Human Resource and Skill Requirement Reports launched

Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Skill Development and Entrepreneurship Shri Rajiv Pratap Rudy here today launched the Human Resource and Skill Requirement reports across 24 sectors in India which will serve as the baseline for all skill development initiatives being planned across the country. 

According to the findings of the reports, the incremental human resource requirement across these 24 sectors is nearly 109.73* million whereby the top 10 sectors account for about 80 percent of requirements.

Speaking on the occasion, Shri Rudy said that in line with Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi’s vision of making India the skill capital of the world; this is yet another endeavour from his ministry. He said, as the old adage goes, what cannot be measured, cannot be corrected. The idea behind the Skill Gap Studies is to understand which sectors are likely to face the biggest gaps. He said, it is imperative for us to plan the skilling of future workforce of India on the basis of these reports.

The Minister said, these reports will be used for the implementation of the recently announced Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY); for State Skill Missions, and for various other skill initiatives being planned across the country.

Shri Rudy said, according to the implementation schedule for the National Skills Qualifications Framework (NSQF) (a competency based framework that organises all qualifications according to a series of levels of knowledge, skills and aptitude), after 27th December, 2016 government funding would not be available for any training, educational programme, course which is not NSQF-compliant. He said, all government funded training and educational institutions shall define eligibility criteria for admission to various course in terms of NSQF levels. Shri Rudy said, the recruitment rules of the government of India and PSUs of the Central Government shall be amended to define eligibility criteria for all positions in terms of NSQF levels. The State Governments and their PSUs shall also be encouraged to amend their recruitment rules on above lines. He said, after 27th December, 2018 it shall be mandatory for all training/educational programmes/courses to be NSQF compliant. All training and educational institutions shall define eligibility criteria for admission to various courses in terms of NSQF levels.

Secretary, Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship Shri Sunil Arora said, there is a changing paradigm in skill training towards demand-driven training to ensure employability and placement of the youth. While the reports give an insight on the quantitative side of human resource requirement in each of the sectors, the research has also led to useful qualitative findings in terms of highlighting key job roles in the sector, existing skill gaps in the sectors, key interventions required to map supply and demand, etc. He said, these will help the Ministry to create a strategy to bind together the islands of excellence that we already have in the country.



In his comments, MD and CEO of NSDC Shri Dilip Chenoy said, more than 1000 industry experts, 19 Sector Skill Councils, 110 training institutions and 1500+ trainees have been engaged for the studies.

The reports were commissioned by National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) and authored by consulting firm KPMG. The objective of these skill gap reports was to understand the sectorial and geographical spread of skill requirements that exist. The figures have been estimated on the basis of extensive stakeholder engagement including small, medium and large enterprises in every sector as well as Sector Skill Councils (SSCs), training providers in the skills space and academia. The skill gap studies provide a granular data on the skill gaps for two time periods- 2013-17 and 2017-22.

The 2015 #Global Monitoring Report released

The 2015 #EducationforAll (EFA) Global Monitoring Report (GMR) was released by Smt Smriti Zubin Irani, the Minister for Human Resource Development today at an event organized by the Ministry of Human Resource Development in collaboration with the UNESCO here today. The 2015 Global Monitoring Report is based on the theme ‘Education for All 2000-2015 Achievements and Challenges.

Smt. Irani highlighted the achievements made by India in reducing the Out of School Children and achieving the gender parity at the elementary level thereby contributing to the global progress in the EFA goals. Minister further elaborated the recent measures taken by the government in harnessing technology for extending quality education and using education as a means pillar for nation’s character building.

The panel presentation by the Nobel laureate 2014 Shri Kailash Satyarthi, Chairperson of the Global March against child labour focused on the issue of the challenge of reaching out to the marginalized children.

The event included a brief video address by the UN Secretary General Mr Ban Ki Moon who called upon the nations to harness the power of education to build a better future for all. The presentation by Mr Aaron Benevot, Director GMR on the key finding of the report while highlighted the unfinished EFA agenda also indicated at the progressive gains made in reducing the Out of School Children, increased enrolment at the primary level and encouraging trends in participation of the girl child.

The release event also included an exhibition put together by the National Council of Education Research and Training (NCERT) entitled’Shaping the Future Education Agenda:

#Dhanush missile successfully test-fired

 India successfully test-fired nuclear weapons-capable Dhanush missile from a ship, off the Odisha coast on Thursday.

The ship-based missile was launched at 11.02 a.m. by personnel of the Strategic Forces Command (SFC) from an Offshore Patrolling Vessel (OPV), which was deep inside the sea, for its full range of 350 km, according to Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) missile scientists.

It was a perfect mission and the missile splashed down near the target point with high degree of accuracy, they said.

Dhanush, a manoeuvring missile is a naval variant of Prithvi-II, and can carry a nuclear payload of 500 kg.

It can target both land-based and sea-based targets. The missile has already been inducted into the armed services and the SFC personnel randomly picked up the missile from the production lot for Thursday’s trial, which was carried out as part of regular user training.

Dhanush was one of the five missiles developed by the DRDO under the Integrated Guided Missile Development Programme.

Centre tells #UPSC to go ahead with #civilserviceresults based on court order on #Jatreservation

the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) has asked Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) to go ahead with the 2014 Civil Services results based on the Supreme Court order on Jat reservation, sources said on Monday.
After the Supreme Court struck down Jat reservations, the UPSC had delayed the Civil Services Mains result and sought DoPT's view on whether to withdraw reservation benefits to Jat students.
The DoPT told UPSC to go with the SC order and decide for itself on what needs to be done. In March 2015, the Supreme Court had set aside Centre's notification to extend the benefit of reservations to the Jat community.The National Backward Classes Commission in its earlier recommendation had refused to give reservation to the Jats in the OBC category.
Numerically strong, the farming community of Jats in nine North Indian states have been demanding reservation under OBC quota for a long time. Many times, they even staged violent protests in some parts of north India. Jats have a strong presence in Haryana, Delhi, Western UP, Punjab, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.
UPSC conducts the Civil Services Examination (CSE) for recruitment to Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Foreign Service (IFS), Indian Police Service (IPS), Indian Revenue Service (IRS) and Central Group A and Group B services. The format has three stages - Preliminary examination which consists of two objective-type papers (General Studies and Aptitude Test), the Main examination which consists of nine papers of conventional (essay) type followed by the Personality Test of interview).
The entire process from the notification of the Preliminary examination to declaration of the final results takes roughly one year. Civil Services are the most coveted jobs in India and the competition is extremely tough with several lakh aspirants taking the Preliminary examination out of which just a few thousands qualify for the Main examinations and just a couple of thousand are called for Personality Test.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/centre-tells-upsc-to-go-ahead-with-civil-service-results-based-on-court-order-on-jat-reservation/538262-3.html

Trust deficit in land acquisition A 'public purpose validation commission' may well bridge the trust deficit

Nobody trusts anybody where forcible land acquisition is concerned ostensibly under “public purpose”, “eminent domain” or “greater common good”. This is at the heart of all the angst and clamour against the amendments in the land Bill. Of the four key pillars that hold up the land Bill edifice, namely, compensation, resettlement and rehabilitation, social impact assessment and consent, it is the last one where all the controversy is focused.

Civil society, particularly, does not trust the state. It has reason not to. The notorious colonial era Land Acquisition Actof 1894 had been thoroughly misused. Under its catch-all “public purpose” window, the state was the biggest culprit. Jairam Ramesh, the principal architect of the Land Acquisition Act, is on record saying:

• “Across India, land has been acquired by government and it remains unutilised even after 30-40 years of acquisition. The government itself was the biggest squatter”.
   
• “PSUs have been the worst defaulters in terms of their poor record of resettlement and rehabilitation.”
   
• “Over the decades, over 4 crore (40 million) tribals had been displaced without rehabilitation and compensation, and could possibly be a prime cause for left-wing extremism in affected parts of the country.”

It led to forcible, heartless acquisition programmes as well as “lazy acquisitions” where acquired land was hugely in excess of needs or just left unutilised. More dangerously, the licence to define anything as ‘public purpose’ resulted in crony-capitalism in land deals. It is reported to have peaked at the height of the SEZ (special economic zone) fever resulting, as we all know, in a spate of protests. The other route cleverly followed was for private sector to sign JVs with statal entities, giving the state a minority stake in a project and then getting the state to forcibly acquire land at notified low prices.

But the state does indeed have a role to play in a democracy in making up its mind on behalf of the people it represents as to when “public purpose” kicks in. In an article in the Hindustan Times on August 15, 2009, noted economist (and one-time chief economic advisor to the government),Kaushik Basu wrote: “Modern economic theory sheds light on this; and, somewhat unexpectedly, comes out on the side of government intervention. As a consequence, even some of the most aggressively market-oriented nations in the world, such as the US, have provisions that allow the state to intervene and acquire land for large-scale industrial or commercial use. The economic argument shows that, left entirely to voluntary transactions, many socially desirable industrialisation projects would never get implemented. This so-called ‘hold-up problem’ was briefly touched upon byAmartya Sen in this Penguin Lecture on ‘Justice and India,’ in Kolkata on August 5, though he did not elaborate on it.” Among the three classical factors of production — government plays a pivotal role in developing and regulating capital and labour markets. It cannot excuse itself from the land market.

The recent amendments to the land Act, as promulgated in the ordinance, seek to broaden the ambit of “public purpose” vis-à-vis the United Progressive Alliance (UPA)’s Act — where public purpose was more tightly defined. A tighter definition, resulted inevitability in having to seek “consent” for projects of national importance. This is what the current government believes goes against its agenda of speedy economic development and job creation.

So, we have a classic dilemma — that a society is being asked to put its finger, through democratic processes, on a shade of grey between the black and white of “individual rights” and “greater common good.” The problem gets compounded by the fact that nobody quite knows who in thesarkari system actually defines “public purpose.” Is it the prime minister, the chief minister or the district magistrate ? And how is such a weighty and complex decision taken, which results in forcible acquisitions and displacement of a settled way of life?

So the “trust deficit” has two clear components. One, historically not trusting the state in defining “public purpose”; and two, the lack of clarity on the processes by which such a decision is sought to be arrived at in the present. The UPA government tried to bridge this chasm by putting most acquisitions under the “consent” clause. The current government argues that it severely hurts speedy economic development.

Is there a solution?

Here is a suggestion. It would be worthwhile considering setting up an independent and credible “public purpose validation commission” at the central and state levels as an acceptable via media between the contentious extremes of “80 per cent consent” and “forcible acquisition.” Such a commission could well be structured with eminent citizens across different walks of life who can be trusted by the public at large to validate or not validate the government’s claim for forcible acquisition for public good.

This could well forge an agreement between warring political parties as well as provide reassurance to the people of India at large. It would certainly be more impactful and relevant than the proposed quasi-judicial authority — the Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, which is supposed to hold hearings in places where acquisition is taking place. The nation wants an ex-ante body for endorsing “public purpose.” Not an ex-post body for cleaning up the mess.

A Persian handshake with promise

Signing of ‘Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action’ closes Iran’s route to nuclear weapons, introduces stringent monitoring, & builds confidence by phasing out sanctions.

The signing of the “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action regarding Iran’s Nuclear Programme” last week, between Iran and P5+1, is the first definitive step on a road that will be long and tortuous but carries profound implications for the West Asian region as a whole. It initiates a thaw in regional political equations that have remained frozen since the 1979 Islamic Revolution when relations between the United States and Iran ruptured. During the last 18 months, it had become clear that within the P5+1, the principal negotiator was the U.S. and it sometimes faced difficulties in keeping its Western partners in line. In 2003-04, the E-3 (the United Kingdom, France and Germany) had come close to a deal that would have constrained Iran’s nuclear programme earlier, but it could not materialise because the U.S. was not at the table.

Israeli and Saudi concerns

Both Saudi Arabia and Israel, key U.S. allies in the region are upset and tried to scuttle the deal, but theObama administration was resolute in pursuing the negotiations. On March 3, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the U.S. Congress in an unprecedented example of political theatre to criticise the deal even as he faced an uncertain re-election in his country a fortnight later.

Mr. Netanyahu claimed that the deal “would not block but pave the way” in furthering Iran’s nuclear ambitions and called for more sanctions against Iran. U.S. President Barack Obama, who had declined to receive Mr. Netanyahu during his Washington trip, dismissed the speech as “offering no viable alternative to the current negotiations”. Mr. Netanyahu’s address was followed by an open letter — signed by 47 U.S. senators and addressed to the Iranian leadership — cautioning against signing any deal that would not be approved by the Congress. While Mr. Obama’s task of convincing the Congress about the merits of a deal with Iran was hard enough, Mr. Netanyahu’s speech and the consequent heightened polarisation only rendered it harder.

The U.S. kept the Saudi leadership briefed about the negotiations but Saudi apprehensions remain. Hints have been dropped that Saudi Arabia — and possibly other Sunni majority states such as Egypt and Turkey — will demand the same rights of accessing and retaining uranium enrichment technology as provided to Iran, a suggestion that makes the Western non-proliferation lobby highly nervous. It is no secret that the Pakistani nuclear programme was funded with generous Saudi support and Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s recent visit to that country promptly led to speculation that Pakistan was being told that the time was coming when it may have to make good on its nuclear debts.

U.S. rationale and Iranian stakes

Mr. Obama’s consistent position has been that the U.S. will do whatever it takes (a euphemism that covers military means) to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. The rationale for the talks is that in the last decade, Iran has slowly built up its capabilities and in the absence of any deal, Iran can move rapidly to develop a nuclear weapon capability. In November 2013, when Iran agreed to freeze its programme and engage in negotiations, it was reported to have a breakout time of three months — in three months, Iran would have sufficient, high enriched uranium (20-25 kg) to produce one bomb. Further, the likelihood of a successful air strike against the underground facility at Fordow constructed during the last decade was remote.

The Stuxnet cyber attack had slowed Iran’s enrichment programme, but since then Iran had strengthened its cyber capabilities, both defensive and offensive. The changing political dynamics in Iraq and the emergence of new jihadi forces in the aftermath of the Arab Spring necessitated a fresh regional approach. Political support for sustaining enhanced sanctions on Iran was eroding and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani’s election offered a window of political opportunity. The U.S. responded with a new policy — a freeze on an Iranian nuclear build-up, an elimination of certain capabilities thereby increasing the breakout time to a year or more, a tighter inspection regime to detect any clandestine activity, accompanied by a phased removal of nuclear-related sanctions — all this based on the assumption that if this could be sustained for a decade or more, it would lead to a gradual moderation in Iran’s behaviour.

For Iran and Mr. Rouhani, the stakes are high. Iran’s regional influence has grown with the U.S. exits from Iraq and Afghanistan but the low oil prices coupled with the economic sanctions are hurting. Mr. Rouhani had handled the nuclear negotiations a decade ago and enjoys a degree of credibility but space for any manoeuvre is limited and timing is critical.

A failure in the talks means that Mr. Rouhani will not win the 2016 Majlis elections. While Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei has given his blessings for the talks, the hardliners feel that now is not the time for compromises. More important, the hardliners do not want the deal to signify a movement towards a normalisation of ties with the U.S. but want its scope limited to ensuring sanctions relief. According to them, Mr. Netanyahu’s re-election and an Obama approaching the end of his tenure is not a combination that can deliver.

The hardliners have already ensured the election of Ayatollah Mohammad Yazdi as Chairman of the Assembly of Experts against former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, widely seen as a moderate and a Rouhani supporter. The Assembly is an important body that guides the Supreme Leader and also chooses his successor. Its eight-year term ends in 2016 and alignments are under way for the new Assembly because the Supreme Leader is over 75 and, reportedly, somewhat frail.

Mr. Netanyahu’s surprise victory in his re-election last month will raise the brinkmanship in the coming months when the negotiators seek to hammer out the technical details by June 30. His position is that Iran must be stopped from having any capability that permits it to become a threshold nuclear weapon state because the Iranian regime cannot be trusted. Its nuclear infrastructure must be dismantled, sanctions tightened and only a new regime in Iran will moderate its revolutionary ideology. At this stage, any sanctions relief will be used by Iran to further destabilise the region. However, Mr. Netanyahu’s extreme rhetoric troubles a significant section of the Israelis who believe that such an approach jeopardises U.S.-Israel relations by introducing an element of polarisation in what has so far been the U.S.’s unconditional and bipartisan support to Israel.

Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, together with a number of former generals, have stated that a military option against Iranian nuclear facilities is unviable and the U.S. and Israel have to work together to manage Iran’s transition towards moderating its posture. They are concerned that the U.S. has dropped the linkage between Iran’s requirement of low enrichment uranium and the number of centrifuges needed by conceding Iran’s intrinsic right to enrichment but are still prepared to live with a limited frozen capacity provided there is a strengthened inspection regime that guarantees an absence of any clandestine activity.

Nuts and bolts of deal

The framework announced on April 2 limits Iran to operating only 5,060 centrifuges of the old variety for 10 years, places a restriction of 3.67 per cent enrichment for 15 years and reduces the 10,000 kg stockpile of enriched uranium to 300 kg. No fissile material can be introduced into the secure facility at Fordow for the next 15 years while the heavy water research reactor at Arak will be modified so that it does not produce any weapons grade plutonium. Its existing core as well as any subsequent spent fuel will be shipped out of the country. Most significant is the opening up of the supply chain that supports Iran’s nuclear programme to international accounting and inspection, restrictions on centrifuge research, development and manufacturing units, and uranium mines and mills, which will remain in place for 25 years. There remain some problem areas to be ironed out over the next three months — a dispute resolution mechanism, measures to resolve concerns about earlier military aspects of its programme possibly at Parchin which Iran has kept out of bounds, establishing a dedicated procurement channel and, finally, a phasing out of the sanctions regime. Only nuclear-related sanctions will be eased while other sanctions pertaining to ballistic missile activity, terrorism and human rights issues will remain in place. Mr. Obama’s authority to waive Congressionally-mandated sanctions may face a challenge at home, though his authority for implementing an Executive Agreement is considerable.

The agreed framework meets the test of a good deal. It closes Iran’s route to nuclear weapons, constrains elements of its programme that generate concern for a decade and more, deters breakout by introducing stringent monitoring, and helps build confidence by phasing out sanctions. Most importantly, diplomacy has achieved more than what a military strike could have achieved. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif’s skills to manage a tricky process despite the disbelievers, in evidence over the 19 rounds of talks spread over 18 months, and Mr. Obama and Mr. Rouhani’s sense of conviction and political leadership will be on test in the coming months as they seek to embed the nuclear deal in a broader regional strategy against the backdrop of increasing volatility and nervous allies.

Modi launches India's #first airqualityindex .The index, initially in 10 #majorcities, will help track and reduce carbon emissions

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Monday launched a nationalair quality index to monitor pollution level in 10 cities, the first of its kind in the country. Claiming that the world's perception of India’s “insensitivity” in addressing climate change and global warming was not correct, Modi said the country’s contribution to global pollution levels was one of the smallest. He also urged Indians to change their lifestyle to help protect the environment.

Modi, who was speaking at the inauguration of a two-day conference of state environment and forest ministers, expressed hope the conference would prove a good platform for discussions to formulate policies in this regard. “We are trying to think of ways of reducing carbon emissions but not about changing our lifestyle. Unless we bring a change in our lifestyle, we will not be able to save the environment," he said.

Modi said that India was ready to take lead in environment protection but "people who lecture us on environment and the use of cleaner energy don't give us nuclear fuel".

"These are double standards," he said, adding that India has to take lead in thinking of ways to protect the environment.

"We must think of traditional methods to tackle environmental issues. There can be green solutions in our age-old traditions", he said.

The prime minister also sought to clear the 'wrong impression' of India that it was not serious on environmental issues, saying that the country had a culture in which the environment is equal to the divine.

"We have grown up in those traditions where nature is worshipped and where conserving nature is very important," he said, adding that we have no right to exploit nature.

"This is not a part of our culture," he said.

The prime minister also said that India was one of the most sensitive countries about nature. "Per person carbon emission in India is very low."

Modi urged urban bodies to focus on solid waste management with programmes to generate wealth from it.

"If we make fertilisers and send them to the villages, then good quality, affordable vegetables can come to the cities," he said.

He said that urban bodies could recycle waste water and send it to farmers, who in turn would make use of it and provide other services like growing organic vegetables, which would make life easier for all.