government will withdraw completely from purchasing farm produce and leave it entirely open to the private sector. The corporates, n turn, will purchase a small portion of the total produce "as per the high standards which can be manipulated" and the remaining crop will get paid only a pittance...
A: The government is not going to withdraw purchasing farm produce and we are not doing away with the Minimum Support Price (MSP) scheme. This has rightly been called as the 1991 moment for the agricultural sector in India.
Under The Farmers Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Act, 2020, farmers will be freed from the grip of the middleman, and they will be able to sell their produce to the buyers from across the country at a price they deem to be fair and at a time of their choosing.
Meanwhile, under The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm Services Act, 2020, farmers can opt for contract farming with agriculture trade firms, wholesalers, big retailers and exporters. The provision of market linkages at the sowing stage itself will insulate them from production and price vagaries.
Through these Acts, we are enabling the farmers to produce as per their will and convenience and that they should not be bound by selling only to the APMCs. The farmer should have the control over his crop and he should have the right to decide the price of the crop. These Acts will be the catalysts to the promise we made to the nation of doubling farmer's income by 2022.
Q: The sugarcane farmers particularly were upset, thousands committed suicide and successive governments have promised assistance, but nothing happened. Is Modi government simply doing lip service?
A: The Modi government is not only committed to increasing farmers' incomes, but also their welfare. The last Cabinet Committee headed by the Prime Minister approved an assistance of about Rs 3,500 crore for sugarcane farmers. This will benefit five crore sugarcane farmers and their dependents.
In addition to this, there are about five lakh workers employed in the sugar mills and ancillary activities; and their livelihoods depend on the sugar industry.
Farmers sell their sugarcane to the sugar mills. However, the farmers are not getting their dues from the sugar mill owners as they have surplus sugar stock. To address this concern, the government is facilitating the evacuation of surplus sugar stock. This will enable payment of dues of the sugarcane farmers. The government will incur about Rs 3,500 crore for this purpose, and this assistance would be directly credited into the farmers' accounts on behalf of the sugar mills against cane price dues and the subsequent balance, if any, would be credited to the mill's account.
This subsidy aims at covering expenses on marketing costs including handling, upgrading and other processing costs and costs of international and internal transport and freight charges on export of up to 60 LMT of sugar limited to Maximum Admissible Export Quota (MAEQ) allocated to the sugar mills for sugar season 2020-21.
Q: You claim to ensure farmers' welfare, yet farmers are on the streets. Either they are misled or your schemes and assurances are like hollow promises. What do you have to say?
A: A few farmers have been misled by the opposition parties. The majority of the farmers have benefited and understand our various initiatives. Since 2014, Soil Health Card has increased productivity levels, provided e-NAM facility to sell produce and set up cold storage facilities apart from opening mega food parks.
We have also provided PM Kisan Maandhan Yojana with an assured monthly pension of Rs 3,000. This is a voluntary pension scheme, where the government will match the monthly contribution and it will also be payable to the farmer's spouse in case of death. Already over 21 lakh farmers have registered for this.
PM KISAN is another flagship initiative that has already benefited around 11 crore farmers with a disbursement of over Rs 95,000 crore. Besides this, the Fasal Beema Yojana, increase in MSP rates and procurement -- all these have immensely increased farmers' welfare, income and productivity. Will the opposition explain why they did not do any of these while in power or in the states they are in power? Clearly, facts speak louder than the opposition's myth mongering.
Q: What was the hurry in introducing farmer-related issues as ordinances in the month of June? The issues concerning lakhs of farmers deserved to be brought in as bills for the opposition to debate them before they were passed. Why did you not allow questions to be raised on the 'anti-farmer' provisions in the bills?
A: Let's go by hard facts. During 2009-2014, the budget allocation for agriculture increased by a meagre 8.5 per cent. From 2014-2019, the Modi government took it much higher - an increase of 38.8 per cent. Those people who accuse the BJP government of being anti-poor have no facts to back their rhetoric. We have been standing with our farmer brothers and sisters and these Acts are a watershed moment in India's agricultural history.
After decades of toil and struggle, our farmers finally have the the option of choice; to choose what they produce, when they produce, whom to sell, at what price to sell. This all is in addition to the MSP scheme which will guarantee a minimum support price for their produce no matter what.
The Indian agricultural sector remained malnourished because of the archaic APMC (Agriculture Produce Marketing Committee) Acts. The mandis which were meant to help and protect the farmers instead became monopolies and benefited only them and not the farmers.
By opposing the passing of these historic Agri Acts in the Parliament, the hypocrisy and the duplicitous nature of the Congress gets exposed. Why? Because in their 2019 manifesto, the Congress had clearly said they "will repeal the Agricultural Produce Market Committee Act and make trade in agricultural produce - including exports and inter-state trade - free from all restrictions".
Lastly, on the issue of this Parliamentary session, it is a fact that this session witnessed 167 per cent productivity, with 60 hours of sittings, 2,300 questions and 370 zero hour mentions. In fact, the House on multiple occasions debated and sat late into the night. Why did the opposition parties not participate in the debates during the session? Why did they create disruption instead of having a democratic debate?
Q: Farmers apprehend that the government is making false claims about the provision for the continuance of the MSP system. Out of the listed 23 crops, in Punjab, MSP is paid only for wheat, paddy and cotton. Does the government guarantee that in case farmers do not get the MSP from traders, the government will buy all the listed crops at MSP?
A: The 70th round of NSSO on Key Indicators of Situation Assessment of Agricultural Households in India shows that only six per cent of farmers gain from MSPs. The archaic and regressive laws did not allow the markets to function and thereby only the rich farmers benefited from the earlier laws.
We had recently released the first instalment of over Rs 19,000 crore for paddy procurement in three states under the MSP scheme. We also announced the MSPs for six rabi crops of 2020-21 which are in line with the recommendations of the Swaminathan Commission.
Wheat MSP for the rabi crop of 2020-21 has been fixed at Rs 1,975 per quintal - 2.6 per cent higher than Rs 1,925 in 2019-20. MSP for lentil (masur) has been fixed at Rs 5,100 per quintal - 6.25 per cent or Rs 300 higher than in 2019-20.
The MSP for gram has been increased to Rs 5,100 per quintal - Rs 225 or 4.62 per cent higher than last year. MSP for safflower has been increased to Rs 5,327 per quintal - hiked by Rs 112 or 2.15 per cent over last year. MSP for barley has seen an increase of Rs 75 (4.92 per cent) from Rs 1,525 per quintal in 2019-20 to Rs 1,600 in 2020-21.
The increase in MSP for Rabi crops for marketing season 2021-22 is in line with the principle of fixing the MSPs at a level of at least 1.5 times of the all-India weighted average cost of production as announced in the Union Budget 2018-19.
Q: How will the government ensure that the private sector pays the MSP when even the government was not doing so in letter and spirit?
A: In spite of the rumour mongering and the underhanded tactics of the opposition to falsely portray fear, the Prime Minister and the Agriculture Minister have clarified that the system of MSP will remain and government procurement will continue.
These Acts, meanwhile, empower the farmers to do business with those private companies that they want and they have no compulsion to accept any contracts which they do not agree with. The imperfectness of the markets was a reason for the poor growth of the agricultural sector. We are giving options to the farmers, no one is compelling them to choose one or the other. If a farmer thinks the APMC mechanism is good, he can opt for it; if he wants to sell his produce to a private company, he should be free to do so. These Agri Acts have empowered the farmers with the power of choice.
By removing the barriers, farmers all across the country can sell their produce wherever they want. This will promote inter-state trade and the farmers will get the right price for their produce. We are also strengthening the agricultural infrastructure and we have announced a Rs 1 lakh crore fund for the same. This fund will facilitate the development of agricultural infrastructure, that includes collection centres, warehouses, storage centres, cold chains, and pre-processing facilities, among others. Funds for the development of the animal husbandry and fisheries sector have also been launched to diversify the sources of farmers' income.
Q: Can the protests of the farmers all across the country be termed unjust? Shouldn't the farmers be given a patient hearing?
A: Do not underestimate the intelligence of our farmers. We have had several rounds of discussions with the Agriculture Minister and we will clarify all the concerns being raised by the farmers.
We have our ears to the ground and have been listening to the farmers. Farmers across the nation are happy and pleased with these Acts. Visit any part of rural India and you will get the real picture.
These are Acts which will alter the agricultural sector as we know it and will bring a paradigm shift in the way the farmers have been doing their business. With the emergence of agri-tech startups and the government being committed to improving the infrastructure side by side, the focus is solely now on increasing the farmers' income and improving their standard of living.
Our doors are always open for our farmer brothers and sisters and we will always pay heed to their concerns as these Acts are for their prosperity and for their benefits. They are the biggest stakeholders in our 'Aatmanirbhar Bharat' vision and their interests are Modi government's priority.
Q: Farmers feel that they have not been involved at any time during the decision-making process on an issue which affects their lives. They say before formulation of the policies, they were not consulted at all. Your comments?
A: Again, let's go by facts. We have at every stage been in touch with the farmers. In fact, the Prime Minister has spoken about them around 25 times! The total number of training and webinar sessions conducted with farmers were over 1,30,000 reaching out to over 92,00,000 farmers between June and November 2020.
We have been in touch with the farmers across the nation. Moreover, as I shared already, the Acts were passed after hours of discussion in both the Houses of the Parliament. The farmers all across the country have suffered because of their inability to produce and sell independently. We have already created 2,000-plus Farmer Producer Organisations (FPO) and 10,000 more are in the works with a budgetary allocation of Rs 5,000 crore.
Over 1,000 agri startups, driven by young technology graduates, have been created and over 20,000 agri clinics have been made possible by agriculture graduates. We need these reforms now more than ever before for these start ups to prosper which will benefit the farmers the most.
No amount of scare mongering will take away the fact that it is the government led by PM Narendra Modi that dismantled monopolies of the APMCs and began a new era for the farmers.
Q: Why are electricity and fertiliser subsidies being taken away and farmers being told that they will be compensated later? Can the government deny that the state and the Central finance departments struggle for funds? So, what is the guarantee for farmers getting refunded later? Many subsidies like those on polyhouses have not been cleared...
A: We have not taken away any electricity and fertiliser subsidies. Instead, since 2013-14, MSP for wheat and paddy has increased by 41 ore cent and 43 per cent, respectively, while there has been up to 65 per cent rise in MSP for pulses and oilseeds.
The quantity of wheat and paddy procured has also increased by 73 per cent and 114 per cent, respectively, compared to 2014. In the case of pulses, the increase has been a staggering 4,962 per cent.
Increased agriculture credit, higher loan subsidy, and soil health card to 16.38 crore farmers have benefited farmers across the nation. The Modi government has also provided security cover to 13.26 crore farmers under the PM crop insurance scheme and direct cash benefit of Rs 94,000 crore to 10.21 crore farmers through the PM Kisan Samman Nidhi.
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month