The State Level Administration and Policy Making- Challenges and Change
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 17th June 2014
With a political party on steroids in the post national election scenario, the politics at the level of States is bound for change as well as a result of power struggle. Different parties in power in different state would take a re-look at the repercussions of the vote-share in the state that led to their debacle and supported rise of the current governing party at center. Efforts to align with voters may be kick-started including opportunities to stoke passions to hide mal-governance issues including cases of omissions and commissions. The changes taking place in the polity itself is being tackled in sporadic manner with state level politicians still trying to come to terms with the colossal change at the state level and unsure if it means any likely change in politics of the states. The top leadership at the state levels are generally occupying the administrative/executive positions in state ministries and are not keen to encourage changes in a hurry since that is likely to lead to dilution of authority due to intense intervention by legislators concerned with administrative machinery of the states. It is incumbent upon state rulers to initiate and enhance development of state level institutional mechanisms rather than adhocism mix with chauvinism that has been the hallmark governance at state level in India, inspite of being a vibrant democracy. This is an urgent imperative if the current sets of rulers want to have any chance in state elections because any development is likely to take a few years to fructify while creation of institution and top level hierarchy is rather easier to conceive and develop over a short run.
The party at centre, is still making all out effort to continue to with the new success formula of exposing corruption blaming state inaction and the policies along with the past government for inflation. The changes like state controllable factors like improving transparency of project planning and implementation in the state by bringing in e-governance at all stages including its constant updation and availability on net; receives little attention. This could have helped track changes in Plan (scale, quality and including costs and user charges), changes in Schedule (Timelines for each stage, benefits delivery status), Complaints (from Stakeholders). The Administrators of such projects i.e. the Ministers have remain oblivious to the concerns of the people and as a result, the policy making legislators of the ruling party as well as sundry supporting legislators and those in opposition fail to meet upto people’s expectation from them. Such legislators who are perceived to enjoy low clout are unable to respond to the voters or face questions from knowledgeable voters who may be having some updates on projects basis some human contacts amongst project workers or at the planning or implementation level. Their projection for photo opportunity with Ministers for inaugurals and public shows, now rubs little with public to have any vote potential. Such projects in Public works, irrigation, state owned/promoted Special Purpose Vehicles/undertakings remain in labyrinth leading mostly to negative perceptions than positive which they should have, mainly owing to bad management. The legislator’s pre-occupation with very limited or specific projects related i.e. either related to them or to their sponsors group only as was the case hitherto is unlikely to gel with publics/voters anymore.
Operational issues like changes in land use licensing policies have been misused with adhocism ruling most of the state SPV like district/city development authorities or industrial promotion authorities rather than a systematic policy driven approach. Most legislators in their part have been concerned only with specific projects rather than a collective and wholesome approach to development of localities which has much greater vote potential while projects are only for specific benefits. Very few states/cities or authorities can boast of clear policies related to promotion of Schools, Hospitals, public gathering spaces like clubs, sports complex etc. and land allotment to such always mired in corruption/nepotism. Similarly industrial authorities lack vision for development of industrial cluster ecosystem with provision for (common) supporting facilities and service units.
Bulk Purchases by states on behalf of customer like power, land for use by state for roads, offices etc. or state policy driven sourcing and distribution for products like Public Distribution System, liquor sourcing/distribution remain an area of massive disenchantment. So is distribution of state service likes vehicle registration, driving licenses, mass/public transportation services like city/inter-city bus service etc.
State provided services like Education, Healthcare, Forest and Environment Administration and water bodies/rivers, tourism and sports leave much space for monitoring as well as improvement. The state legislators could do with some effective standing committee which has powers to consult with experts as well as question ministers and state bureaucrats on regular basis including ‘official’ monitoring rights that includes rights to lodge direct complaints against officiating staff can go a long way. Leaders from such standing committee may also be allowed to interact with national policy makers along with or in absence of minister in-charge for smoother functioning of systems/administration in state and percolation of best practices.
Similar set up including transparency is required around mining rights in states. Whereby all mining resources/area and potential exploration areas are listed on website including status/operators and his licensing details and associated terms etc. The minister makes his examination with bureaucrats but a standing committee of bipartisan legislators gathers data by interacting with various stakeholders including suggest changes, reports violations among other things. Such committee leaders may also be allowed to interact with national policy makers along with or in absence of minister in-charge for smoother functioning of systems/administration in state and percolation of best practices to push up state revenues and employment.
We also have continued lack of governance of financial institutions especially those collecting deposits from ordinary people and their answerability to meet underlying obligations on time. This has resulted in widespread public grievances which remain away from media glaze. The state can have a Bipartisan standing committee to look into such financial institutions and their functioning besides minister and state agencies, so that there is greater empowerment of state legislators to regulate the affairs of such companies in the state.
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 17th June 2014
With a political party on steroids in the post national election scenario, the politics at the level of States is bound for change as well as a result of power struggle. Different parties in power in different state would take a re-look at the repercussions of the vote-share in the state that led to their debacle and supported rise of the current governing party at center. Efforts to align with voters may be kick-started including opportunities to stoke passions to hide mal-governance issues including cases of omissions and commissions. The changes taking place in the polity itself is being tackled in sporadic manner with state level politicians still trying to come to terms with the colossal change at the state level and unsure if it means any likely change in politics of the states. The top leadership at the state levels are generally occupying the administrative/executive positions in state ministries and are not keen to encourage changes in a hurry since that is likely to lead to dilution of authority due to intense intervention by legislators concerned with administrative machinery of the states. It is incumbent upon state rulers to initiate and enhance development of state level institutional mechanisms rather than adhocism mix with chauvinism that has been the hallmark governance at state level in India, inspite of being a vibrant democracy. This is an urgent imperative if the current sets of rulers want to have any chance in state elections because any development is likely to take a few years to fructify while creation of institution and top level hierarchy is rather easier to conceive and develop over a short run.
The party at centre, is still making all out effort to continue to with the new success formula of exposing corruption blaming state inaction and the policies along with the past government for inflation. The changes like state controllable factors like improving transparency of project planning and implementation in the state by bringing in e-governance at all stages including its constant updation and availability on net; receives little attention. This could have helped track changes in Plan (scale, quality and including costs and user charges), changes in Schedule (Timelines for each stage, benefits delivery status), Complaints (from Stakeholders). The Administrators of such projects i.e. the Ministers have remain oblivious to the concerns of the people and as a result, the policy making legislators of the ruling party as well as sundry supporting legislators and those in opposition fail to meet upto people’s expectation from them. Such legislators who are perceived to enjoy low clout are unable to respond to the voters or face questions from knowledgeable voters who may be having some updates on projects basis some human contacts amongst project workers or at the planning or implementation level. Their projection for photo opportunity with Ministers for inaugurals and public shows, now rubs little with public to have any vote potential. Such projects in Public works, irrigation, state owned/promoted Special Purpose Vehicles/undertakings remain in labyrinth leading mostly to negative perceptions than positive which they should have, mainly owing to bad management. The legislator’s pre-occupation with very limited or specific projects related i.e. either related to them or to their sponsors group only as was the case hitherto is unlikely to gel with publics/voters anymore.
Operational issues like changes in land use licensing policies have been misused with adhocism ruling most of the state SPV like district/city development authorities or industrial promotion authorities rather than a systematic policy driven approach. Most legislators in their part have been concerned only with specific projects rather than a collective and wholesome approach to development of localities which has much greater vote potential while projects are only for specific benefits. Very few states/cities or authorities can boast of clear policies related to promotion of Schools, Hospitals, public gathering spaces like clubs, sports complex etc. and land allotment to such always mired in corruption/nepotism. Similarly industrial authorities lack vision for development of industrial cluster ecosystem with provision for (common) supporting facilities and service units.
Bulk Purchases by states on behalf of customer like power, land for use by state for roads, offices etc. or state policy driven sourcing and distribution for products like Public Distribution System, liquor sourcing/distribution remain an area of massive disenchantment. So is distribution of state service likes vehicle registration, driving licenses, mass/public transportation services like city/inter-city bus service etc.
State provided services like Education, Healthcare, Forest and Environment Administration and water bodies/rivers, tourism and sports leave much space for monitoring as well as improvement. The state legislators could do with some effective standing committee which has powers to consult with experts as well as question ministers and state bureaucrats on regular basis including ‘official’ monitoring rights that includes rights to lodge direct complaints against officiating staff can go a long way. Leaders from such standing committee may also be allowed to interact with national policy makers along with or in absence of minister in-charge for smoother functioning of systems/administration in state and percolation of best practices.
Similar set up including transparency is required around mining rights in states. Whereby all mining resources/area and potential exploration areas are listed on website including status/operators and his licensing details and associated terms etc. The minister makes his examination with bureaucrats but a standing committee of bipartisan legislators gathers data by interacting with various stakeholders including suggest changes, reports violations among other things. Such committee leaders may also be allowed to interact with national policy makers along with or in absence of minister in-charge for smoother functioning of systems/administration in state and percolation of best practices to push up state revenues and employment.
We also have continued lack of governance of financial institutions especially those collecting deposits from ordinary people and their answerability to meet underlying obligations on time. This has resulted in widespread public grievances which remain away from media glaze. The state can have a Bipartisan standing committee to look into such financial institutions and their functioning besides minister and state agencies, so that there is greater empowerment of state legislators to regulate the affairs of such companies in the state.