Keep out will, whim and fancy

Since the commencement of the Constitution in 1950, it is for the third time that governors — this time, as many as nine — have had to go following a change of guard at the Centre. Congress and non-Congress governments have done the same thing every time the occasion has arisen. The situation is still developing, and the numbers may go beyond nine. Also, the issue of the removal of governors has been taken to court for the third time.

The office of governor has been mired in controversies — regarding appointment, functioning and removal — from Day One. From time to time, certain state governors have been accused of partisan behaviour and of acting as agents of the party or parties in power at the Centre. Some commentators have gone so far as to suggest doing away with the institution of the governor all together.

A dispassionate analysis of the need and role of the office would show that it is one of great dignity, responsibility and continuing relevance. On the one hand, a governor was envisaged as the constitutional head of the state, and on the other, as the representative of the Union in the state. She was expected to be a vital link between the Union and the state, to act as the eyes and ears of the Centre, and to generally ensure that the government of the state is carried out in accordance with the Constitution and, particularly, to see that the interests of the Union are safeguarded. In context of the many fissiparous tendencies that come to the fore now and then, the office of governor becomes even more relevant and important. Misuse of the high office by unscrupulous holders constitutes no argument for its abolition. If constitutional offices begin to be scrapped because some of their occupants indulge in unbecoming conduct, very soon hardly anything would be left.

Under Article 155 and 156 of the Constitution, a governor is appointed by the president and holds office during her pleasure. Thus, both appointment and continuance in office are dependent on the pleasure of the Union government. The Sarkaria Commission and the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution both suggested salutary reforms — including that governors should be selected only from among eminent persons not too intimately connected with active party politics. So long as this advice is not heeded, controversies because of their removal at the time of a change of government would continue.

In Surya Narain Choudhary vs Union of India, the Rajasthan High Court held that the pleasure of the president was not justiciable, the governor had no security of tenure and she could be removed by the president at any time by withdrawing her pleasure. In B.P. Singhal vs Union of India, the Supreme Court looked into the pleasuredoctrine in great depth. It upheld the earlier position — “no limitations or restrictions are placed on the ‘at pleasure’ doctrine, it means that the holder of the office can be removed by the authority at whose pleasure he holds office, at any time, without notice and without assigning any cause.” But the court said that it “does not dispense with the need for a cause for withdrawal of the pleasure”.

In other words, the occupant of office at pleasure can be removed “summarily, without any obligation to give any notice or hearing to the person removed, and without any obligation to assign any reasons or disclose any cause for the removal, or withdrawal of pleasure. [But] the withdrawal of pleasure cannot be at the sweet will, whim and fancy of the authority.” It should not be “mala fide”, “unreasonable” or done “arbitrarily, whimsically or capriciously”. “While the president need not disclose or inform the cause for his removal to the governor, it is imperative that a cause must exist.” As for judicial review, only where the aggrieved person is able to make a prima facie case of arbitrariness or mala fides, can the court require the Union government to produce records/ materials to show that the withdrawal of pleasure was for good and compelling reasons. The Supreme Court added that “there will be no interference unless a very strong case is made out” as the scope of “judicial review…is very limited”.

After this judgment of the Supreme Court, there should be no scope for any controversy or confusion. But controversy and confusion are often created to score political brownie points and to embarrass one’s opponent in power. Looked at from another angle, given that appointments are made only at the pleasure of the government, when an appointee has any indication of that pleasure having ended, she should consult her own dignity and self respect and put in her papers forthwith, without waiting to be asked to quit or to get removed. It is also clear that it is not for the president or prime minister to personally inform a governor of a government decision in the matter. After all, it is institutional.

Not in a fit state

India’s challenge over the next five years can be summed up somewhat melodramatically in one sentence: a medieval state is trying to run a post-modern economy. Almost every interesting story in recent days involved serious regulatory failure. These stories have belied any hope that cleaning up India’s regulatory mess is going to be easy. The right combination of technical skills, oversight mechanisms, public reason and mediation of knowledge systems is not going to be easy to institutionalise across a range of sectors.

If this diagnosis is correct, what India needs is not a new Planning Commission, not a new think tank, but a state-building commission. This is different from an administrative reforms commission, which looks at conventional issues of administration and process. A state-building commission has a different starting point. It would ask: how do we build a state fit for purpose?

Behind the recent economic logjam is not just a story of paralysis and corruption. It is also the story of a state that has not come to terms with new functions. The debilitating imbroglio over coal is not just about corruption; it also reflects an inability to understand what modern mining might look like. Disputes over electricity tariffs abound, with the recent Supreme Court stay on the compensatory tariff order for Tata-Adani being just the latest instance. Environment regulation is a general mess all around. There is no framework for thinking about the tradeoff between security and convenience even in as simple a thing as Uber. Apart from the knowledge issues, behind our inability to have a sane conversation on GM foods lies a well-founded suspicion of our regulatory capabilities. The list could go on: the police does not even have basic forensic capabilities to handle its case load; our newly commissioned warships are apparently taking to sea without submarine detection equipment. Corruption is part of the story in many of these cases. But the context in which the state operates has changed in several ways.

First, the knowledge mediation functions of the modern state are immeasurably more complex. It cannot avoid taking a call on scientific and technical knowledge, on every issue from regulating GM crops to assessing the environment, from health to the choice of energy technologies. How credible are its processes and capacities to take such calls, particularly in a context where the asymmetries in knowledge between what is produced in the state and what is produced outside it are growing immeasurably? What data does it require to have a minimum of social self-knowledge to intervene intelligently? Does it have the capacity to assess cross-cutting risks at the level of detail that matters? Our options are reduced because we do not trust the state to perform this role.will continue with many traditional functions, it is now more deeply implicated in markets, civil society, professional associations and so forth. Even internally, the state is a lot more heterogeneous and differentiated: it has to have capacity for command and control, regulation, contracting and so forth. The nature of laws that have to be drafted, the kinds of contracts that have to be overseen, the kinds of entities that have to be held accountable, the principal-agent problems that need to be surmounted, the networks that need to be managed, are vastly different. There is constantly sand in the wheels because few processes are attuned to these realities: the government is losing on poor drafting, poor contracting and poor project design. Traditional bureaucracy cannot do these functions.

Third, the human resource requirements of the new state are going to be very different. But nowhere in the Indian state is there a credible human resource strategy. What kind of people will the state need? Even when the state subcontracts out, it needs capacity to understand good subcontracting. With the possible exception of the Indian Economic Service, most of the knowledge-producing services of the state are in disarray. India’s pioneering statistical service is a pale shadow of itself. How does one select them, and what will it take to get them under altered market conditions? The department of personnel and training should be doing this. But it has no credible staffing roadmap for the state. No wonder the state is often out-lawyered, out-hacked and generally outwitted.

Fourth, a modern state ostensibly needs to supplement process with performance. There has been a lot of talk of performance accountability frameworks. But most of these are window-dressing. At the moment, the state does not do even one little routine exercise that should be mandatory. Many laws or significant policies usually have a financial assessment attached. But there is no administrative assessment attached to most laws or policies. Who will carry out the required functions? How much time and manpower will it take to carry them out? Policies cannot be drafted on the assumption that state capacity exists.

Fifth, a modern state, like all states, is located in an international context. But globalisation requires the state to have a thicket of interactions across a range of domains. Sometimes your strategic advantage is simply a function of the number of lawyers you can deploy in a negotiation. Unless you want to just say no, building up arsenals of negotiation is probably half the source of your power. Our arsenals of negotiation are much weaker than they should be.

Finally, the nature of rationality embodied in the culture of the state has changed. It could never be reduced to a purely technical exercise of economic maximisation or bureaucratic domination. This rationality has to take on board the undeniable importance of democratic experimentation and justification. It cannot be a top-down rationality constantly out of touch with organic processes and a changing society. It has to have cultures of communication that can engage with those

Second, while the statethat are going to be affected by policies. To borrow Jurgen Habermas’s phrase, it will have to engage in a form of communicative rationality if it is not to be constantly subverted.

Contrary to polemical readings, the Indian state is not hopeless. The first avatar of the Planning Commission coincided with a phase of state-building that was thought appropriate for the times. For all the rot in the bureaucracy and public sector, the fact remains that during the 1950s, India built some remarkable institutions that helped nation-building and democratic mediation. Getting rid of some old laws and deregulating more areas is easy. But the risk of being stuck with an ineffective state is still real. The big challenge is: How do we build a 21st century state?

Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana: A step towards ‘Sab Ka Sath Sab Ka Vikas’

In his first Independence Day speech on 15^th August’2014, Prime Minister of India had announced the National Mission on Financial Inclusion titled, ‘Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana’(PMJDY). Now in less than a fortnight the country is geared up to launch this mega event all across the country with the Prime Minister himself launching it from the national capital.Simultaneous launch functions of the Yojana are held in the state Capitals and at all district Headquarters.  Besides, camps would also be organized in the area allotted to branches of the banks.  

Now what is this Yojana and how it’s going to be different from the earlier schemes…………

The PMJDY has been conceived as a national mission on financial inclusion with the objective of covering all households in the country with banking facilities and having a bank account for each household. Financial inclusion or inclusive financing is the delivery of financial services at affordable costs to sections of disadvantaged and low-income segments of society, in contrast to financial exclusion where those services are not available or affordable. It is said that since banking services are in the nature of public product, the availability of banking and payment services to the entire population without discrimination is the prime objective of financial inclusion in public policy. With a bank account, every household gains access to banking and credit facilities. This will enable them to come out of the grip of moneylenders, manage to keep away from financial crises caused by emergent needs, and most importantly, benefit from a range of financial products/benefits. Describing the task as “gigantic,” the Prime Minister in an email to all bank officers has stressed the need to enroll over 7 crore households and open their accounts on urgent basis as all their development activities are hindered by this single disability.

Current status of financial inclusion in the country:

Various initiatives were taken up by RBI / GoI in order to ensure financial inclusion. These include like Nationalization of Banks , Expansion of Banks branch network , Establishment & expansion of Cooperative and RRBs ,Introduction of PS lending , Lead Bank Scheme, Formation of SHGs and State specific approach for Govt sponsored schemes to be evolved by SLBC .During 2005-2006, RBI advised Banks to align their  polices with the objective of financial Inclusion.  Further, in order to ensure greater financial inclusion and increasing the outreach of the banking sector, it was decided to use the services of NGOs/SHGs, MFIs and other Civil Society Organizations as intermediaries in providing financial and banking services through use of “Business Facilitator and Business Correspondent Model”.

However, as per Census, 2011, out of 24.67 crore households in the country, 14.48 crore (58.7%) households had access to banking services. Of the 16.78 crore rural households, 9.14 crore (54.46%) were availing banking services. Of the 7.89 crore urban households, 5.34 crore (67.68%) households were availing banking services. In the year 2011, Banks covered 74,351 villages, with population more than 2,000 (as per 2001 census), with banking facilities under the “Swabhimaan” campaign through Business Correspondents .However the program had a very limited reach and impact.

 The present banking network of the country (as on 31.03.2014) comprises of a bank branch network of 1,15, 082 and an ATM network of 1,60,055. Of these, 43,962 branches (38.2%) and 23,334 ATMs (14.58%) are in rural areas. Moreover, there are more than 1.4 lakh Business Correspondents (BCs) of Public Sector Banks and Regional Rural Banks in the rural areas. BCs are representatives of bank to provide basic banking services i.e. opening of basic Bank accounts, Cash deposits , Cash withdrawals, transfer of funds, balance enquiries, mini statements etc. However actual field level experience suggests that many of these BCs are not actually functional.Public Sector Banks (PSBs) including RRBs have estimated that by 31.05.2014, out of the 13.14 crore rural households which were allocated to them  for coverage about 7.22 crore households have been covered (5.94 crore uncovered). It is estimated that 6 Crore households in rural and 1.5 Crore in urban area needs to be covered.

PMJDY

The mission mode objective of the PMJDY consists of 6 pillars. During the 1^st year of implementation under Phase I (15th August, 2014-14th August,2015), three Pillars namely(1)Universal access to banking facilities (2) Financial Literacy Programme and (3) Providing Basic Banking Accounts with overdraft facility of Rs.5000 after six months and RuPay Debit card with inbuilt accident insurance cover of Rs 1 lakh and RuPay Kisan card, will be implemented.

Phase II, beginning from 15^th August 2015 upto15^th August,2018 will address (1) Creation of Credit  Guarantee Fund   for coverage of defaults in overdraft  A/Cs (2)  Micro Insurance and (3)  Unorganized sector Pension schemes like  Swavlamban. In addition, in this phase coverage of households in hilly, tribal and difficult areas would be carried out. Moreover, this phase would focus on coverage of remaining adults in the households and students.

  The implementation strategy of the plan is to utilize the existing banking infrastructure as well as expand the same to cover all households. While the existing banking network would be fully geared up to open bank accounts of the uncovered households in both rural and urban areas, the banking sector would also be expanding itself to set up an additional 50,000 Business correspondents (BCs), more than 7000 branches and more than 20000 new ATMs in the first phase .A comprehensive plan is necessary considering the past experience where a large number of accounts opened remained dormant, resulting in costs incurred for banks and no benefits to the beneficiaries. The plan, therefore, proposes to channel all Government benefits (from Centre/State/Local body) to the beneficiaries to such accounts and pushing the Direct Benefits Transfer (DBT) scheme of the Union Government including restarting the DBT in LPG scheme. MGNREGS sponsored by Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD, GoI) is also likely to be included in Direct Benefit Transfer scheme.

Keeping the stiff targets in mind, in the first phase, the plan would focus on first three pillars in the first year starting from 15^th August, 2014.The target for setting up additional 50,000 BCs is quite challenging given the constraints of telecom connectivity.   In order to achieve this plan, phase wise and State wise targets for Banks have been set up for Banks for the period 15^th August, 2014 to 14^th August, 2015.    Roles of various stakeholders like other Departments of the Central Government, State Governments, RBI, NABARD, NPCI and others have been indicated. Gram Dak Sewaks in rural areas are proposed as Business Correspondent of Banks.  Department of Telecom has been requested to ensure that problems of poor and no connectivity are resolved. It is understood that of the 5.93 lakh inhabited villages in the country (2011 census) only about 50,000 villages are not covered with Telecom connectivity.

The major shift this time in this Financial Inclusion effort of the Government is that households are being targeted instead of villages as targeted earlier. Moreover both rural and urban areas are being covered this time as against only rural areas targeted earlier. The present plan pursues digital financial inclusion with special emphasis on monitoring by a Mission headed by the Finance Minister.

While the film on ‘Financial Inclusion’ and the Mission Document on Financial Inclusion scheduled for release at launch, are expected to help in creating awareness, the ‘account opening kit’ and the mobile banking facility on the basic mobile phone (USSD) envisaged on the occasion indicates the concerns of the government to end financial exclusion and usher in a new chapter in country’s governance for the people. In Prime Minister’s own words this Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana lies at the core of this government’s development philosophy of Sab Ka Sath Sab Ka Vikas.

Radiation treatment of eye cancers using iodine-125

Generally, public believe that scientific and technological developments in the field of nuclear energy in India are mostly confined to the strategic area and to nuclear power generation. Medical, industrial and research uses of ionising radiation, which rose manifold over the past few decades have not got due recognition.

At any moment, hospitals in many parts of the country are carrying out radiation treatment in one form or other on many thousands of cancer patients.

BARC-made ‘BARC I-125 Ocu-Prosta seed’ is an ideal choice to treat retinoblastoma and uveal tract melanoma, two forms of rare eye cancers.

Unlike conventional treatment which involves removal of eyes with the tumour to save the patient, successful radiation treatment saves the eye and retains vision.

Since iodine -125 ( I-125) has a half life of about 60 days, scientists have enough time to transport the sources from its production site at BARC laboratories to the treatment centres at different parts of the country.

Half life is the period in which radioactivity of a source reduces to half its original value.

Modelling the eye

Specialists model the affected eye of each patient by using computerised tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) procedures. They identify the orientation of tumour borders relative to the surrounding healthy structures such as the optic nerve, centre of the eye etc by using ultrasound.

Using the imaging data in a dedicated software programme, they arrive at the number of radioactive seeds, their activity and their placement on the plaque to produce the ideal dose distribution.

Physicians use this information to fix appropriate number of I-125 seeds on a plaque of suitable size using a tissue compatible auto-polymerising glue.

By accurately positioning the plaque, they restrict irradiation to the tissue where it is needed.

I-125 which emits low energy gamma rays helps to spare healthy tissues; it reduces side effects and related morbidity. Generally, physicians carry out the treatment in 5 to 10 consecutive days.

BARC scientists have independently measured the dose distribution around I-125 seeds.

It was truly a multidisciplinary programme. Radiopharmaceuticals Division, Laser Processing and Advanced Welding Section, Centre for Design and Manufacture, Radio metallurgy Division, Radiological Physics and Advisory Division and external agencies such as Hindustan Machine Tools Limited, Bangalore and Titan Industries Limited, Hosur, collaborated in many areas to prepare the seeds.

Batch process

BARC scientists produce Iodine 125 in a batch process by irradiating 4 gramme of xenon-124 gas in the Dhruva reactor for a period of 15 days. Xenon -125 produced by the neutron interaction decays into I-125.

After removing from the reactor, they keep each sample for 50 days to ensure that I-126, an unwanted radioisotope which is also produced during neutron irradiation decays to negligible values.

“The need for technically intense operations in the handling of gaseous targets in hostile radiation environments, the transformation of I-125 into a chemical form within acceptable radionuclide impurities, and adherence to radioactive concentrations of the final I-125 solution are some of the key technical challenges during the production of I-125,” BARC scientists wrote in Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research (2012, 51, 8575-8582), a journal of the American Chemical Society. This paper vividly describes the marvellous engineering and design procedures and production processes.

BARC-produced I-125 seeds are available in 50 micrometre thick titanium (titanium is bio-compatible) capsules of diameter 0.8mm and length 4.75 mm. Scientists subject these tiny seeds to a variety of tests mandated by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board to ensure safety.

In September 2003, BARC supplied the first batch of I-125 seeds to Sankara Nethralaya to treat a four-year-old child suffering from retinoblastoma.

As on May 31, 2014, BARC supplied 1124 seeds to treat 95 patients from India and neighbouring countries. Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai, PD Hinduja National Hospital, Shri Ramakrishna Institute of Oncology Research/Arvind Eye Hospital, Coimbatore are collaborating in the programme

The patients treated so far are too few to estimate cure rates, eye salvation rates etc, though some preliminary results amply demonstrate the potential value of this treatment modality.

I-125 seeds are also useful in treating prostate cancer. BARC supplied so far 370 I-125 seeds to PD Hinduja Hospital, Mumbai to treat five patients. For treating prostate cancer, physicians implant I-125 seeds permanently in patients.

BARC's achievement

In spite of extensive demand for I-125 seeds worldwide, only a few companies produce I-125 seeds, as the manufacturing processes are too complicated. BARC has developed the technology from scratch. The Board of Radiation and Isotope Technology (BRIT) has plans to produce I-125 seeds commercially. It has great potential for internal use and hopefully for export.

PM launches Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana

• End financial untouchability for freedom from poverty

• "Vish-chakra se gareebon ki aazadi ka parv" – celebration of liberation of the poor from a poisonous cycle • A record unprecedented in economic history – 1.5 crore bank accounts opened in one day The Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi, today declared the beginning of the end of financial untouchability in India, with the opening of an estimated 1.5 crore bank accounts across the country, in an exercise unprecedented in scale in economic history. Formally launching the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana (PMJDY) at a function broadcast across the nation from Vigyan Bhawan in New Delhi, the Prime Minister described the occasion as a festival to celebrate the liberation of the poor from a poisonous cycle. (Vish-chakra se gareebon ki aazaadi ka parv) Expressing satisfaction at a number of records being broken today, the Prime Minister said the nationwide success of the enrolment drive today would give confidence not just to the officials of the Department of Financial Services and banking sectors, but also to officers across the Union Government, that they can successfully achieve the goals that they set for themselves. "Never before would insurance companies have issued 1.5 crore accident insurance policies in a single day. Never before in economic history would 1.5 crore bank accounts have been opened in a single day. Never before has the Government of India organized a programme of such scale – over 77,000 locations – with the participation of so many Chief Ministers, Union Ministers, Government and bank officials." He said the success is an inspiration for achieving new heights. The Prime Minister said that though the initial target of PMJDY was to open bank accounts for 7.5 crore families in one year, he had exhorted the concerned officials to complete the task before the next Republic Day. Elaborating the benefits under PMJDY, the Prime Minister said this was not a mere bank account, but had other benefits including an RuPay debit card, Rs 1 lakh accident insurance cover, and an additional Rs. 30,000/- life insurance cover for those opening bank accounts before January 26th, 2015. He said the account performance would be monitored and overdraft facility would be given. The Prime Minister said he had sent 7.25 lakh bank employees, exhorting them to help reach the target of 7.5 crore bank accounts, and bring freedom from financial untouchability. The Prime Minister referred to the five beneficiary couples who had received account opening kits in today`s event at Vigyan Bhawan, and said the ladies appeared to have dressed for a festival. He said they knew that there could be no bigger festival than the opening of a bank account for empowering women. The Prime Minister said when banks were nationalized in 1969, it was done with the objective of bringing people into the economic mainstream. But that objective had not been achieved till date. After 68 years of independence, not even 68% of India`s population had access to banking, he added. He said it is easy for the rich to get a loan at low interest rates. But the poor are forced to seek loans from money-lenders at five times the rate charged to the rich. Is it not the responsibility of the banking industry to provide banking access to the poor, the Prime Minister asked. The Prime Minister illustrated his point through the example of a mother saving money and being forced to hide it somewhere within the house. He said the bank officials who had opened an account for such a mother, had been blessed today. He said a breakthrough was required to overcome the vicious cycle of poverty and debt, and that breakthrough had been achieved today. He said there were similarities between the poor getting access to mobile telephones, and getting access to debit cards. They both had the effect of instilling confidence and pride among the poor, he added. The Prime Minister referred to the ancient Sanskrit verse: Sukhasya Moolam Dharma, Dharmasya Moolam Artha, Arthasya Moolam Rajyam – which puts the onus on the state to involve people in economic activity. "This Government has accepted this responsibility," the Prime Minister said. The Prime Minister said Indians had a habit of saving, and thinking about the future of their children. The Prime Minister also distributed awards to winners of the Name and Logo contest for this scheme. He observed that those who won prizes were predominantly from non-Hindi speaking states, but had won prizes for coining a name and slogan in Hindi. This is an example of national integration, he said. Speaking on the occasion, the Finance Minister said PMJDY would be taken forward in Mission Mode, and the first target of reaching 7.5 crore unbanked families would be achieved by January 26th, 2015. The Minister of State for Finance, Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman, said the lady of the house had been given priority in the PMJDY. She said this scheme would touch the lives of everyone in a positive and constructive way.

The Yojana will be implemented in two phases:- 

Phase-I from 15^th August 2014:

·         Universal access to banking facilities for all households across the country through a bank branch or a fixed point Business Correspondent (BC) called Bank Mitra within a reasonable distance except areas with infrastructure & connectivity constraints.

·         To cover all households with atleast one Basic Banking Account with RuPay Debit card having inbuilt accident insurance cover of Rs.1 lakh. Further an overdraft facility upto Rs.5000 will also be permitted to Adhaar enabled accounts after satisfactory operation in the account for 6 months.

·         Financial literacy programme which aims to take financial literacy upto village level.

·         The Mission also envisages expansion of Direct Benefit Transfer under various Government Schemes through bank accounts of the beneficiaries of.

·         The issuance of Kisan Credit Card (KCC) as RuPay Kisan Card is also proposed to be covered under the plan.

Phase-II :

·         Providing micro –insurance to the people.

·         Unorganised sector Pension schemes like Swavalamban through the Business Correspondents.

The Yojana is being monitored in a Mission Mode with the Finance Minister being the Head of the Mission.

It is estimated to cover 7.50 crore households with at least one account under the Yojana and also a large number of dormant accounts would be activated

Electronic Transfer of subsidies under various schemes of Government would be enabled.

Regulating India’s nuclear estate , for IAS mains

For the country’s nuclear energy sector plans to be effective, the government should lift the veil of opaqueness surrounding its civilian programme. The first step would be to establish an autonomous, transparent and accountable regulatory institution

The 2014 Nuclear Materials Security Index prepared by the Washington-based Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) has ranked India 23rd out of 25 countries with weapons-usable nuclear materials. While the NTI ranking has been criticised for a variety of reasons including inadequacies in its methodology, it has rightly pointed out the absence of an independent nuclear regulatory mechanism in India with the mandate to ensure that high standards of safety and security are observed in India’s civilian nuclear facilities. Even though many Indian analysts and officials dismiss the NTI ranking as being uninformed, New Delhi needs to take such criticism seriously given its long-standing desire to mainstream itself into the global nuclear order including gaining membership to key international export control cartels such as the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). Given this context, there is a need to take a critical look at the proposed Nuclear Safety Regulatory Authority.

Background to the Bill

Currently, the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB), established in 1983 through a gazette notification, is tasked with regulating the safety and security aspects of the country’s civilian nuclear facilities. However, it is not an autonomous body as it depends on the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) for all practical purposes. It has, as a result, been unable to perform its regulatory functions effectively. The demand for establishing a truly autonomous nuclear regulatory authority has been a long-standing one. In 1997, the Raja Ramanna Committee report had recommended that the Atomic Energy Act (1962) should be amended to enhance the effectiveness of the nuclear regulatory system in the country. Even though the Union government, in 2000, had directed the DAE to suggest the necessary amendments to the 1962 Act, nothing substantial happened for almost a decade. Finally, it was the Mayapuri radiation accident (New Delhi) in 2010 and the Fukushima disaster (Japan) of 2011 that served as a wake-up call for the DAE.

 “Since the NSRA Bill will now have to be reintroduced in Parliament, the Department of Atomic Energy should try and accommodate the eminently useful suggestions given by the standing committee and other independent experts” 

In 2011, the Nuclear Safety Regulatory Authority (NSRA) Bill was drafted by the DAE and submitted to the Union Cabinet for approval. The DAE note that sought approval from the Cabinet to introduce the Bill in Parliament had cited both the Mayapuri and the Fukushima accidents as the factors that contributed to the urgency to strengthen the country’s nuclear regulatory mechanism. However, even the NSRA, as currently envisioned by the DAE, does not propose the establishment of a truly autonomous regulatory authority. The Bill, first introduced in the Lok Sabha in 2011, has now lapsed and will have to be reintroduced in the new Lok Sabha. Before the NSRA Bill is reintroduced in Parliament, there is a need to strengthen the powers of the regulatory authority that it proposes to set up.

CAG and Committee reports

Even as the DAE was preparing to table the NSRA Bill in Parliament, the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India had undertaken a “Performance Audit on Activities of Atomic Energy Regulatory Board.” The CAG report, tabled in Parliament in August 2012, concluded that “the legal status of AERB continues to be that of an authority subordinate to the Central Government, with powers delegated to it by the latter,” and recommended to the government to “ensure that the nuclear regulator is empowered and independent. For this purpose, it should be created in law and should be able to exercise necessary authority in the setting of regulations, verification of compliance with the regulations and enforcement of the same in the cases of non-compliance.”

Following the CAG report, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of Parliament also produced a report in 2013 entitled “Activities of Atomic Energy Regulatory Board” in which it agreed with the view taken by the CAG on the functioning of the AERB. The PAC also highlighted the observation made by the “Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment and Forests” in 2012 that the NSRA lacks autonomy. The PAC, in the light of the observations made by the standing committee and the CAG, was critical of the functioning of the AERB as well as the proposed NSRA Bill and stated in its report that the “DAE should seriously re-examine the provisions of the Bill and take necessary steps urgently so as to ensure that the nuclear regulator becomes an independent and credible body at par with similar regulators in other Countries.” In other words, the NSRA Bill, as it stands today, is far from satisfactory even though the DAE has made the assurance that the Standing Committee’s recommendations would be seriously considered.

Issue of authority

The Council of Nuclear Safety to be established by the NSRA Bill — with the Prime Minister as the Chair and mostly government representatives as members — will be a very powerful body with the power to appoint the chairperson and members of the new regulatory body. This will diminish the powers of the regulator since it will be subordinate to the Council chaired by the Prime Minister. We will, as a result, end up having a government-controlled regulator all over again. The NSRA Bill is explicit on the ability of the government to control the regulator: “the Central Government may, by notification, supersede the Authority for such period, not exceeding six months, as may be specified in the notification.”

The NSRA also does not say which facilities would be put under the new authority — currently, the AERB can only oversee the civilian facilities. The Bill states that “the Central Government may, for the purposes of national defence and security, exempt any nuclear material, radioactive material, facilities, premises and activities; the premises, assets and areas associated with material and activities from the jurisdiction of the Authority.” So, the question is this: who will oversee the safety and security of the strategic facilities and programmes for which there is currently no regulatory authority? The Bill mentions that new regulatory bodies can be created to regulate the strategic programmes. The Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee had recommended the creation of other bodies to do so. However, there has not been any movement so far on that front. Another issue is the exclusion of the NSRA from the purview of RTI Act, thereby reducing the requirement for the regulator to be transparent.

This is not to say that the NSRA Bill is not an improvement from the existing AERB. Clearly, there are significant differences between the two. For one, while the AERB was set up by a government order, the new regulator will be established by an Act of Parliament, thereby making it more powerful. More so, while the AERB reported to the AEC, the new authority will not report to the AEC but will submit its report to Parliament.

Way ahead

It is unknown how many of the amendments suggested by the standing committee have been incorporated by the DAE. Since the Bill will now have to be reintroduced in Parliament, the DAE should try and accommodate the eminently useful suggestions given by the standing committee and other independent experts. The new government should encourage the DAE to carry out at least the following three amendments: one, the new regulatory body should be given complete financial, administrative and institutional autonomy from the Central government and made accountable to Parliament; two, the new regulatory body should also include persons from outside government such as scientists, civilian auditors, environmentalists and independent experts; three, given the crucial role that the NSRA will play in the years to come, the selection of its members should be done by a body comprising the Leader of the Opposition and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha.

If India’s plans to drastically expand its nuclear energy sector have to be effective, and acceptable to the people at large, it should bring the country’s civilian nuclear establishment out of the thick layers of secrecy and opaqueness within which it has traditionally operated. The first step in that direction will be to establish a genuinely autonomous, transparent and accountable institution that is capable of regulating the country’s “nuclear estate.”

The words of Professor Kiyoshi Kurokawa, who chaired the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission are eminently appropriate in the Indian context as well: “What must be admitted — very painfully — is that this was a disaster ‘Made in Japan.’ Its fundamental causes are to be found in the ingrained conventions of Japanese culture: our reflexive obedience; our reluctance to question authority; our devotion to ‘sticking with the program’; our groupism; and our insularity … nuclear power became an unstoppable force, immune to scrutiny by civil society. Its regulation was entrusted to the same government bureaucracy responsible for its promotion.”

Needed, a Growth Commission for IAS-2014 MAINS

An organisation to look at the basic issues confronting the economy, and to prepare a broad framework on how long-term issues can be resolved, is still a necessity

There is a need to evaluate and restructure every organisation as circumstances change and the Planning Commission is no exception. Restructuring an organisation can be of two types. One approach takes the functions of the organisation as a given and proceeds to restructure it to make it more effective to fulfil those functions. The second approach is more fundamental. It questions the very basis of the organisation and focusses on the relevance of the basic functions it has been performing. It is the second type of restructuring that we are talking about in relation to the Planning Commission.

Relevance now

The Planning Commission has a distinguished past. Many eminent men and women have adorned the position of Deputy Chairman and Member. The question that is posed now is about its relevance in the current circumstances. The Planning Commission now performs three types of functions. First and foremost, it draws a blueprint for the country’s economic development over a five-year period. It also outlines a detailed strategy for achieving the goals and objectives enshrined in the blueprint which we call the Plan. The plan exercise outlines not only how the broad macroeconomic parameters are expected to move, but also a sector wise analysis of what needs to be done. After approval of the Five Year Plan, the Planning Commission in consultation with the Finance Ministry also determines the annual plan. The determination of the “size” of the annual plan of each State is a major exercise and has been a cause of much irritation.

 “Through a broad range of discussions, the commission should prepare a road map which will be acceptable to both the Centre and the States” 

Second, flowing from its function of determining the size of plans for States, the Planning Commission allocates funds to States, the distribution of which has again been a contentious issue.

Third, the Planning Commission has a key role in the formulation of various policies and programmes. It critically assesses the individual programmes of Ministries. Major projects are also assessed and approved by it. It is this function which resulted in a parallel unit corresponding to every Ministry being established in the Planning Commission. It would be useful to analyse which of these functions remain relevant and which of them can be discarded or transferred to other authorities within the government.

Ushering in faster growth

Planning was perceived in the 1950s as the most appropriate tool for ushering in faster economic growth. The strategy for achieving this was discussed at great length, particularly at the time of the formulation of the Second Five Year Plan. This was consistent with the thinking at that time that the state must have control over the “commanding heights.”

Times have changed. In the post-liberalisation period, the concept of planning itself has undergone a change. We have moved, at best, to an era of indicative planning. The blend of public and private investment has tilted in favour of the private sector. While planning of the type we had in the first five decades after Independence has no relevance, an organisation to look at the basic issues confronting the economy, and preparing a broad framework on how long-term issues can be resolved, is still a necessity. If there is an acceptable framework on what the critical issues are and how they should be tackled, it will provide a suitable basis for policy formulation.

While the state may play a diminishing role, it still plays a critical role in the economy. In the infrastructure sector, it still has a dominant role. If the Centre and States agree on a broad framework through discussions, it would facilitate the adoption of better policies. Such an organisation will be something more than a think tank. Through a broad range of discussions, it should prepare a road map which will be acceptable to both the Centre and the States. Thus, the task of preparing a blueprint for the country over a certain period is essential and should continue to be performed. Also, there are issues which cut across Ministries, such as energy, transport, water or environment. In terms of policy formulation, this commission can take a holistic view and offer advice.

The second function of allocating resources among States is somewhat debatable. There is a strong view that the Finance Commission is the appropriate constitutional authority for allocating resources. Of course, the Planning Commission has also been following a formula for allotting funds among States but the quantum of transfer of funds through this mechanism has been diminishing. Much larger funds from the Centre flowed through the centrally sponsored schemes and this was performance-based. Given the States’ aversion, it may be best that this function is fully entrusted to the Finance Commission.

The third function of evaluating projects and giving approval has also raised many controversies. The Ministries regard the implementation of projects as their prime responsibility and very often consider the Planning Commission as a hindrance.

While having a ‘second look’ is always an advantage, leaving this task entirely to the Ministry seems appropriate. The Planning Commission has been looking at restructuring itself. In fact, the Committee on Public Expenditure Management, of which I was the Chairman, had made the point that the distinction between plan expenditure and non-plan expenditure should go, and the Planning Commission should take a comprehensive look at public expenditure in the key sectors. The result of making a distinction between plan and non-plan expenditures has been that we have had situations of hospitals without doctors and schools without teachers because one is treated as plan and the other as non-plan. In fact, within the present structure of the Planning Commission, the federal element could have been enhanced, if, besides Central Ministers, some Chief Ministers were also included as members. This would have given it a national character.

The current practice of “approval” by the National Development Council has also not been satisfactory. Even when some Chief Ministers differed on the strategy, very few changes were made. At the end of a long day of discussions, the plan is taken as approved.

A task that must continue

As we move ahead, there are critical problems facing the economy. Ensuring a faster rate of economic growth with equity is not an easy task. Environmental considerations have emerged as a serious concern. Therefore, an integrated look at the problems faced by the country over a five-year period is very much required. Thus, the need for an organisation for formulating ideas on how to shape the economy over a certain time frame will be helpful. This was the task which the Planning Commission was performing with some success and this must continue.

If the word “planning” is reminiscent of an earlier period, it may be substituted by “development” or “growth.” The other two functions performed by the Planning Commission now can be delegated to other authorities in the government. The allocation function can go to the Finance Commission and project evaluation can be taken care of by strengthening the Ministries. Thus, a National Development Commission or Growth Commission, which is charged with a mandate to prepare a blueprint with goals and objectives to be achieved over a defined period, may still be the need of the hour. This document can then be discussed by the National Development Council, a political body.