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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]latest-news-updates/the-power-of-populists-and-naysayers-nc-saxena-18736.html"/> LATEST NEWS UPDATES | The power of populists and naysayers-NC Saxena | Im4change.org
Resource centre on India's rural distress
 
 

The power of populists and naysayers-NC Saxena
-The Indian Express

The growing influence on policy issues of activists who call themselves “civil society” is a worrying trend and needs to be objectively analysed. Two recent policy pronouncements will illustrate how government seems to be yielding to their pressure.

It is well established that absenteeism of teachers and poor quality of outcomes in government schools is the main factor behind the popularity of private schools with poor infrastructure that cater to the needs of the underprivileged. The management pays pittance to the teachers but such schools are still attracting students because of better teacher attendance, personal attention to each student and testing of their homework by the teachers, faster scholastic learning, and in some places greater emphasis on English. Often they run under a banyan tree or in a dilapidated building. However, the Right to Education Act insists that such schools would be closed down if they do not have an all- weather building consisting of at least one classroom for every teacher and an office-cum-store-cum-head teacher’s room; barrier-free access; separate toilets for boys and girls; safe and adequate water facility to all children; kitchen for mid-day meals; playground; library; and qualified teachers.

Shutting down private schools that do not meet the required norms and standards will place an additional burden on Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) funds at a time when the overall demand for primary education is still greater than supply. This is particularly so in urban areas that cater to migrants and slum dwellers. At the very least, the answer lies in improving the quality of infrastructure and outcomes in government schools and not in shutting down the private schools, thereby denying access to education to the deprived sections. However, the lobby of “fundamentalists” in the education sector is

so strong that these schools are under threat of being de-recognised under law.

A more recent example of the civil society influence on drafting of laws can be seen in the Land Acquisition Bill. A close examination of its clauses would reveal that acquisition of even one acre of land would take at least two years and the proposal will have to pass through about a hundred hands. The delay is caused mainly because the bill seeks to establish several committees adorned by activists and “experts”. To begin with, Social Impact Assessment would be carried out by a committee, and its report would be vetted by an Expert Group. In addition, there would be an R&R Committee, of course a State Level Committee and a National Monitoring Committee to pontificate over the reports generated by the junior committees.

As land cost is insignificant (between 1 to 5 per cent of the project cost), a simpler solution would have been to increase compensation several fold, and make land available to the project in a few months’ time. However, landowners cannot ask for more than the recorded price (it is common knowledge that it is often less than one-third of the actual price) in urban areas and not more than double in rural areas. The bill is anti-farmer and anti-growth, but certainly pro-civil society!

Barring a few exceptions, many of these NGO activists think with their hearts and not with their brains. They are populists and cater to a constituency of “habitual seminar participants”. One can easily predict their stand on any development issue. For instance, they would never say that profits are legitimate or that industry is creating jobs, or that agriculture has shown vast improvements in Gujarat. They believe in development being a “zero-sum game” where the poor can benefit only when the rich are losing out. Both cannot win, according to them. Ramachandra Guha rightly called them the “No No People”. In the past, they criticised the Green Revolution, in the 1980s their target was farm forestry, and now their target is infrastructure, dams, power plants, direct cash transfer schemes, UID, PPP, etc. Reality for them is either black or white, never grey. Everywhere, they see a conspiracy engineered by the World Bank/ IMF or the “neo-liberal state”.

They pick up facts selectively, or distort them. They are people in a hurry looking for quick-fix solutions. Like journalists who only write but do not read, they too only talk but have no time for comprehensive analyses of such facts that do not support their biased views. Their favourite pastime is to hog media space and run down government. No wonder, their image amongst bureaucrats is that of wasters, dependent on foreign funding. Interestingly, their differences and rivalries with each other are at times quite open. Competition for funds, professional jealousies, differences in operational traditions and the desire to be seen everywhere, are common maladies that restrict inter-NGO collaboration.

The Planning Commission should critically examine their contribution before they acquire permanent space for themselves in all social ministries.

The writer is member, National Advisory Council