01-29-2007, 09:18 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Snubbing President </b>
The Pioneer Edit Desk
The Government's PURA blunder
By its very definition, the process of economic planning is meant to be rational and faceless, with no place for emotion and only a cold allocation of resources for one of competing areas of investment. As such, the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, <b>Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia, is perfectly within his rights to recommend - as he has done to the Finance Ministry - that the Centre stop funding the Provision of Urban Facilities to Rural Areas (PURA) scheme and incorporate its mandate into the regular programmes of the Rural Development Ministry.</b> Yet, the timing and political semiotics of Mr Ahluwalia's recommendation couldn't have been more wrong. <b>PURA is the brainchild and favourite scheme of President APJ Abdul Kalam. It is also the first sustainable development project suggested by Rashtrapati Bhawan in a long, long time. President Kalam's distinguished predecessor, for instance, limited his nation-building counsel to calling for reservations in the judiciary. In contrast, PURA offers an exciting model of providing road, broadband and "knowledge" connectivity - that final parameter standing for call centres and information banks that, say, a farmer can reach for cropping or weather data - in far-flung villages, with one PURA cluster covering 20-30 villages. </b>As an idea it is worth trying and pilot projects have been initiated by State Governments and private social service institutions. On the eve of Republic Day, the President announced that the Centre was working on a phased nation-wide roll-out of PURA. Behind his back, and obviously unknown to him, the <b>Government was getting ready to bury a scheme that President Kalam has come to see as his legacy</b>. In his last year in office, he deserved a little more courtesy.
Policy planners have two views on ad hoc interventions and special schemes. Some advocate these as fast-track mechanisms; others say they get in the way of the regular process of socio-economic development. As such, an intellectual debate on the merits and demerits of PURA and a healthy disagreement with the modalities of the President's proposal would have been unexceptionable. Since Mr Kalam has been talking of PURA ever since he took office, it would perhaps have been in order for the Prime Minister to have driven up to Raisina Hill to gently convey his Government's misgivings. Alternatively, he could have deputed a senior colleague, maybe even Mr Ahluwalia, to have a chat with the President. This would have saved the first citizen the embarrassment of advocating an idea in his final address to the nation, ignorant of the fact that his Government had no plans to implement it. Alternatively, a Centrally-sponsored pilot project - a scaling up of template PURA schemes in many States - could have been attempted. In snubbing the President thus, Mr Singh and Mr Ahluwalia have shown bad form. They may be enlightened policy-makers but surely enlightened policy-making is not their monopoly?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Pioneer Edit Desk
The Government's PURA blunder
By its very definition, the process of economic planning is meant to be rational and faceless, with no place for emotion and only a cold allocation of resources for one of competing areas of investment. As such, the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, <b>Mr Montek Singh Ahluwalia, is perfectly within his rights to recommend - as he has done to the Finance Ministry - that the Centre stop funding the Provision of Urban Facilities to Rural Areas (PURA) scheme and incorporate its mandate into the regular programmes of the Rural Development Ministry.</b> Yet, the timing and political semiotics of Mr Ahluwalia's recommendation couldn't have been more wrong. <b>PURA is the brainchild and favourite scheme of President APJ Abdul Kalam. It is also the first sustainable development project suggested by Rashtrapati Bhawan in a long, long time. President Kalam's distinguished predecessor, for instance, limited his nation-building counsel to calling for reservations in the judiciary. In contrast, PURA offers an exciting model of providing road, broadband and "knowledge" connectivity - that final parameter standing for call centres and information banks that, say, a farmer can reach for cropping or weather data - in far-flung villages, with one PURA cluster covering 20-30 villages. </b>As an idea it is worth trying and pilot projects have been initiated by State Governments and private social service institutions. On the eve of Republic Day, the President announced that the Centre was working on a phased nation-wide roll-out of PURA. Behind his back, and obviously unknown to him, the <b>Government was getting ready to bury a scheme that President Kalam has come to see as his legacy</b>. In his last year in office, he deserved a little more courtesy.
Policy planners have two views on ad hoc interventions and special schemes. Some advocate these as fast-track mechanisms; others say they get in the way of the regular process of socio-economic development. As such, an intellectual debate on the merits and demerits of PURA and a healthy disagreement with the modalities of the President's proposal would have been unexceptionable. Since Mr Kalam has been talking of PURA ever since he took office, it would perhaps have been in order for the Prime Minister to have driven up to Raisina Hill to gently convey his Government's misgivings. Alternatively, he could have deputed a senior colleague, maybe even Mr Ahluwalia, to have a chat with the President. This would have saved the first citizen the embarrassment of advocating an idea in his final address to the nation, ignorant of the fact that his Government had no plans to implement it. Alternatively, a Centrally-sponsored pilot project - a scaling up of template PURA schemes in many States - could have been attempted. In snubbing the President thus, Mr Singh and Mr Ahluwalia have shown bad form. They may be enlightened policy-makers but surely enlightened policy-making is not their monopoly?
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->