Premium
This is an archive article published on May 30, 2006

Both sides of reservation

Realising the importance of the quota debate, ‘People’s Democracy’ carries a number of comments on OBC reservations in the latest issue.

.

Realising the importance of the quota debate, ‘People’s Democracy’ carries a number of comments on OBC reservations in the latest issue. Prof Anil Sadgopal’s piece ‘Anti-Reservation Shrill — Images vs Reality’ blames the National Knowledge Commission for not doing enough research before debunking the quota policy. He also questions the “meritocracy” argument, saying supporters of meritocracy never explained why the four southern states and Maharashtra, all with enhanced reservations, were ahead of Bimaru states in terms of social indicators and modern industrial development. Sadgopal’s other point is that most SCs and STs can only access the government school system, but ‘neo-liberal policies’ have caused their decline. While a “new sociological principle had been established” where each child would get an education in consonance with his social and economic status, it could be contended that government policy was to allow the school system to deteriorate so that children quit school early. The fallout from this would be the mushrooming of low quality, private unrecognised schools in towns and villages where the early school dropouts would go. “This is what the World Bank and the market forces wanted to happen in India,” Sadgopal says.

However, against the backdrop of the anti-Mandal agitation, the CPM is also keen to ensure there is less “pain” on either side. West Bengal state secretary Biman Bose’s comments reflect this. According to him, it was “not at all desirable that a kind of cleavage developed amongst students” on reservations. The Centre must speak to the Medical Council of India on increasing seats, and such seat increases were also necessary in states for the smooth implementation of quotas. For the record, Basu was also critical of police action against anti-reservationists in Delhi and Mumbai.

The demise of planning

The ‘Demise of Planning’ is underway in India, says economist Prabhat Patnaik citing recent developments by planners and statements by Finance Minister P. Chidambaram and Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission Montek Singh Ahluwalia. In theory, he says, when an economy opens up to globalised financial flows, state policy gets geared towards retaining the confidence of investors. This is the anti-thesis of planning, which should aim at economic policies to fulfil certain social priorities. In his words, the opening up of the Indian economy resulted in “abandoning” planning.

Story continues below this ad

According to him, the Planning Commission is busy announcing its self-immolation and its reincarnation as a body to assist state governments in capacity-building for setting up Public-Private Partnership cells with a list of projects that are bankable. He refers in this connection to remarks by Chidambaram and Ahluwalia at a meeting of state chief secretaries on May 20. Patnaik says that when huge costs are cited for projects, they are actually a ruse to prepare the argument for public-private partnership. When broken down to annual figures, he says, they do not seem high and can be easily financed through the Budget. “This is exactly the argument that was used some time ago to induct multinationals like Enron into the power generation sector with guaranteed rates of return in foreign exchange,” says Patnaik. He suggests the argument that some projects can be “offloaded to the PPP basket” so that the government can focus on non-bankable projects is actually the story of “continuous government retreat from one sphere after another and a handing over of the vacated space to private, including multinational players”. The demise of planning will have the Planning Commission becoming a mere go-between that arranges meetings between private businessmen and government agencies for striking deals.

Another blow to education

The CPM’s position on implementing the WTO regime of trade in education is reflected in a memorandum that representatives of the All India Federation of University and College Teachers’ Organisations gave Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recently. It would impact “the qualitative and quantitative dimensions of higher education negatively,” the teachers union said. AIFUCTO representatives, whose meeting with the PM was facilitated by CPM leader Sitaram Yechury and CPI general secretary A.B. Bardhan, also told the PM about what they believe is a “dichotomy” in the recommendations made by the CABE committee reports on autonomy and financing of higher education — while the one on autonomy has called for market reforms in higher education, the one on financing has suggested more public investment and public control in higher education institutions. Not surprisingly, AIFUCTO’s vote was for implementing the CABE report on financing.

— Compiled by Ananda Majumdar

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement