Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/states-ask-for-more-4678643/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/states-ask-for-more-4678643/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/states-ask-for-more-4678643/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/states-ask-for-more-4678643/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;States ask for more&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;states-ask-for-more-4678643&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4678643,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;States ask for more&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;states-ask-for-more-4678643&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4678643,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 30580
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/states-ask-for-more-4678643.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>States ask for more</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindu Business Line<br /><br /><em>If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem<br /></em><br />A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &lsquo;flagship&rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.<br /><br />Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).<br /><br />If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;States ask for more&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;states-ask-for-more-4678643&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4678643,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;States ask for more&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;states-ask-for-more-4678643&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4678643,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 30580
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/states-ask-for-more-4678643.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>States ask for more</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindu Business Line<br /><br /><em>If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem<br /></em><br />A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &lsquo;flagship&rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.<br /><br />Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).<br /><br />If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f7a2ab32df7-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;States ask for more&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;states-ask-for-more-4678643&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4678643,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 30580,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;States ask for more&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;states-ask-for-more-4678643&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4678643,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 30580
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Hindu Business Line&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the finance panel&amp;rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&amp;rsquo;s a problem&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &amp;mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &amp;mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &amp;mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &amp;mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &amp;lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&amp;rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&amp;rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &amp;lsquo;flagship&amp;rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&amp;rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &amp;mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &amp;mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/states-ask-for-more-4678643.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>States ask for more</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Hindu Business Line<br /><br /><em>If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem<br /></em><br />A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &lsquo;flagship&rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.<br /><br />Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).<br /><br />If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.</div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 30580,
		'title' => 'States ask for more',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Hindu Business Line<br />
<br />
<em>If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem<br />
</em><br />
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &lsquo;flagship&rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.<br />
<br />
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).<br />
<br />
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'states-ask-for-more-4678643',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 4678643,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 30580,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more',
	'metaKeywords' => 'rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Hindu Business Line<br /><br /><em>If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem<br /></em><br />A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &lsquo;flagship&rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.<br /><br />Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).<br /><br />If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.</div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 30580,
	'title' => 'States ask for more',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Hindu Business Line<br />
<br />
<em>If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem<br />
</em><br />
A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &mdash; ₹1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to ₹2.05 lakh crore from ₹3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of ₹40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &lsquo;flagship&rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.<br />
<br />
Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).<br />
<br />
If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 February, 2016, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/editorial/states-ask-for-more/article8264566.ece?homepage=true',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'states-ask-for-more-4678643',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 4678643,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 30580
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | States ask for more'
$metaKeywords = 'rashtriya krishi vikas yojana,NITI Aayog,Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS),mgnrega'
$metaDesc = '
-The Hindu Business Line

If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem

A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-The Hindu Business Line<br /><br /><em>If the finance panel&rsquo;s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there&rsquo;s a problem<br /></em><br />A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement &mdash; more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget &mdash; was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers &mdash; 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission &mdash; have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre&rsquo;s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that &lsquo;Central assistance to State plans&rsquo;, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States&rsquo; domain. In 2015-16, the Centre&rsquo;s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen &lsquo;flagship&rsquo; schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre&rsquo;s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced.<br /><br />Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs &mdash; a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget &mdash; this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments).<br /><br />If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.</div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

States ask for more

-The Hindu Business Line If the finance panel’s award has been negated by cutbacks elsewhere, there’s a problem A few days back, the States conveyed to the Centre that the new devolution arrangement — more under the Fourteenth Finance Commission award and less from the Union Budget — was not working well for them. The main burden of their argument was that the additional transfers — 1.78 lakh crore more this year under the Finance Commission — have been nullified by cutbacks in the Centre’s share of centrally sponsored schemes (CSSs), forcing the States to shell out extra to keep these going instead of pursuing programmes of their choice. According to them, there has been no increase in untied transfers as was initially expected (Odisha has complained of a net decline). If this is true, the devolution plan spelt out in the 2015-16 Budget seems to have gone off-track. A NITI Aayog report on the subject submitted last October explains that ‘Central assistance to State plans’, which comprises 85 per cent CSS transfers, has been cut in the 2015-16 Budget to 2.05 lakh crore from 3.38 lakh crore in the 2014-15 Budget. This leaves the States with a net gain of 40,000 crore. Yes, CSSs should be phased out; they represent an intrusion into the States’ domain. In 2015-16, the Centre’s share has been reduced in 33 schemes, while 16 will be implemented as wholly Central or State schemes. Seventeen ‘flagship’ schemes, such as MGNREGA, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and National Rural Health Mission, are expected to continue as before. Even here, a reduction in the Centre’s share (as opposed to outlay) should be worked out over time in consultation with the States. But for the Centre to be able reduce its share in CSSs, the States must be left with more rather than less funds from the Centre. If the States are right about being worse off now, it could be either because the funds cutback for the ongoing CSSs is more than has been spelt out in the Budget, or that new CSSs (requiring a matching contribution from States) have eaten into finance panel transfers. States should be consulted in advance before any new scheme that involves them is announced. Most CSSs are poorly implemented because of their one-size-fits-all approach. States lack operational freedom to tailor them to local needs — a notable exception in this regard, however, is the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, which has more room for the States built into it. CSSs suffer for shortage of staff, as Plan transfers cannot be used for recruiting permanent employees. All the more reason then for raising the untied component of funds transfer also from the Budget — this would allow the States to figure out their own Plan, non-Plan mix (the latter including salaries and interest payments). If the issue of funds devolution festers, it could impact efforts to arrive at a consensus on the GST. To raise funds, States may press for keeping more items out of the GST. Therefore, the issue must be cleared up in the forthcoming Budget.