Design fixes

the necessary partnership that big development schemes require.

Over the last five-year plan period,the number of Centrally sponsored schemes proliferated from 99 (2007-08) to 147 (2011-12) — another 26 schemes qualify for additional Central assistance,taking the total number to 173. To address concerns about the inadequate architecture of CSS,the Planning Commission had constituted a committee. It specifically recommended schemes with small outlays be implemented by states or merged with other schemes — 44 per cent of the total CSS had,as of then,an average annual outlay of less than Rs 100 crore — and that new Centrally sponsored schemes be limited to flagship programmes for major development needs.

While each new scheme needs to be appraised on its specific merits,the restructuring should discourage politicisation of implementation of Central schemes,and shift the focus to how effectively a programme is being implemented and monitored. As popular awareness of welfare schemes has grown,with target beneficiaries increasingly proactive in tracking disbursal of funds,there have been petty scraps on who can take political credit — the Centre for announcing the scheme or the state for its administration. These are pointless arguments and voters have already shown they have internalised a far more enlightened understanding of federalism to be detained by such disputes. It is high time the Centre-state interface exhibited a similarly enlightened standard. Another political hazard that must be acknowledged and guarded against is the enthusiasm of ministers to have schemes retained by their departments. An optimal restructuring would,perhaps of necessity,leave many departments without a CSS to call their own. It would therefore need the cabinet’s resolve to discourage turf wars by specific ministers.