Policy Buzz

Keep up-to-date with all that is happening in welfare policy with this curated selection of news, published every fortnight.

Policy News

  1. The Union Ministry of Jal Shakti launched Sujalam 2.0, a countrywide project to reuse grey water.
  2. The Government of Sikkim is set to announce ‘Bahini’, a scheme to install free sanitary pad vending machines in all the secondary and senior secondary government schools in the state.
  3. The State Assembly of Bihar passed the Bihar Land Mutation Amendment Bill, 2021, making the mutation of maps mandatory in the state.
  4. The Union Cabinet set a target of about ₹1 trillion for the National Bank for Financial Infrastructure and Development (NaBFID) for sanctioning loans to the infrastructure sector in the next fiscal year.
  5. The Department of Land Resources launched the Unique Land Parcel Identification Number (ULPIN) system in Assam under the Digital India Land Records Modernization Programme (DILRMP).

Health 

  1. The Union Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs approved the continuation of the National AIDS and STD Control Programme (NACP) till March 2026, with an outlay of ₹15471.94 crore.
  2. The Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare released India Tuberculosis (TB) Report 2022 and the National TB Prevalence Survey Report.
  3. The Union Ministry of Health and Family Welfare launched the BRICS Vaccine R&D Centre.

Education

  1. The University Grants Commission (UGC) made it mandatory for central universities to adopt the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) for admission to their undergraduate courses. The National Testing Agency (NTA) released guidelines for CUET 2022.
  2. The Union Education Ministry conducted a ‘Foundational Learning Study’ in order to assess the learning levels of students up to Class 3 in all the states and union territories.
  3. The Ministry of Defence (MoD), in partnership with NGOs, private schools and state governments, approved the setting up of 21 Sainik schools.

Sanitation

  1. The Parliamentary Standing Committee report on water resources was presented in the Lok Sabha. The report presented statistics on fund allocation, utilisation and target completion for components of the Swachh Bharat Mission and Jal Jeevan Mission. 
  2. The Delhi government proposed an outlay of ₹7,610 crore, 10% of the total budget estimates, for water supply and sanitation. 
  3. The Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs (MoHUA) in partnership with the Department of Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) and the French Development Agency (AFD) launched the Swachhata Startup Challenge.

Other News 

  1. The Union Minister for Rural Development answered in Rajya Sabha that 2.28 crore houses have been sanctioned to the beneficiaries, out of which 1.75 crore houses have been completed as of 9 March 2022, under Pradhan Mantri Gramin Awaas Yojana (PMAY-G). For more information on PMAY-G, read our budget brief here.
  2. The Standing Committee on Social Justice and Empowerment tabled its recent report flagging the under-utilisation of funds by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes.
  3. The Union Ministry of Rural Development & Panchayati Raj released the Disaster Management Plan of the Ministry of Panchayati Raj.
  4. The National Payment Corporation of India launched a new Unified Payment Interface (UPI) service called UPI-Lite. Read the report here
  5. The United Nations released the World Water Development Report 2022 (UN WWDR 2022) titled ‘Groundwater: Making the invisible visible.’
  6. The Ministry of Home Affairs extended the validity of registration certificates issued under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) till June 2022.

पॉलिसी बज़्ज़

विभिन्न कल्याणकारी योजनाओं में क्या घटित हो रहा है, यह पॉलिसी बज़्ज़ आपको हर 15 दिन के अंदर ख़ास ख़बरों के साथ अपडेट करता है |

नीतियों से सम्बन्धित समाचार  

  1. सूक्ष्म, लघु और मध्यम उधम मंत्रालय ने एमएसएमई (MSME) नवाचार योजना लॉन्च की है।
  2. सूक्ष्म, लघु और मध्यम उधम मंत्रालय ने महिलाओं के लिए विशेष उधमिता संवर्धन अभियान शुरू किया।
  3. केंद्र ने कोविड प्रभावित क्षेत्रों के लिए ऋण गारंटी योजना को तीन महीने के लिए, जून 2022 तक, बढ़ाने की घोषणा की है।
  4. श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय ने प्रधानमंत्री श्रम के तहत डोनेट-ए-पेंशनकार्यक्रम शुरू किया।
  5. केंद्र ने बिहार, कर्नाटक और पश्चिम बंगाल के ग्रामीण स्थानीय निकायों को अनुदान प्रदान करने के लिए ₹2,221 करोड़ से अधिक कि राशी जारी की।
  6. केंद्र ने 1,452 करोड़ के परिव्यय के साथ चयनित उप-योजनाओं के तहत ‘प्रवासियों को राहत और पुनर्वास‘ अब्रेला योजना को 2025-26 तक जारी रखने की मंजूरी दी है।

शिक्षा

  1. शिक्षा मंत्रालय ने यूनिफाइड डिस्ट्रिक्ट इंफॉर्मेशन सिस्टम फॉर एजुकेशन (UDISE+) 2020-21 पर रिपोर्ट जारी की है।
  2. विश्वविधालय अनुदान आयोग (UGC) ने उच्च शिक्षा संस्थानों (HEIs) को बहु-विषयक संस्थानों में परिवर्तित के लिए दिशानिर्देशों का ड्राफ्ट जारी किया है। आयोग ने एचईआई (HEI) को अनुसंधान और विकास संस्थान की स्थापना के लिए नए दिशानिर्देशों को लागू करने का भी निर्देश दिया है।
  3. दिल्ली शिक्षा निदेशालय (डीओई) ने कक्षा 9 और 11 के छात्रों के लिए पदोन्नति नीति में संशोधन किया है।

स्वास्थ्य

  1. राष्ट्रीय स्वास्थ्य प्राधिकरण (NHA) ने आयुष्मान भारत प्रधानमंत्री जन आरोग्य योजना (AB PM-JAY) लाभार्थियों के इलाज के लिए मुआवजा व्यवस्था में तेजी लाने के लिए ग्रीन चैनल पेमैंट (GCP) की शुरुआत की है |
  2. महिला और बाल विकास मंत्रालय ने भारत में महिलाओं के मानसिक स्वास्थ्य में सुधार के लिए स्त्री मनोरक्ष परियोजनाकी शुरुआत की है |
  3. केंद्रीय स्वास्थ्य और परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय ने 12 से 14 वर्ष की आयु के किशोरों के लिए कोविड-19 टीकाकरण कवरेज का विस्तार किया है ।

अन्य खबरें

  1. रजिस्ट्रार जनरल और जनगणना कार्यालय ने सैम्पल पंजीकरण प्रणाली (SRS) सांख्यिकीय रिपोर्ट 2019 जारी की है।
  2. राष्ट्रीय सांख्यिकी कार्यालय (NSO) ने अप्रैल से जून 2021 के लिए आवधिक श्रम बल सर्वेक्षण (PLFS) जारी किया। तिमाही के लिए शहरी बेरोजगारी दर 12.6 प्रतिशत थी।
  3. नागरिकों को ऑनलाइन स्वयं  गणना करने की अनुमति देने के लिए केंद्र सरकार ने जनगणना नियमों में संशोधन किया।
  4. केंद्रीय मंत्रिमंडल ने अतिरिक्त भूमि के मुद्रीकरण के लिए राष्ट्रीय भूमि मुद्रीकरण निगम (NLMC) की स्थापना को मंजूरी दी है।
  5. भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक (RBI) ने उपयोगकर्ताओं को बिना इंटरनेट के फीचर फोन पर एकीकृत भुगतान इंटरफ़ेस (UPI) सेवा उपयोग करने के लिए UPI123Pay लॉन्च किया।

यह लेख पॉलिसी बज़्ज़ के अंग्रेजी संस्करण पर आधारित है जो 14 मार्च 2022 को प्रकाशित हुआ था।

पॉलिसी बझ

हे पॉलिसी बझ तुम्हाला विविध कल्याणकारी योजनांमध्ये काय चालले आहे याविषयी दर 15 दिवसांनी विशेष बातम्या अपडेट करते.

धोरण बातम्या 

  1. सूक्ष्म, लघु आणि मध्यम उद्योग मंत्रालयाने एम.एस.एम.इ नाविन्यपूर्ण योजना सुरू केली आहे.
  2. सूक्ष्म, लघु आणि मध्यम उद्योग मंत्रालयाने महिलांसाठी विशेष उद्योजकता प्रोत्साहन मोहीम सुरू केली आहे.
  3. केंद्राने कोविड प्रभावित क्षेत्रांसाठी कर्ज हमी योजना तीन महिन्यांसाठी जून 2022 पर्यंत वाढवण्याची घोषणा केली आहे.
  4. श्रम आणि रोजगार मंत्रालयाने प्रधानमंत्री श्रम अंतर्गत ‘डोनेट-ए-पेन्शन’ कार्यक्रम सुरू केला.
  5. बिहार, कर्नाटक आणि पश्चिम बंगालमधील ग्रामीण स्थानिक स्वराज्य संस्थांना अनुदान देण्यासाठी केंद्राने ₹2,221 कोटींहून अधिक रक्कम जारी केली.
  6. केंद्राने ₹1,452 कोटी खर्चासह 2025-26 पर्यंत ‘स्थलांतरित आणि परत आलेल्यांचे मदत आणि पुनर्वसन’ या ‘अम्ब्रेला योजने’ अंतर्गत निवडलेल्या उप-योजना सुरू ठेवण्यास मान्यता दिली आहे.

शिक्षण

  1. शिक्षण मंत्रालयाने जिल्हा शैक्षणिक माहिती प्रणाली (यु- डायस प्लस) 2020-21 वरील अहवाल प्रसिद्ध केला.
  2. विद्यापीठ अनुदान आयोगाने उच्च शिक्षण संस्थांना (एच.इ.आइ.एस) बहुविद्याशाखीय संस्था बनवण्यासाठी मार्गदर्शक तत्त्वांचा मसुदा सुरू केला. संशोधन आणि विकास सेल (आर,डी.सी) च्या स्थापनेसाठी नवीन मार्गदर्शक तत्त्वे अंमलात आणण्याचे निर्देशही त्यांनी एच.इ.एल. ला दिले आहेत.
  3. दिल्ली शिक्षण संचालनालय (डी.ओ.इ ) ने इयत्ता 9 वी.आणि 11वी. मधील विद्यार्थ्यांसाठी पदोन्नती धोरण सुधारित केले.

आरोग्य

  1. राष्ट्रीय आरोग्य प्राधिकरण (एन.एच.ए.) ने आयुष्मान भारत प्रधानमंत्री जन आरोग्य योजना (ए.बी.पी.एम.- जे.ए.वाय) लाभार्थ्यांच्या उपचारासाठी दावा समायोजन जलद करण्यासाठी ग्रीन चॅनल पेमेंट (जी.सी.पी) लाँच केले.
  2. भारतातील महिलांचे मानसिक आरोग्य सुधारण्यासाठी महिला आणि बालविकास मंत्रालयाने ‘स्त्री मनोरक्षा प्रकल्प’ सुरू केला.
  3. केंद्रीय आरोग्य आणि कुटुंब कल्याण मंत्रालयाने 12 ते 14 वयोगटातील किशोरवयीन मुलांसाठी कोविड-19 लसीकरण कव्हरेजचा विस्तार केला आहे.

इतर बातम्या

  1. रजिस्ट्रार जनरल आणि जनगणना कार्यालयाने नमुना नोंदणी प्रणाली (एस.आर.एस) सांख्यिकी अहवाल 2019 जारी केला.
  2. राष्ट्रीय सांख्यिकी कार्यालय (एन.एस.ओ) ने एप्रिल ते जून 2021 साठी पीरियडिक लेबर फोर्स सर्व्हे (पी.एल.एफ.एस.) जारी केला. या तिमाहीत शहरी बेरोजगारीचा दर 12.6 टक्के होता.
  3. केंद्र सरकारने जनगणना नियमांमध्ये सुधारणा करून नागरिकांना ऑनलाइन स्व-गणना करण्याची परवानगी दिली.
  4. केंद्रीय मंत्रिमंडळाने अतिरिक्त जमिनीचे मुद्रीकरण करण्यासाठी राष्ट्रीय जमीन मुद्रीकरण महामंडळ (एन.एल.एम.सी.) स्थापन करण्यास मान्यता दिली.
  5. भारतीय रिझव्‍‌र्ह बँक (आर.बी.आय.) ने युपीआय123पे लाँच केली आहे ज्यामुळे वापरकर्त्यांना इंटरनेटशिवाय फीचर फोनवर युनिफाइड पेमेंट इंटरफेस (यु.पी.आय) सेवा वापरता येईल.

 

हा लेख पॉलिसी बझच्या इंग्रजी आवृत्तीवर आधारित आहे जो 14 मार्च 2022 रोजी प्रकाशित झाला.

In a Glance: Budget Session 2022 (Part I)

The Budget Session 2022 of Parliament commenced on 31 January 2022 and is scheduled to conclude on 8 April 2022. Below are curated highlights from the Question Hour and Zero Hour during the first part of the session (between 31 January 2022 to 11 February 2022) and a brief summary of reports related to welfare schemes.  

Highlights from Question Hour & Zero Hour

Women & Child Development

  • As on 30 June 2021, the Anganwadi Services Scheme was being implemented through 13,89,110 operational Anganwadi Centres and 7,075 projects covering 9.06 crore beneficiaries across the country.
  • Written consent and the husband’s Aadhaar is no longer a mandatory criteria under the modified guidelines of the Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana (PMMVY). This has been done in order to facilitate the inclusion of single and abandoned mothers.
  • Under the POSHAN Abhiyan’s community mobilisation, behavioural change and Jan Andolan components, 4 Poshan Maahs (in September 2021) and 3 Poshan Pakhwadas (in March 2021) were organised. To strengthen and promote community engagement through events like Annaprashan Diwas, Suposhan Diwas and Godh Bharai, around 3.70 crore Community Based Events (CBEs) have been conducted since the launch of POSHAN Abhiyan. (Download our latest briefs on PM POSHAN, and Saksham Anganwadi and POSHAN 2.0 to know the status and progress of the schemes.)

Education

  • The total expenditure by the Union Government on education as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has remained around 1% in the past five years.
  • The Union government has requested state governments and Union Territories (UTs) to explore the prospect of introducing millets under the PM POSHAN Scheme, preferably in districts where millets are a part of cultural food practices.

Nutrition & Food

  • Under the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Anna Yojana (PMGKAY), allocations of additional 5 kgs foodgrains per person per month were made free-of-cost for around 80 crore beneficiaries of all 36 states and UTs covered under the National Food Security Act (NFSA) for a period of 8 months i.e April-November 2020. This was similarly implemented during the period May-November 2021. The scheme was extended for a period of four months i.e. from December 2021 till March 2022. The financial implication under the scheme is estimated to be about ₹2.60 lakh crore. The scheme was launched during the COVID-19 pandemic, on 26 March 2020, as a food security scheme. (Download our latest brief on the Food Subsidy and NFSA to know the status and progress of the scheme.)

Labour & Employment

  • As on 30 January 2022, more than 24.54 crore unorganised workers have been registered on the eShram portal, which is a National Database of  Unorganised Workers. Female unorganised workers constitute 52.96 per cent of the total registration. Based on self-declarations, the figures of urban and rural workers were 1.9 crore and 22.6 crore respectively. The main objectives of the eShram portal is to create a national database of unorganised workers seeded with Aadhaar and to facilitate delivery of social security and welfare schemes. 
  • As per surveys conducted by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, during 2013 and 2018, 58,098 eligible manual scavengers were identified and paid One-time Cash Assistance of ₹40,000 under the Self-Employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers (SRMS).

Others

  • State-wise per capita income, measured in terms of per capita Net State Domestic Product (NSDP), ranged from ₹46,292 in Bihar to ₹4,55,654 in Goa at current prices and ₹31,017 in Bihar to ₹3,07,108 in Goa at constant (2011-12) prices for the financial year 2020-21.

Highlights from Reports tabled in the Parliament

  •  The Standing Committee on Energy presented its 21st report titled ‘Financial Constraints in Renewable Energy Sector’.
  • The Standing Committee on Education, Women, Children, Youth and Sports presented an ‘Action Taken Report on Issues Related to Safety of Women’.

    The Committee highlighted the under-utilisation of Nirbhaya Fund, which continues to be a cause for concern. The Nirbhaya Fund contributes to 32 different projects and schemes across the country crucial for enhancing the safety of women.

    At present, out of the allocated funds of ₹9,549 crore, only ₹4,241 crore funds have been released, and further, only ₹2,989 crore funds have been utilised. The states have not yet utilised the total funds allocated under the One Stop Centres (OSC) and Women Helpline (WHL) schemes, with only 20 per cent to 30 per cent of the funds having been utilised by the majority of the states.
  • The Standing Committee on Rural Development and Panchayati Raj  presented its report titled ‘Critical Evaluation Of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA)’.

    The Committee noted an increase in budgetary demand and the number of days of work sought under MGNREGA. In view of the changing times and emerging challenges, particularly because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the committee has recommended a complete revamp of the scheme. The Committee recommended increasing the number of guaranteed working days from 100 days to 150 days under MGNREGA. Other recommendations are:
    1. Budgetary allocations to the scheme should be undertaken in a more “pragmatic manner” to ensure seamless flow of funds for wages, material share, etc. and to prevent dearth of funds during mid-year.
    2. The Ministry of Rural Development (MoRD) should increase the wage rates under the scheme through linkage with an appropriate inflationary index.
    3. MoRD should look into the disparity of wages among states/Union Territories and formulate a mechanism for notifying a unified wage rate across the country.
    4. Social Audit Reports of Gram Panchayats should be timely placed in the public domain immediately after the audit exercise is over. (Download our latest brief on the MGNREGS to know the status and progress of the scheme.)

 

Both Houses of Parliament were adjourned for recess on 11 February 2022, to reassemble on 14 March 2022.

Also Read: In a Glance: India’s Major Welfare Programmes

Investing in Champion Local Governments: A Case Study of Bangladesh

Over a decade back, when making my first forays into international consultancy, I was lucky to listen to a remarkable idea which was then in its infancy and had just been rolled out. Two motivated individuals with vision, brimming with energy, had just launched the ‘Horizontal Learning Programme’ in Bangladesh. Mark Ellery and Shantanu Lahiri, who worked with the World Bank’s Water and Sanitation Programme then, planned to energise Bangladesh’s local government’s system to strengthen capacities and improve efficiency.

Bangladesh’s local government system broadly followed the pattern of sub-national governance prevailing in the sub-continent. While local governments were formally in charge of many local responsibilities, true power and government finance rested with the vertically integrated civil service. At the district level, the administration was still headed by a District Commissioner, by whatever designation termed, a position inherited from colonial days.

Thus, Bangladesh’s local government system was high on good intentions, but bereft of, like in India, finances required to enable local governments to perform the formal mandates devolved to them.

Again, like in India, there was a government institution – the National Institute of Local Governance – which was tasked with the responsibility of delivering training to elected members and officials of the over five thousand local governments in the country. The same routine was followed, of training programmes designed and delivered from the top, with the pedagogy and content both determined with little consultation with local governments.

Mark and Shantanu intended to change all that. They were convinced that because of decades of NGO and government action at the local level, there was sufficient inherent capacity to perform some of the devolved tasks. All one needed was to identify champions in the system and then, a system of peer-to-peer learning could be initiated and expanded, they felt.

They called this paradigm, the Horizontal Learning Programme.

 

Identifying champions, investing them and promoting them as evangelizers can yield benefits. People tend to learn the best not when they are associated with outside champions, but when they meet their own peers, who are slightly better than them.

 

The Horizontal Learning programme rested on the premise that local government elected representatives were not empty headed receptacles into which government generated enlightenment could be poured. They came with considerable grassroots-level experience and they had successfully overcome the gauntlet of elections. They were well aware of the need to satisfy the expectations of voters and were anxious for real solutions, not to listen to homilies.

The key was also to realise that some of them had already worked out their own solutions to the problems encountered in running a local government and put these into practice in their own local governments. However, these good practices remained insulated from the outside world, due to two reasons.

Firstly, the local governments did not have a community to share their good practices. Secondly, and more significant, because they worked insulated from other local governments, they were often not aware that some of the remarkable things they were practicing were good practices; after all, one needs to compare oneself with others to realise that one is doing things better.

The Horizontal Learning Programme commenced with a process known as ‘appreciative enquiry, where in each Upa-zila (the equivalent of a ‘Block’ in India), the Union Parishads (i.e. the equivalent of Gram Panchayats) were assembled to discuss their activities. Discussions would ramble, as Union Parishad elected representatives used the forum to vent their grievances against government process dysfunctionalities. However, after all the complaints were expressed, discussion would focus on their practices; what we call their jugaads of governance. The exercise ended with the group voting on the five practices that they considered to be the best within the group.

These good practices were meticulously documented by teams that interviewed the Union Parishad and its member concerned, and reduced to simple fact sheets. The progenitor of each such practice was enabled to evangelize about the practice in peer learning sessions.

The result was impressive. The appreciative enquiry process threw up many hitherto unheralded champions of good practices. Many were unaware that they were doing something special. With support from the HLP programme, many were taken into the system as resource persons. Their speaking of these practices to their peers from other local governments had a dramatic effect as here was no lecturer speaking theory. But here were practitioners who had the vision and staying power to think up and innovation and execute it.

The HLP programme has many lessons for those who wish to run an effective capacity development programme. Yes, while broad brush programmes that touch all stakeholders are necessary, they often suffer in quality when run at scale.

Identifying champions, investing them and promoting them as evangelizers can yield benefits. People tend to learn the best not when they are associated with outside champions, but when they meet their own peers, who are slightly better than them. Their peers have overcome the impediments their followers face, to run their reforms effectively. That gives strength and assurance to the aspiring learner. There is also the feeling that if something goes wrong, the peer who is just ahead will have worked out the answers as to how to tackle such issues.

Yet, investing in champions is a small scale operation. Would it be possible to upscale that, without losing the personal touch and the quality of content? That is a challenge, but not an insurmountable one.

T.R. Raghunandan is an Advisor at Accountability Initiative.

 

Also read: India’s Capability Building Framework and the Reshaping of Panchayat-level Training

Also see: Our learning tool for grassroots civil society leaders in India called Hum Aur Humaari Sarkaar

The Conundrum on Capacity Development of India’s Local Government Elected Representatives

Have capacity development programmes for local government elected representatives and officials improved over the years?

Before answering that question, three preliminary questions need to be answered. These are: have the structural design of Panchayat Raj systems in states changed for the better? Second, have the inherent capabilities of Panchayat representatives improved? Third, have communication strategies improved, to enable improved pedagogies and more effective learning outcomes?

From the institutional design perspective, we are as far away from what is considered an ideal paradigm of devolution of powers and responsibilities to local governments, as we were two decades back. The foundation of this ideal paradigm for local government design is that devolved functions are to be clear, and then, finance is to follow function.

Design begins with a detailed activity mapping exercise that delineates the powers and responsibilities of local governments, followed by earmarking of matching budget that enables them to fulfil these mandates and ensuring that funds are transferred to them regularly.

Further, these functional and fiscal arrangements are to be operationalised by placing adequate and qualified staff with local governments so that they have the organisational capacities to carry out their responsibilities effectively.

We are nowhere close to achieving that ideal.

 

The local government system continues to be fractured and stagnant, stuck in a familiar rut, where lip service is given to the principles of devolution, but implementation is highly centralised.

 

In most states, activity mapping has been carried out in a nominal fashion. However, the activities devolved to local governments are not actually devolved, they are merely delegated to them to carry out as agencies of the government.

Fiscal devolution is as abysmal as ever. Barring a few states, none have created separate budget windows for earmarking funds to the local governments. The Panchayats are woefully bereft of flexible grants. Even though allocations to Panchayats have increased, as a proportion of the state’s budget, they remain as pitiful as before.

Some headway has been made in panchayats to raise their own revenues, but here too, it is the champions who are moving forward, not the states that have had a poor record at collecting their own revenues at the panchayat level.

Staffing to local government is still exclusively on deputation from the state level. Very little has changed; the old, tired model of the district administration being under the control and supervision of the District Collector continues. Even in champion states, staff are still borne on the state’s cadre, and local governments have little freedom and flexibility to hire their own human resource.

There is much better news regarding the inherent capabilities of local elected representatives.

The old stereotype of local government elected individuals being largely illiterate and therefore, ‘lacking capacity’, no longer prevails. Twenty years back when we began a satellite based training system for Panchayat members in Karnataka, only about 50 per cent of the elected representatives were comfortable with reading and writing. While the official illiteracy level was about 25 per cent, another 20 per cent could merely sign their names.

In stark contrast, among the latest bunch of elected representatives at the panchayats, about 9 per cent are illiterate. At least 41 per cent have completed their high school, or pre-university courses. Over 13 per cent are graduates, diploma holders or have higher qualifications.

Professionals such as doctors, engineers and lawyers are entering and winning elections (data obtained from the State Institute of Rural Development, Mysore). Such data are now emerging from other states too.

Meanwhile, communication technologies have exploded over the last 20 years. Two decades ago, cascading classroom-level training, through groups of resource persons was the followed mode, but it was expensive and quality could not be monitored.

In 2000, Karnataka’s satellite training system, by which TV programmes were broadcast to large numbers of elected representatives from a central studio, followed by local group discussions and phone-in question and answer sessions, was considered state of the art. Today, the data from Karnataka reveal that most elected representatives have smartphones. Nearly 50 per cent of them have social media accounts and email addresses.

To sum up, elected representatives are educated and they have avenues for communication that are on par, if not better, than their official colleagues. However, in contrast, the local government system continues to be fractured and stagnant, stuck in a familiar rut, where lip service is given to the principles of devolution, but implementation is highly centralised.

In such circumstances, continuing conventional approaches to training are a recipe for disaster. Repeatedly, training sessions end with searching questions. Elected representatives voice their immediate concerns — why do officials deputed to their local government not listen to them? Why do they not have control over such officials? Why does the government not provide enough funds to implement all the functions devolved unto the local governments? Why do departments issue circulars that directly contradict provisions empowering the local governments? They ask.

Resource persons are invariably ill equipped to give convincing answers, they can at best toe the official line and refrain from criticising the government. When this happens, elected representatives quickly lose interest in listening to homilies and begin to see information on how to beat the system through other channels.

Thus, one sees them sourcing information directly from government websites or latching onto trusted mentors to seek guidance.

Can the state institutes of Rural Development (SIRDs) adapt to this changing scenario?

Luckily, some have. The pandemic gave an impetus to interactive sessions through videoconferencing and some SIRDs jumped onto the bandwagon, initiating talks and discussions on pandemic management first, but soon spilling over into the management of other panchayat responsibilities as well.

This is the way forward; to make training more interactive, more flexible, more discursive and pinpointed to the needs of individual members. The new National Capability Building Framework will need to change its approach radically to be relevant in the current scenario.

T.R. Raghunandan is an Advisor at Accountability Initiative.

Also read: Investing in Champion Local Governments: A Case Study of Bangladesh

Also see: Our learning tool called Mapping Governance

India’s Capability Building Framework and the Reshaping of Panchayat-level Training

Last week, I tuned into a meeting convened to discuss the preparation of a new National Capability Building Framework (NCBF) for Panchayats. It was a good opportunity to meet the old stalwarts who had dedicated their professional lives to strengthening democratic decentralisation, as also to meet those who have since entered the field.

In 2005, while working as the Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Panchayati Raj in the Union government, I was tasked with the job of putting together the first NCBF document. I say ‘putting together’ because I prepared the first draft for discussion and that went through a consultative process both within the Ministry and with civil society representatives and states. The final document carried the stamp of many minds and covered a gamut of issues that related to the capacity development of Panchayats.

Looking back at that effort, I realise now that the scope of the document we prepared was limited. It was confined to defining the contours of training programmes that could reach out to nearly 26 lakh elected representatives of the panchayats across the country.

Before the creation of the Ministry of Panchayati Raj in 2004, the strengthening of panchayats was the task of the Ministry of Rural Development. From its vast budget that covered employment programmes, watershed development, water supply, and rural roads, there was a tiny sliver of a budget dedicated to panchayat training.

Those funds were often grabbed by states with greater capability in preparing training proposals; there was no state-wise quota of allocation of funds. Thus, those states with weak state institutes of Rural Development, lagged in panchayat-level training, often relying on international agencies or civil society organisations to provide episodic training sessions for elected representatives.

The Ministry of Panchayati Raj inherited this measly budget in 2004 when it was carved out as a separate ministry. The same ad hoc system of funds allocation continued for some time; the NCBF was expected to lay down a framework through which states could prepare proposals for funding and all states would be judged by the same standards when funds were allocated.

For a year more, the hiatus continued, as the budget continued to be slim as before. However, all that changed from 2006 onward, when the Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF) programme was begun.

The BRGF had a simple, but revolutionary design. For 250 Backward Districts, the Panchayats were given untied grants with which they could undertake any gap-filling programme that they wished. In doing so, no value judgments on their choice of projects were to be imposed by oversight agencies. All that was insisted upon was that every panchayat ought to prepare a participative plan and these plans ought to be consolidated into District Plans, by the District Planning Committees constituted per the Constitutional mandate. 

The allocations under the BRGF were substantial, with each district receiving Rs. 15 to 20 crores on a yearly basis. Additionally, every state was allocated Rs. 1 crore annually for each BRGF district. These funds were to be pooled and used for the training of panchayat representatives in these districts. The state was allowed to retain some money with themselves so that they could beef up their SIRDs, hire staff, build training rooms, and so on, to enable them to handle their tasks of training better.

The NCBF got a new life then, as it became the guidance document based on which states would prepare plans for capacity development. It was a framework that was backed by a large budget, of Rs. 250 crores per annum.

Till such time that the BRGF was crafted, the common refrain heard from states was that panchayats were languishing because adequate funds were not reaching them, as also because adequate funding was unavailable for delivery of training programmes. The BRGF changed all that; it put adequate money in the hands of states, not only to pass through to panchayats but also to design and deliver capacity development programmes. 

Sadly, the BRGF programme funds were not drawn adequately by states in the first two years. Two impediments came immediately to the fore. First, about 50 per cent of the states were ineligible to draw funding for the programme because they had not set up the constitutionally mandated District Planning Committees. Furthermore, they showed an inexplicable resistance to setting up these Committees, revealing thereby that much of their commitment to strengthening panchayats was mere lip service. When it came to actually run the system as mandated by the Constitution, they were lax.

 

So it came to pass that many states went into a numbers game. While reporting that training programmes were going on in accordance with the standards prescribed under the NCBF, what was happening on the ground was something else.

 

The weak capacity development system was also exposed by the BRGF programme. About 50 per cent of the Rs. 250 crores annual allocation for capacity development was not picked up by the states, mostly those states that needed the money most, were not able to obtain their funds.

While in retrospect the NCBF was a restricted, supply-driven framework, it did lay down standards for training that were aimed at improving the quality of training. Every Panchayat member was to be touched by an orientation programme within six weeks of being elected. There were supposed to be only 20 participants in each face-to-face training programme, with three resource persons per training session. Taking some of these standards into consideration, the total number of resource persons needed per state was calculated.

However, many states were unequal to the task of organising the infrastructure and the manpower required to comply with the standards prescribed for the training. After eyeballing each other, finally, the Ministry of Panchayati Raj looked the other way and began to release funds, while being aware that at least in some states, the strict standards mandated by the NCBF would not be met. 

So it came to pass that many states went into a numbers game. While reporting that training programmes were going on in accordance with the standards prescribed under the NCBF, what was happening on the ground was something else. Sixty elected people crammed into a room where a boring homily was delivered, with half of those 60 walking out to claim their traveling allowance or have a cup of chai.

Have things changed now? If they haven’t will they, ever? More in my next blog.

T.R. Raghunandan is an Advisor at Accountability Initiative.

Policy Buzz

Keep up-to-date with all that is happening in welfare policy with this curated selection of news, published every fortnight.

Policy News 

  1.  The Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises launched the MSME Innovative Scheme.
  2. The Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises launched the Special Entrepreneurship Promotion Drive for Women
  3. The Centre announced the extension of the Loan Guarantee Scheme for Covid Affected Sectors by three months to June 2022.
  4. The Ministry of Labour and Employment launched the ‘Donate-a-Pension’ program under Pradhan Mantri Shram.
  5. The Centre released over ₹2,221 crore for providing grants to the rural local bodies in Bihar, Karnataka, and West Bengal.
  6. The Centre has approved the continuation of the selected sub-schemes under the umbrella scheme ‘Relief and Rehabilitation of Migrants and Repatriates’ till 2025-26 with an outlay of ₹1,452 crore.

Education 

  1. The Ministry of Education released the report on Unified District Information System for Education (UDISE+) 2020-21.
  2. The University Grant Commission launched the draft guidelines for making Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) into multidisciplinary institutions. It has also directed HEIs to implement the new guidelines for establishment of research and development cells (RDC). 
  3. The Delhi Directorate of Education (DoE) revised the promotion policy for students in Classes 9 and 11. 

Health 

  1. The National Health Authority (NHA) introduced the Green Channel Payment (GCP) to expedite claim adjustments for treatment of Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (AB PM-JAY) beneficiaries.
  2. The Ministry of Women and Child Development launched ‘Stree Manoraksha Project’ to improve the mental health of women in India.
  3. The Union Ministry of Health & Family Welfare expanded the COVID-19 vaccination coverage to adolescents between the age of 12 and 14. 

Other News 

  1. The office of the Registrar General & Census released the Sample Registration System (SRS) statistical report 2019.
  2. The National Statistical Office (NSO) released the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) for April to June 2021. The urban unemployment rate was 12.6 per cent for the quarter. 
  3. The Union government amended the Census rules to allow citizens to self-enumerate online.
  4. The Union Cabinet approved setting up the National Land Monetisation Corporation (NLMC) to monetise surplus land.
  5. The Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) launched UPI123Pay to allow users to use unified payments interface (UPI) service on feature phones without internet.

Professional Welfarism or Corporate Capture? A Perspective on CSR and Local Governments

Of late, there is a forward popular on WhatsApp groups. It is the story of a Panchayat where everything is run, on the face of it, ideally. Not only are roads well built, but welfare programmes are implemented faultlessly. The Panchayat has a surplus of funds and uses them now to deliver even private services, such as supermarkets at prices far lower than that of the open market.

In the WhatsApp forward, the Panchayat has elected to its body, people without political affiliations. From all aspects, this Panchayat represents a stellar example of how a local government system can succeed far better than a state-run system; a great advertisement for the inherent strength of decentralised public governance as envisaged under the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Constitution.

A corollary to this forward is another series of events. Apparently, the Panchayat is being harassed by political parties, and disillusioned by their response, the prime mover, a corporate entity running a business that employs large numbers of people in the Panchayat and its vicinity, plans to discontinue its support to the Panchayat.

These social media posts usually end with a condemnation of our selfish and venal politics, and concludes that we, the people of India, are far better off without any politics or politicians. 

A closer look at this situation reveals nuanced layers of other dynamics. As is usually the case, there is more to it than meets the eye! Other than the squeaky clean social media story of right minded people being harassed by an evil government. 

What has happened is that a corporate entity that contributes a great deal to the economic development of the Panchayat has pumped in plenty of its CSR funds into the Panchayat. They seem to have entered into an arrangement with the local voters, promising to them that they would pump in their CSR funds, if they vote for independents who were informally endorsed by the company. Once this team of independents got elected, they have been running the Panchayat with zero corruption. The quality of services improve and the Panchayat is blessed with a financial surplus. 

The cynical may call this corporate bribery of the entire population. However, this manner of corporate capture of local governments is common all across the world. To my mind there are no clear rights or wrongs here. I often argue with my colleagues that I am OK with this approach. After all it’s a win-win situation for all. The people are getting excellent local services and a government of high integrity.

Yet, there is no escaping the fact that if one thinks about the implications at a larger scale it makes you wonder. Today, with huge inequality in India, more than 10 per cent of the country’s wealth is concentrated in the hands of just one per cent of the population. The net worth of some of our richest billionaires is more than the budgets of many states. What happens if they tire of investing in electoral bonds and pumping their money into the leaky buckets of political parties?

It is not far-fetched to think of what might happen if a billionaire or two start a political party, make an open offer of an investment of Rs. 50,000 crore into, say, a large metropolitan city as a deposit plus assure payment of taxes of Rs. 10,000 crores every year on the condition that we the people elect to power ‘independents’ sponsored by them. Let us say that they do win power and they execute development projects without corruption and with lots of participatory planning. Would we be comfortable? Would political parties be comfortable?

I asked this question of some who are in politics and here is a thought provoking response.

There is no arguing with the fact that without corruption, a Panchayat’s resources would go much farther than now. Yet, CSR money from a powerful corporate entity is like margin money put in by a businessperson when investing in a business. Evidently, this practice to provide public services is not acceptable because it is just another technique to buy votes and subvert democracy. Legally, however, nothing prevents a corporate from setting up a political party and using the company’s political donations (which, unlike donations for charity, are totally tax-free without any limits!) to campaign for its candidates.

Just imagine what would happen if rich corporates indulged in such ‘direct’ subversion of democracy instead of the indirect subversion they are doing today by donating to political parties in return for policies that further their interests!

Panchayat works should therefore be undertaken only with legally raised resources, like all other panchayats. Putting all panchayats on the same footing, using budgets approved by an elected local body by using legally collected taxes from all residents to improve local public services is the only acceptable solution. There should be no additions to this budget from any corporate institution as donations, since that could be used as an inducement to influence people’s decisions. Using CSR money for doing what government should itself be doing is unacceptable. 

As a corollary, all large companies should pay property and other taxes levied by the local body under which they fall just like other residents. The reality today is that they avoid these payments and negotiate with the local bodies to give them unwarranted concessions. The bargaining platform can be quite skewed when a local body deals with one large company. There is scope for blackmail and intimidation on both sides too. 

That is how those who run good politics think.

What do you feel?

T.R. Raghunandan is an Advisor at Accountability Initiative.

The opinion is that of the author and does not represent an institutional stand. 

Under-prioritisation of Women’s Safety in the Union Budget?

In 2021, the National Commission for Women (NCW) registered a 30 per cent increase in the number of complaints related to crimes against women in India from 2020. Of this, the greatest proportion comprised cases of emotional abuse, followed by domestic violence, and harassment for dowry. India has various schemes for women’s safety, but a look at the funding status of key schemes and even their categorisation, reveals gaps.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD) recognises that gender-based violence is a public and private phenomenon. It impacts women’s right to mobility and comprehensive well-being and empowerment. In 2015, for example, the MWCD initiated the One Stop Centre (OSC) scheme, which provides a range of services – from emergency redressal to shelter and psychosocial and legal counselling – under a common roof. Similarly, the Women Helpline Scheme (WHS), integrated with the OSC, allows women affected by violence to seek appropriate redressal measures. Schemes like Ujjawala[1] attempt to intervene at the community level to prevent trafficking and sexual exploitation of women and girls. Swadhar Greh (SG)[2], Beti Bachao Beti Padhao (BBBP)[3], Mahila Police Volunteers[4], among others, aim to prevent gender-based violence and provide rehabilitation to its victims, and attempt at making community spaces safe for women.

Thus, what seems counterintuitive is that the Government of India (GoI), under the MWCD, spends marginally on women’s safety. In this year’s Union Budget, the budgeted (or estimated) expenditure on the MWCD is ₹25,172.28 crores, which is 0.6 per cent of the overall budget. The government has allocated ₹3,184.11 crores on women’s protection and empowerment measures, which includes women’s safety, accounting for only 0.08 per cent of the ministry’s overall budget. 

Reclassification of MWCD’s key schemes complicates prioritisation

Before diving into the funding status, it is important to understand the ministry’s categorisation of schemes linked with women’s safety. In 2021-22, MWCD streamlined its Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSS) under three umbrella schemes of Mission Poshan 2.0, Mission Shakti, and Mission Vatsalya. Under its erstwhile classification, schemes related to women’s safety like the OSC, Ujjawala, and SG, featured as standalone schemes under the Mission for Protection and Empowerment of Women. Now, reclassified under the Mission Shakti, these schemes have been clubbed under Mission Shakti’s sub-schemes of Sambal and Samarthya for achieving the objectives of safety and security, and empowerment of women, respectively. 

Sambal comprises schemes such as the OSC, WHS, BBBP, etc. Samarthya, on the other hand, consists of Ujjawala, SG, Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana (PMMVY), among others. As a consequence of this reclassification, there seems to be a dilution of what the government interprets as women’s safety. For example, the PMMVY, a maternity benefit programme previously under the Umbrella Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), is now a part of Samarthya. But, at the same time, schemes such as Ujjawala and Swadhar Greh, which focus on gender-based violence and women’s safety are also a part of Samarthya. 

Fund allocation for Mission Shakti in this year’s budget is dismal

Zooming back out, in financial year (FY) 2022-23, allocations for Mission Shakti have marginally increased by 0.02 per cent, as a proportion of MWCD’s CSS outlay, from Budget Estimates (BE) 2021-22. Allocations for Mission Shakti are exceedingly small, especially compared to Saksham Anganwadi and Poshan 2.0 (Figure 1). On the other hand, Mission Vatsalya, which comprises only one scheme – the Child Protection Services (CPS) – has seen an approximately 2 per cent increase in its proportional share. Both Saksham Anganwadi and Poshan 2.0 and Mission Vatsalya are schemes related to women and children but do not exclusively look at women’s safety.

Additionally, schemes that do focus on women’s safety, such as those under Sambal, constituted only 17.65 per cent out of the total funds earmarked for Mission Shakti, decreasing by approximately 1 per cent from BE 2021-22. The decline in prioritisation for Sambal schemes was also observed in 2021-22, as allocations were 10 per cent less than the standalone allocations made under each of these schemes (OSC, WHS, etc.), respectively, the previous year.

Figure 1: Saksham Anganwadi and Poshan 2.0 received the most prioritisation out of the total MWCD CSS outlay in FY 2022-23

Figure 1: Saksham Anganwadi and Poshan 2.0 received the most prioritisation out of the total MWCD CSS outlay in FY 2022-23
Source: Notes on Demands for Grants, 2022-2023, MWCD, https://www.indiabudget.gov.in/doc/eb/sbe101.pdf. Last accessed on 10 February 2022.

Prioritisation in the Gender Budget

The Gender Budget (or GB) is another way to capture the government’s emphasis on reducing crimes against women. Created in 2005, the GB has been a regular budgetary exercise at the Union level to allocate a specific proportion of scheme-related funds exclusively for women. Part A of the GB reflects a 100 per cent scheme allocation for women. Part B, on the other hand, reflects 30 per cent of the scheme benefits for women. In the case of the MWCD, Part B received approximately four times more allocation than schemes in Part A in BE 2022-23.

All Sambal schemes feature under Part A. In 2022-23, allocations for Sambal schemes reduced by 1 percentage point to 16.81 per cent of the overall allocation under Part A of the MWCD’s GB. However, schemes under Samarthya (Ujjawala, SG, PMMVY, etc.) received the most prioritisation at approximately 76 per cent. Further, a minuscule percentage of Samarthya schemes are also allocated under Part B of the GB. 

As mentioned above, schemes under Sambal and Samarthya appeared as standalone schemes in the GBs before FY 2021-22. A comparison of the composition of a few schemes under Part A of MWCD’s Gender Budget (Figure 2) suggests that while the proportional share of OSC had increased marginally from 2018 to 2020, the overall share of schemes – WHS, BBBP, Ujjawala, and SG – meant for women’s safety and empowerment remained low.

Figure 2: Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana (PMMVY) forms the greatest proportion of Part A of MWCD’s Gender Budget among the selected schemes

Figure 2: Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana (PMMVY)[8] forms the greatest proportion of Part A of MWCD’s Gender Budget among the selected schemes
Source: Gender Budgets from 2019-20 to 2022-23, Expenditure Profile, https://www.indiabudget.gov.in/. Last accessed on 10 February 2022.
This trend also implies that, much like the previous years, PMMVY might continue to comprise the greatest proportion of the (now clubbed) Samarthya scheme. It is also unclear which schemes under Samarthya constitute Part B of the GB. Thus, as a proportion to the entire GB of the MWCD, allocations for women’s safety and gender-based violence might remain the least prioritised.

Other ministries/departments also complicate allocating for women’s safety in their GBs. A previous blog reflected on some of the challenges associated with the lack of transparency in GB allocations. Schemes to strengthen women’s safety, such as those by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), have stopped featuring in the GB statement altogether. Additionally, existing schemes for women, such as the Crime against women – Juvenile Justice Human Rights of the Policy Department and the Scheme for Safety of Women on Public Road Transport of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, feature in Part B of the GB statement. 

A lot is yet to be done

In a previous series of blogs, T.R. Raghunandan highlighted the “inter-relatedness” of crimes against women, which warrants action in an integrated approach. To an extent, the Nirbhaya Fund[5] solicits action from ministries/departments, and state governments, to implement projects and schemes to prevent and redress crimes against women and promote women’s safety in India. 

In the next blog, I will trace the challenges to the utilisation of funds for key women safety schemes – OSC, WHS, BBBP, and others – over the years and across ministries/departments and state governments, and what this might mean amidst the reclassification exercise of the MWCD. 

 

Tanya Rana is a research intern at the Accountability Initiative.

 

NOTES

[1] Ujjawala is short for “Ujjawala: A Comprehensive Scheme for Prevention of Trafficking and Rescue, Rehabilitation and Re-Integration of Victims of Trafficking for Commercial Sexual Exploitation”.

[2] Swadhar Greh seeks to provide institutional support to women in difficult circumstances, providing relief and shelter, legal aid and counselling, vocational and skill training, etc.

[3] Beti Bachao Beti Padhao seeks to address (and reduce) sex-selective abortions, and promote the girl child’s survival, protection, and education.

[4] Mahila Police Volunteers have been envisaged to create a safe space for victims of gender-based violence to report crimes and seek necessary redressal. Like Women Helpline, this scheme is also integrated with the One Stop Centre.

[5] This non-lapsable fund was set up in the aftermath of the 2012 Nirbhaya rape case. MWCD, as the nodal ministry, is responsible for monitoring any schemes or projects sanctioned against this fund.