Two suggestions on grassroots governance

AMONG THE most significant amendments to the Constitution since its promulgation are the 73rd and 74th Amendments on Panchayati Raj and democratic decentralisation devolving power on ``we, the people of India''. These amendments have not been very effective, however, in their avowed objective of decentralising decision making. The Centre has not been keen to decentralise to the States nor the States to the district/subdistrict level. There is great resistance from MLAs and MPs as they feel threatened by these amendments.

According to management experts like Peter Drucker, strategy should determine structure. We have however stood Peter Drucker on his head here. Because there are MLAs and MPs in competition with the decentralised setup, we have given them also largesse for distribution.

The first suggestion is that for each district and major urban body, the political parties will offer two candidates, a district panchayat president and his running mate, a vice-president. The president will also be the MP for his constituency. He will attend the Parliament sessions and when Parliament is in recess, he will discharge his duties as the district panchayat president. The vice-president will deputise for him whenever he attends Parliament. Similarly, at the subdivisional level the president will be the MLA.

Several advantages

This suggestion has several systemic advantages. At present the MP is in the national mainstream of thinking but has no operational area to implement it. The district panchayat president has an operational area but is a frog in the well concerned exclusively with the politics of the parish pump, so to say and not in the national mainstream of thinking on subjects relevant to him like health, family planning, primary education, the ground realities of economic reforms, etc.

In the new setup, he will interact in Parliament with his counterparts from other districts, share experience and apply them in his district appropriately. He and his counterparts would pressure the Centre to decentralise its powers to the States and further down. The problems the people face at the ground level would echo in Parliament effectively resolving the issue of ``Pehle pani, phir Advani'' It has been estimated that more than 80 per cent of the problems faced by the people can be solved at the district and subdistrict levels without going to the State/Central level.

The second suggestion is that there will be no Central or State List. All functions will figure in the Concurrent List between the three tiers of governance at the district, State, and the Central levels. The present attitude of a zero sum game where it is assumed that whatever the State gains, the Centre loses and vice versa should cease. For instance, under primary/secondary education, the district level governance will recruit, post, transfer, determine emoluments, promote/discharge teachers, monitor attendance of teachers/students, hold examinations except for 7th/10th/12th classes. The State will conduct 7th/10th/12th class examinations on a statewide basis, prescribe text books, release grants, maintain a common denominator of quality among districts, generate teaching material, conduct summer schools, etc., to maintain and upgrade the quality of education imparted.

The Centre will strive to maintain the standard of education among the States, arrange international exposure for teachers and educational administrators and so on. The criterion is the lower the level, the more operational and less conceptual; the higher the level, the more conceptual and less operational responsibilities. A procedure has to be evolved to amend the List and incorporated in the Constitution itself, without involving Constitutional Amendments e.g. a forum like NDC or any other institutional mechanism where all the three tiers of government will be represented.

The objections against the suggestions will be legion. The anthropomorphical entity called the 'people' will vote for one party for local issues and another for national issues and the suggestions proposed will upset the apple cart. The sussestions will weaken the States and take away their hard won autonomy. The district panchayat presidents will not have the calibre required for Members of Parliament. Who will look after the 100 odd districts whose presidents will join the Central Cabinet? Bureaucracy which provides problems to solutions and not the other way round will raise many more objections and argue for the status quo which is time-tested, whatever this may mean. A myriad laws, Acts, regulations and procedures will require to be amended. If the concepts are sound, the objections can be sorted out.

We argue for zero base thinking when it comes to the budget. Why not zero base thinking when it comes to reinventing institutions?

K. A. CHANDRASEKARAN

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : Drug abuse