Speech of Sri Jitan Ram Manjhi, the Hon'ble
Chief Minister of Bihar in the meeting chaired by Hon'ble Prime Minister on the
subject of restructuring of Planning Commission
Hon’ble Prime Minister, respected Chief Ministers of
states, officials of the central and state governments, ladies and gentlemen!
I express my sincere thanks to the Hon'ble Prime Minister
for inviting me to this meeting of Chief Ministers of the States and be part of
the deliberations on this important issue.The speech of the Hon'ble Prime Minister
on the Independence Day about re-thinking on the Planning Commission has given
rise to the public perception that the government has decided to give a go-bye
to the process of planning in this country and that the growth and development
in this country will be led by the market forces and the capitalists. Though the
Prime Minister has talked about strengthening the federal structure and
increased, active participation of the states in the formulation of national
policies as equal partners and in their effective implementation, nothing substantial
has been done to confirm these views. I am of the view that to deliberate on
this important issue, the appropriate forum would have been the National
Development Council. Furthermore it would have been more fruitful and productive
if the alternative structure and modalities that are being proposed could have
been circulated beforehand to the States, so that they could have firmed up their
views on the issue. The manner in which this meeting has been convened, its
agenda and format, is pointing to the fact that you have already made up your
mind on the subject and the States are here, merely to put their stamp on it.
2. There is no doubt
about the fact that India in 21st century is not the country of 1950s and the
forces that determine and drive the growth and development across the Globe are
also not the same. The State Government believes thatover the years the
Planning Commissionhas played an important role in the assessment of the
material, capital and human resources of the countryand formulate Plans for the
its most effective and balanced utilization. However ithas not been able to
fulfill its mandate completely, particularly with respect to reducing
inter-regional disparities, providing basic amenities to the vast masses and
fostering human development. But we still believe thatthe timing and relevance
of restructuring the Planning Commission at this juncture is not appropriate as
we are in midst of the 12th Plan period and all of our developmental
strategy are committed to this 5 year Plan. Any substantial change now in our
Planning strategy will create confusion and dysfunctionality in our
developmental programmes and ongoing projects.
3. The last few decades have seen increasing role of the market and the
private sector in the growth of the economies, across the globe. There in
increasing evidence and realization, however, that unless the state intervenes
effectively, the growth process may lead to increasing disparities across
regions and peoples and the growth process may not be sustainable in the medium
and long run. The Indian nation and economy is complex and diverse, where states
and regions form a spectrum of development in all spheres, so much so that in
many ways it resembles ‘many worlds’ within one nation. In such a scenario,
there is a greater need for effective intervention of the government in
regulating and supplementing the market forces. In a federal set up, this has
to be suitably designed to focus on national aspirations as well as to promote
mainstreaming and inclusion of the vast sections of marginalized and the poor
across regions and communities.Thus Planning cannot be given a go-bye
completely.
4. Our view is that as a nation, we need to have a medium and long term vision
for its entire geographical and territorial spread.Such vision shouldalso
incorporate the entitlements of all citizens of the country. We require to
prepare the blue-print for this, assess the strength and potential of both the
public and private sector, both domestic and external, for various areas and
identify the need for support /regulation by the government. Similarly, we
should also assess the resources of the regions/ states with respect to the
economic, technological, physical and social infrastructure necessary to
support the achievement of the vision and sustainability of theentitlements to
be ensured for all the citizens. These assessments made and recommendations/
guidelines framed should be the basis for guiding the allocation and
formulation of schemes by various Ministries of the Government. As a think
tank, the institution should also have the capabilities to support the
Ministries and States with the knowledge of innovations and best practices of
the world.
5. I am saying all this on the basis of past experience of the state of
Bihar, which has been at the bottom of pyramid for historical reasons, in almost
all the parameters related to development. Not only that, the gap between the
all India average and Bihar’s position has been widening over years, except
during very recent period. An analysis of allocation on the basis of
recommendations of successive Finance Commissions and the Planning Commission makes
it clear that the per capita allocation has been regressive and this regression
has increased with successive Finance Commissions. If we add to this the
investment done by various Ministries under Central Plan schemes, the picture
becomes further depressing, so far as the per capita investment figures for various states are concerned.
This also happens because the schemes’ formulation and the conditionalities attached
to them do not necessarily further the cause of basic goal. For example, if
promotion of urbanization is part of the strategy to achieve the goals of
development, then the focus should be on states and regions where urbanization
is low. The scheme designed by the name JNNURM favours the states which were
already more urbanized. To give another example, eastern region including Bihar
was chosen as the focus area for Second Green Revolutionduring the last plan
period. The allocation for agricultural development, however, was meager and
not in tune with the task. Further, a scheme called AIBP for promoting
irrigation facilities had such conditions that Bihar could not use it for two
successive plan periods and conditions were
not modified despite persistent requests by the State Government at all levels. How then do we hope to provide
the basic entitlements to the people of backward states like Bihar and bridge
the divide between Bihar and the national average? I would like to submit
before this august forum that if India has to progress and progress in a
sustained manner, Bihar and such other backward states also have to be taken
along and development policies of support have to be so framed and the ensuing
allocation has to be done in such a manner that the gap is reduced and reduced within
a definite time frame. Whether we decide
to keep the artificial distinction of Plan and Non-Plan and have separate
institutions like the Planning Commission and the constitutional body of
Finance Commission for devolution of resources to the States or merge the two,
the primary focus should be on reduction of gap.
6. Similarly, the allocation of Ministries of the Central Government for
various central sector schemes and centrally sponsored schemes have to be made
keeping in view the overall national perspective of providing the desired
entitlements to all the citizens of this country. The national level institution
have to be directed to provide the framework and support for the same.The
poorer and backward states also lack in capacities; they have to be so assisted
with techno-managerial capabilities, as to develop these capacities, so that
they are able to absorb additional resources effectively.
7. The State Government believes that a powerful evaluation wing should
be put in place, which will be able to suggest appropriate measures for
implementation of national priorities and suggest mid-course corrections. This
task cannot be delegated to the Ministries who may not be inclined to
discontinue a particular scheme despite its ineffectiveness in achieving the
stated objectives.
8. With the bifurcation of the State in the year 2000, whatever mineral
resources and the organized large public and private sector units the erstwhile
state of Bihar had, have all gone to the State of Jharkhand. At the time of
division, the revenue ratio of Bihar and Jharkhand was 52:48, whereas 75%
population remained with the successor state of Bihar. Keeping this imbalance
in view, the Reorganization Act provided that a Unit be created in the Planning
Commission under the direct charge of the Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission
to deal exclusively with matters relating to the development of the rest of
Bihar consequent upon the formation of the State of Jharkhand. This unit was
supposed to assess the needs of Bihar and make necessary support by way of
schemes. But nothing specific has emanated from this legal dispensation. Unfortunately,
even the special plan allocations under BRGF has been reduced during the last
year and the current year. Such measures have to be strengthened, rather than
curtailed, to bridge the infrastructure gap, as mandated by the law.
9. The Reorganization Act provided for sharing of pension liabilities by
the two states of Bihar and Jharkhand as per formula prescribed. Due to
non-compliance by the state of Jharkhand for ten long years, the Ministry of
Home Affairs had to intervene as per provisions of the Act and it passed orders
for transfer of Rs 2584 crore,with respect to apportionment of pension
liabilities upto 2010-11, by the state of Jharkhand to the State of Bihar. The
orders passed in September 2012 remain non-complied despite regular requests by
the Bihar Government to the Home Ministry to effect the transfer from the
grants to be given to the Jharkhand from the Finance Ministry, Government of
India.The issue of settlement of pension liabilities for the three years after
that also remains pending. There is no substitute for effectiveness of the
government in sorting out such inter-state issues and I request for immediate
implementation of the order.
10. Despite the handicap of resources, the State Government of Bihar has
initiated various measures of reform to ensure good governance including focus
on inclusive development. As a result, it has grown consistentlyat higher than
national average and in some of the years its growth rate has been highest
among states. Despite this, Bihar remains at the bottom in most of the
socio-economic parameters because the per capita public investment remains low.
The StateGovernment is aware that the effort of the Government have to be
supplemented more and more by the private sector investment. It is also a
historical fact that private sector investments have a tendency towards
concentration in the same area, to reap the benefits of scale economies and the
availability of the supporting ancillaries and the other infrastructure. This
naturally benefits the developed regions and developed states. This circle can
only be broken and investment attracted to backward regions, if and only if we
provide special incentives for those investing in these regions. This is
particularly important for states having no mineral resources or ports and
which are land-locked. Special Category status to Bihar will enhance the
availability of resources by lowering the State contribution in centrally
sponsored schemes, improve access to external resources, act as a catalyst for
private investment based on tax breaks and concessions and act as a spur to
employment generation, improve life quality and further accelerate the growth
momentum by supporting higher public outlays coupled with private investment.It
is for these reasons that Bihar has been demanding Special Category status,
without which the growth rates achieved so far during last 9 years will be
impossible to sustain.
In the end, I would
request the Prime Minister to take no decision in haste without due diligence
and deliberation. The meeting of the National Development Council should be
convened to discuss the matter and take a holistic view on the same. If States
are to be consulted meaningfully then the proposed structure and modalities
should be duly circulated for firming up of their view on the matter. Final
view should be taken after considering the observations of all stakeholders.
Jai Hind !
No comments:
Post a Comment