Tags:
Journalism of Courage
We are at a point where we can either raise the debate and, therefore hopefully, the policy on positive discrimination. Or we can, frankly, produce a very big mess. The Sachar Committee report on Muslim social conditions will land right in the middle of a public arena roiled by the extension of OBC reservations in higher education and judicial observations on excluding the privileged among the disadvantaged, the so-called creamy layers. The government will have to handle a clamour of demands; some ministers have already been irresponsible enough to ask for additional quotas, no doubt inspired by the eventual success that Arjun Singh achieved in extending OBC quotas. There will inevitably be legal challenges as well as high and low debates on the constitutionality of some proposals. It is up to the government to keep the focus on some key issues. This is being done in the discussion on affirmative action in the private sector. Because industry is well organised and articulate, the menu of solutions has transformed from quota ad hocism to affirmative action. The latter isn8217;t ready to formulate it but industry, as our columnist in the op-ed page today argues, is ready to work with the government.
Similar common sense is desperately needed in other reservation debates. Take the Muslim question. Sensible commentators have already pointed out that to take the community as one un-stratified mass is wrong. That the truly disadvantaged Muslims are unlikely to benefit from a wholesale quota policy, especially when it applies to jobs and higher education. There would also appear to be significant regional differences in Muslim social conditions that bolster the conclusion that general economic dynamism can act as a good positive discrimination tool. And, as these columns have already argued, access to reasonable quality schools is the single biggest factor that
determines life chances.
It is perfectly true that many of these considerations apply to other social groups as well. There8217;s a respectable argument, for example, that quotas for OBCs in higher education do not help poor OBCs; for them access to schools remains the crucial impediment. It is also true that politicians have traditionally chosen to ignore this kind of argument. Many will be tempted to do the same again. They should know the costs will be much higher.
