In an interview with The Indian Express, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, responding to questions in the wake of the Jantar Mantar protest, spoke on concerns driving India’s youth — from exam paper leaks and unemployment to the education-to-employment gap, the quality of government schools, the role of the private sector in creating jobs and the opportunities and challenges facing Gen Z.
Excerpts from the interview conducted on the sidelines of the 1st BRICS Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors meeting in Jaipur on August 12-13.
When you saw the protest at Jantar Mantar, what was your first impression? Do you think it was just about the NEET paper leak? The protesters were not only NEET aspirants but also people raising concerns about employment, especially the lack of opportunities in the job market.
When such young people come to protest at one place, their issues will never be limited to one thing. That age, between 16 and 26, is a very dynamic age.
Jobs? Yes, why not… Paper leaks? Yes, we should… because they are still very idealistic.
And at that age, everything which is going wrong, even if it is confined to one part of the world, they take it on. Yes, we will fight for this also. So NEET exam leak expanding to other things is very typical of that age group.
So there were multiple issues that bothered them?
There was one very distinct feature. There wasn’t one coherent narrative or one hierarchical leadership that voiced all the concerns of everybody. Yes, there was a set of people in a group who were the leaders, and they voiced concerns about the paper leaks. But there were other groups with other interests.
Those interests were not getting uploaded onto this leadership… There were others with other issues. Whether it was jobs or something else somewhere, they were being talked about to a few groups of journalists who approached them. There were a lot of groups speaking for their own causes. It is common… everybody understood it.
A significant number of graduates are neither employed in education nor in training, pointing to a deeper structural issue. While there is heavy reliance on government jobs, they account for only 1-2% of total employment. With the number of graduates far outpacing the availability of quality private sector jobs and only a small share securing regular salaried employment with formal contracts, what structural fixes are needed?
See, courses which all of us go and join and come out of… they don’t ready you for jobs. But ironically, they don’t even ready you for becoming an entrepreneur. You don’t need to go and work for somebody. You can do something yourself. But the courses don’t give you enough.
For instance, if you were to be in a developed country, they give a young person the option to go for higher studies in the subjects that they are interested in or go for a local technical university which teaches one particular skill and then also tells you how to go about handling that skill and what are the things that you can do with that skill.
Then, it also tells you how far that will take you in terms of management. In terms of you managing your own affairs, or there’s somebody who can manage it for you. So, that readies you for the marketplace, either to become an employee to somebody or to do your own thing.
Our university courses don’t have that. They give you a certificate, which is a bachelor’s degree, of something. If you have done economics or political science, what do you do with it afterwards? After BA, what do you do? You go for an MA. But after an MA, you need to have something. The UGC entrance exams.
In my time, the UGC exam would be for Junior Research Fellowship, or JRF, and then Senior Research Fellowship. So, you can do research. But those who were with me in the class, not all of them did the JRFs and SRFs. What did they do?
So our system produced certified or degree-holding youngsters, but they were not ready yet for handling themselves, either as an employee or themselves to start off something. Or even to go and join their own parent’s business. That’s the fix we need.
How do we make government schools a genuine choice rather than an option forced by affordability? Do we need a structural overhaul to make parents willing to choose government schools for their children?
That would be the ideal state of affairs. It requires a lot of mindset change, before the money that is required. There is enough money, and more money is flowing, and more should go into government schools. We need more of them. But we need to look at what quality of teaching and learning happens there. What infrastructure is there? We can’t just be building classrooms and toilets. We need classrooms which can stand up to the requirements of today. We need teachers who are willing to go to those government schools… every teacher, if possible. And I wouldn’t blame them. Because when they go to a village school and house there, their own children’s education, who might not be going to primary school but into colleges, won’t have colleges there. So, other things will have to be ready before the ideal government school setup… For the teachers who go there, does the village provide them accommodation where they can live safely? Can the entire teacher’s family live there, or is she just going to be compelled to live there because she has to attend the school? So, there are quite a few such issues. Also, in some regions, where mother tongues are not so spoken in other regions, but in the local school, you need people with that mother tongue to be available. Are they readily available? Even if they are available, are they teacher material?
During the Jantar Mantar protests, there were demands for the Education Minister’s resignation. Looking back, where do you think the government got it wrong?
I am not sure there is an alternative that I can think of now. What has happened has happened. With the benefit of hindsight, there’s no good talking I could have done it this way or we should have handled it this way. That’s just not possible.
The job market is increasingly stratified, with different sections facing very different challenges – from social security for gig workers to stagnant wages, rising costs, job security, and changing skill requirements for the middle class. How can the government design policies that address these diverse needs while also ensuring the private sector creates enough quality jobs?
Except for nudging the private sector, you can’t do much as the government. It’s up to the private sector. It’s their money that they are investing. Beyond a point, it will not be the government’s job to tell them. But if the market requires it, meaning that if there’s a need for something and the private sector sees a point that if they invest, they will be able to get something out of it, they will come in actually… So the market forces are the ones which decide where the money is put by the private or the government sector. So, unless there is a demand for a certain set of people or a certain set of jobs that require a certain set of people, the investment wouldn’t happen. So, we need to create situations and identify people to match with them.
The West Asia crisis began affecting India in February, disrupting supply chains, raising construction costs, and causing LPG shortages. Having also managed the Covid-19 crisis as a minister, how is this crisis different?
That last was for a brief while. Gas availability, as a result of which we had to tell the industry to cut down from 100% to 70%. Domestic consumers were seen… In the meanwhile, departments got together. In fact, a Group of Ministers, headed by a senior minister, went into reviewing it every day and saying where the supply was going to come from. Once it comes, where it will go, to make sure no one suffers disproportionately. So, we were all hands-on and, therefore, it was possible to manage and confine it to the shortest period of time.
Have we learnt anything from these crises, and have we devised any framework or plan to mitigate losses in the future if such a situation arises again?
Yes, I think institutional arrangements are far more well-defined now. So, these memories should be in the institution, hopefully. Next time, God forbid, we have a situation like this, we will be able to handle it better.
Recent investment data suggests that a majority of domestic corporate investment is flowing into emerging fields like AI. What is your advice to Gen Z as technology continues to evolve so rapidly?
Of course, they should learn AI. In whichever field you are in, you will be expected to know it. You are probably better off knowing it because you can see the various ways in which it improves your efficiency. Nothing should stop any generation from learning.
What is your Gen Z story? What do you think is different about this generation from your personal experience? Is it the technology, the ways in which we communicate, our expectations?
I think you have a big advantage over earlier generations. The biggest advantage is that you have everything in your hands – in your mobile phone. So, your confidence comes from that. This is good. But what needs to go along is a sense of discretion to say, ‘How much can I use, and how much should I use it? And when do I use it, and when do I not?’ That sense of discretion, once it comes in, will be a brilliant change as you grow. At the moment, you are very blessed because you have the technology with you.
Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. (Express photo by Renuka Puri) 
Share
