tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-149594482024-03-08T05:11:20.695-08:00Volunteer RamblingsA place to share opinions/views/research on various social and development issues.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger77125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-43227968815873756052007-06-21T16:44:00.000-07:002007-06-21T16:50:46.165-07:00US Supreme Court & CorporationsIn the last two weeks or so US supreme court has given 4 judgements pro-corporations against investors/consumers. And they are very plainly pro-corporation - you dont require to stretch your imagination to any degree. All make tougher to sue corporations for things like plain fraud to wage dicrimination to<br />1. Supreme Court sides with business again<br />http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/06/21/PM200706211.html<br />An 8-1 Supreme Court ruling will make it more difficult for investors to bring class action lawsuits that allege they've been ripped off by companies committing securities fraud.<br /><br />2.<br />Supreme Court sides with banks<br />http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/06/18/PM200706182.html<br />Supreme Court justices have ruled that Wall Street investment banks and stock brokers are immune from antitrust lawsuits that challenge the banks' and brokers' cooperation when they float IPOs.<br /><br />3.<br />A big day for business at the Supreme Court<br />http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/06/11/PM200706111.html?refid=0<br />The Supreme Court released four, unanimous business-related opinions today. There was some bad news for Big Tobacco. And, as Steve Henn reports, it wasn't such a good day for unions either.<br /><br /><br />4.<br />High Court Vs. Working Women<br />http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/06/09/1765/<br />On May 29, the Bush Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts delivered what could be a devastating blow to women experiencing discrimination in pay and promotion.<br /><br />All due to pro-corporate justices choices made over the years.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-76925718542629424972007-06-07T07:18:00.000-07:002007-06-07T07:47:56.613-07:00private-sector-shining-govt-tarnished ??http://policymusings.blogspot.com/2007/06/private-sector-shining-govt-tarnished.htmlUnknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-74107252944884169262007-01-13T07:43:00.000-08:002007-01-13T07:46:49.427-08:00Walmart's Health Insurance for EmployeesAccording to a report released by walmart " <span style="font-weight: bold;">less than half of its 1.3 million workers -- 47.4 percent -- are enrolled in Wal-Mart's own health program"<br /><br /></span>To read in more detail read <a href="http://policymusings.blogspot.com/2007/01/walmart-health-insurance-for-employees.html">this</a> blogpost.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-40209232453723363782007-01-08T10:39:00.000-08:002007-01-08T10:42:09.523-08:00Friedman: Free to Choose Part 1Posted from: <a href="http://policymusings.blogpost.com">http://policymusings.blogpost.com</a><br /><br />The video is part 1 of documentary series "<a href="http://www.freetochoose.net/">Free to Choose</a>" by Milton Friedman, followed by a discussion between Friedman and others about free markets/capitalism/government intervention/corporate power/freedoms. The discussion is good and brings up lots of points in the debate as compared to the documentary which shows only part of view points.<br /><br />In the documentary Friedman purports various benefits of free markets. He stresses the point that free markets provide economic freedom to everybody and even though in sweat shops the conditions maybe bad, people choose it over other options and they move on to better futures after the hard work. Here he is making a big assumption that people are free to choose which is debatable. In my opinion people who "choose" sweatshop labor have a very constrained set of choices - maybe between a tyrannical government or sweatshops. The goal should not be to find which is the better option among these choices but rather to find policy options to broaden and enchance the set of options in order to make a truly "free" choice.<br /><br />He goes over the neo-classical economic theories of "Magic of Prices" and how they provide incentives. He seems to be a great beleiver that free markets lead to more freedoms both political and social and for this he uses example of Hong Kong which has almost zero tariffs, low or non-existent government regulation but which is thriving. But the fact is that HK with all the prosperity has huge disparities in income with the inequality index of <a href="https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/hk.html">0.46</a> in 1996.<br /><br />I would question his premise the free markets help everybody and is the solution to poverty. Free markets are not level playing fields and dont provide equal freedom to all. They are highly skewed in favor of the rich who get more votes - in terms of voting with their checkbooks - while poor get less votes as they have only so much to spend. Free Markets are definately good for the rich as they get more votes, their voices are heard. Like for example pharamecutical industry comes up with drugs for the illnesses of the rich but rarely comes with new drugs for the illnesses of the billions of poor like malaria etc as shown by recent new medicines introductions.<br /><br /><embed style="width: 400px; height: 326px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-4303061419031514770&hl=en" flashvars=""></embed><br />He is a strong proponent of reducing government regulation. He says govt regulation tends to work for the industralist and government anyway cant do anything good so its better when they intervene the lease. He tends to believe government regulation restricts indiviual freedom. Again this point is highly debetable. Absence of government regulation in my opinion instead of freeing the poor, empower the rich as they have more voting power in this new setup. I understand over government regulation stifles innovation and leads to a bureucratic power strucutre where again the rich seek benefits. But this does not mean complete de-regulation and no government oversight as that leads to corporations exploitation of labor, communities, enviornment. There needs to be a balance between the two and only government where - one person, one vote holds true to a large degree can represent interest of the poor.<br /><br />The discussion which follows brings up series of interesting points. Though in theory if everybody has equal power than free markets will benefit everybody but power strucutres are too squewed towards corporations & the rich for a free market setup to benefit everybody. The challenge I think is to device government regulation and control upto extent where the less powerful are represented, without giving the rich additional powers. I would highly recommend the documentary, especially the discussion.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-42128614932923659862007-01-06T23:00:00.000-08:002007-01-06T23:25:36.583-08:00Case Study: City of Atlanta Water Privatization<code>Cross Posted @ <a href="http://policymusings.blogpost.com">http://policymusings.blogspot.com</a><br /><br />This case study of city of Atlanta water privatization analyzes the reasons for the failure of water privatization in Atlanta and lessons to be learned from the failure for other cities which are considering privatizing their water services. It was done in collaboration with a bunch of folks.<br /><br />Case Study @ </code><a class="tabcontent" target="_blank" href="http://docs.google.com/View?docid=ddnrwjjv_7f5msvf">http://docs.google.com/View?docid=ddnrwjjv_7f5msvf</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-49630959534702133602007-01-05T16:35:00.000-08:002007-01-05T16:37:56.081-08:00Posts on corporationsHere are two new posts which are first among several case studies to be collected over time about corporations, privatization, development, international institutions ...<br /><br /><h3 class="post-title"><a href="http://policymusings.blogspot.com/2007/01/new-worker-scheduling-at-walmart.html">New Worker Scheduling at Walmart - Another way to exploit workers and be more "efficient"</a></h3><br /><h3 class="post-title"><a href="http://policymusings.blogspot.com/2007/01/corporations-human-lives-vs-profit.html">Corporations: Human Lives vs Profit? Winner: Profit</a></h3>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1149967363685441562006-06-10T12:22:00.000-07:002006-06-10T12:22:43.703-07:00Schools, reservations, vouchers and usWhile the bogey of reservations in higher education has created many entrenched groups clamoring for or against it (with apparently little middle ground), many interesting developments have passed quietly in the primary and basic education sector, which perhaps needs the most urgent reform. <br /><br />The Free and Compulsory Education Bill, which, if executed well could have truly made a difference to the mass of underprivileged, undereducated children of India, has pretty much been scuttled by our lawmakers. The Central government has washed its hands off the bill, and instead the current proposal intends to pass on the proposals to the states, which can then individually act on it. There was also a proposal to reserve 25% of all seats in private schools in India for children from disadvantaged/underprivileged sections. <br /><br />The proposal concedes the fact that the government schooling system is in shambles, and parents, if they can afford it, will send their kids to a hole-in-the-wall private school rather than a government school. Gone are the days when people could expect a good education in government schools (many of our parents went to government schools, and went on to become engineers, doctors, academics, scientists and the like). Yet this new proposal (of 25% reservations in private schools) has its own concerns. <br /><br />This proposal though typically invokes three types of reactions amongst people. One is outright dismissal of the idea, and the dogged refusal to concede that all is not well with primary education in India, that social inequities are entrenched and perhaps even reinforced in schools, and that often getting an education in a government school is as good as no education at all. However, many people belong to one of two other groups. Both groups are in complete agreement that the primary education sector is in an unhealthy state, and that government schools are failing miserably to impart a quality education. This is not due to teachers’ salaries (see an <a href=http://balancinglife.blogspot.com/2006/01/and-how-do-teachers-become-accountable.html>earlier post</a>). It is also not due to the government not being <I>capable</I> of imparting good education. The Kendriya Vidyalayas, Sainik schools and some central schools still do a good job. But most schools are terrible. The need for reform and new alternatives is apparent to both groups. Yet one of these groups favors the reservation being extended in to private schools, the other does not.<br /><br />Those who oppose it instead suggest an incentive based model. Their argument is that any coercion is not acceptable, and will result in further dividing the haves and have-nots. It is also the government’s job to provide good education to the masses, not the role of a private school (though educational institutions in India cannot be “for profit). Instead, if the government provided economic incentives to private schools to become more inclusive, they believe the schools might. An incentive might perhaps be some form of tax-breaks to schools for percentages of underprivileged students studying in it. Another proposal is a “voucher scheme”, where poor parents are given government vouchers that can be “cashed” only by schools, as fee payments. Even if private schools deny opportunities for kids of parents with vouchers, the market will observe that there is a clear opportunity for new schools that accept vouchers to be built, and these will serve the purpose of providing good education to the underprivileged. <br /><br />Those who would accept it do not accept it outright, as an only solution. But, in this case, it is mostly “some effort is better than no effort”. They also raise some valid points. In an ideal world, the government would move towards a good central schooling system, where schools serve areas, and all children from the area study there. This would enforce social mixing of all children in the area, and “have-nots” will study with “haves”, decreasing discrimination. There is a greater likelihood of better education being imparted. However, in the absence of any government effort to do any such thing, extending reservations in private schools might ensure that at least there’s a chance of underprivileged students getting a decent education. Most also agree that the school should not bear the expense of these students, but the state must. They believe economic incentive or voucher system, though conceptually good, will fail in an Indian system. In the Indian system, with its still very rigid and prevalent class mores, educational institutions are unlikely to voluntarily accept any inclusion. The urban middle class will baulk at the though of their kids studying with kids from slums, and will not allow schools to include these children, even if the government gives schools some economic incentives. They will be willing to pay more than voucher amounts to schools, to ensure that the schools their kids study in remain “elite”, or “better”. Even if new schools come up that accept vouchers, it may be that only underprivileged kids with vouchers will study in it, creating or perpetuating a class system, without assimilation or mixing of groups. 25% reservations in schools might still perpetuate inequities (since the underprivileged will remain a minority), but some effort is better than nothing.<br /><br />My own take is that in both these stands undoubtedly have valid and forceful arguments. However, both are based on anecdotal reasoning, or arguments by analogy. By saying “the Indian middle class will not accept poor students studying with their kids”, you are only creating a <I>hypothesis</I>. It remains the same if you say “vouchers will provide incentives for schools to accept all students”. Again, a hypothesis. <br /><br />Now, a <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis>hypothesis</a> is not just a statement or opinion. It is a reasoned explanation of a phenomena or observation, usually based on some evidence. However, any hypothesis needs to be tested to be proven to be correct. In this case, both arguments could even fall in to the trap of <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_Razor>Occams Razor</a>. The Indian middle class thinks it is beneath them to mix with the lowest strata, therefore all schools that use vouchers to enroll underprivileged students will not have a mix of students from all classes is fallacious. Similarly, saying that vouchers will enable all students to gain access to education is also not as straightforward as it sounds. My own view is that the only way we’ll know is if there is an independent verification of both suggestions, perhaps by selecting say two districts with similar socio-economic conditions, and trying these two systems for a sufficient period of time (five years? Ten?). Or use other means of data collection, with data that will simulate the Indian system the closest. But these things take time, commitment and effort. Do we have that?<br /><br />Any views (except flaming) are welcome.<br /><br />Some (quick reading) on the topic <a href=http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?autono=93944&leftnm=3&subLeft=0&chkFlg=>here</a>, <a href=http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/22/stories/2006052207691200.htm>here</a>, <a href=http://www.infochangeindia.org/EducationItop.jsp?section_idv=5>here</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1148974059662875772006-05-30T00:26:00.000-07:002006-05-30T00:27:39.690-07:00TISS report on farmer suicide in MaharastraA TISS study on farmer suicide on request of High Court. It has some important conclusions about minimum support prices in India (which are lower than cost of production in India, in many cases 50% less), investment in agriculture by govt (which has been steadily decreased to 1.6% of GDP), rural credit system in India (even today more than 50% of agri. loans are from private sources).<br /><br />It touches some of the broader macroeconomic issues but not in detail.<br /><a href="http://www.tiss.edu/Causes%2520of%2520Farmer%2520Suicides%2520in%2520Maharashtra.pdf">http://www.tiss.edu/Causes%20of%20Farmer%20Suicides%20in%20Maharashtra.pdf</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1148327821660334842006-05-22T12:57:00.000-07:002006-05-22T14:13:45.506-07:00Meeting the challenge of Mandal IIThis is a two part series looking into<br />a) Social distribution of current graduates 20 or above<br />b) Defining "merit"<br />c) Proposing a new model for affirmative action.<br /><br />http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/22/stories/2006052202261100.htm<br />http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/23/stories/2006052305841100.htm<a href="http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/22/stories/2006052202261100.htm"></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1148262285775082662006-05-21T13:42:00.000-07:002006-05-22T14:13:12.143-07:00World Trade Talks & Agricultural SubsidyRecently in Sangati we started discussions on World Trade Policy, especially how it impacts developing and third world countries. Its a very interesting topic and one of great importance to almost everyone as these talks have the potential of changing livelihood options for millions (maybe billions).<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Brief History:</span><br />After the second world war numerous world-wide institutions came into existence. The important ones relating to trade/finance were the World Bank, IMF and <a href="http://www.ciesin.org/TG/PI/TRADE/gatt.html">GATT</a>. All these institutions were set up by the developed nations with different objectives. The objectives varied from funding post-war recovery to opening up trade among nations. GATT (General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs) was designed to provide an international forum that encouraged free trade between member states by regulating and reducing tariffs on traded goods and by providing a common mechanism for resolving trade disputes. Intially only developed countries were part of GATT. By 1980's most of the developing countries were members of GATT but the discussion agenda was dominated by developed countries. Developed countries wanted developing countries to lower tariffs and other barriers so that their corporations could trade in develping countries more easily. GATT's intial agenda dealt only with trade in goods The last round for GATT talks - the Uruguray round - increased the scope of GATT by signing an agreement on Intellectual Property Rights at the behest of the developed nations. By mid-1990's GATT gave away to <a href="http://www.wto.org/index.htm">WTO</a> (World Trade Organization). WTO covers trade in goods, services, IPR and almost everything. Almost all countries in the world - barring few are part of WTO. As per WTO site its a platform for multi-lateral trade talks and its goal is to improve welfare of people pf member countries.<br /><br />More detailes about GATT can be found at <a href="http://www.ciesin.org/TG/PI/TRADE/gatt.html">http://www.ciesin.org/TG/PI/TRADE/gatt.html</a><br /><br />Developed vs Developing Countries<br /><br />Developed countries are interested in opening up services like financial services, goods trade and in imposing intellectual property rights through WTO. The developing world has a nascent or almost non-existent services industry + they are technological disadvantage to developed world. So they are opposed to opening up services, because developed world corporations will crush the local industry. Developing world wants that developed countries open up agriculture and low end manufacturing trade for them. These are sectors where developing countries have an advantage and most of their population is involved in. But developed nations have maintained very high argiculture tariffs making it almost impossible to export to them. But they are more bigger issues in agriculture trade as explained below.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">WTO Round of Talks: <span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></span></span><br />The Doha round of talks seem to be stuck on agriculture. In its last few meetings WTO members havent being able to come up with an agreement on this issue because of strong disagreements between developed and developing world. So whats the crux of the problem?<br /><br />In short, a farmer in developed world gets huge subsides through their respective gevernements and can afford to sell their products in international market at substantially low rates. A farmer in developing country or under-developed countries doesnt get these level of subsidies and is unable to sell their produce in international market at rates offered by developed countries farmers. So their produce is not competetive to be sold in international market. So they are forced to sell at very low profits or below their production costs.<br /><br />Plus, developed countries have very high barriers in form of tariffs for imported agricultural produce. So these markets are virtually closed for many agricultural goods for the entire world.<br /><br />In addition, import tarrifs for agricultural goods in many developing countries are not high. So local farmers have to compete with imported subsidized produce from developed countries.<br />This means farmers lose out on their local markets also.<br /><br />Why is this a BIG problem?<br /><br />In developing countries and especially the under-developed countries agriculture is one of the main occupations and more than 50% of the population is dependent on that. These farmers have very few alternate livelihood options and lack of social security incentives. Subsides offered in developed world kill the only area of trade where they have more expertise as compared to developed world.<br /><br />In upcoming blogs I will go in detail on specific case studies like, EU & Sugar Subsidy, US & Cotton Subsidy, Japan & Rice Subsidy. The issue is far more intricate than the above explanation implies and hopefully details will try to clear those. Once its clear how the subsidies impact poor in the developing world, we will try to look at reasons why developed world govt are so opposed to removing them.<br /><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1147127679207887992006-05-08T15:34:00.000-07:002006-05-08T15:34:39.333-07:00Corporate Subsidy - SEZ land allotmentHumongous amount of land are being allocated at concessional rates for setting up SEZ's by corporations. Another example of "unmentioned" corporate subsidy.<br /><br /><a href="http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1521678.cms">SEZs give rise to new-age landlords- The Economic Times</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1147117358634988732006-05-08T12:42:00.000-07:002006-05-08T12:52:12.420-07:00Corporate SubsidyAll across India, in name of development/jobs, private corporations are given land at concessional rates or free. This is true from software parks in South or industries in Orissa or the topic of discussion below Reliance in Punjab. One example of corporate subsidy being offered by the poor state/central governments.<br /><br />Earlier I had pointed on blog about SEZ (Special Economic Zones) bill, which is full of corporate subsidies.<br /><br />Who pays for this? Ultimately the state, the tax payers.<br /><br />At what Cost? State govts which cant fund "agraian crisis" due to lack of funds (Maharastra), who have huge budget deficits pay these subsidies.<br /><br />Who cares? Almost no one, because very few seem to be directly affected. This though smaller in proportion earlier has been rapidly rising with the new wave of "development".<br /><br />I am not against development or new industrial parks or things coming up. But these are for-profit corporations and if they really feel worth it they can invest the money and buy up land at market rates. After all corporations are all for market to work and no government interference so why doesnt the principle apply here.<br /><br />These are some arguments for doing this: like new jobs are created in the area, new taxes will be collected and so on. Agreed. But there should be transparency in how much subsidy the govt gives for these purposes and needs to be evaluated is it worth it?.<br /><br />http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060508/main4.htm<br /><br /><a href="http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060508/main4.htm">The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News</a>: "Punjab out to ‘gift’ land to Reliance<br />Crucial meeting today<br />Sarbjit Dhaliwal<br />Tribune News Service<br /><br />Chandigarh, May 7<br />The Punjab Government is all set to offer the premium land worth several hundred crores to Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) for a song. A high- level meeting in this regard has been convened by the Chief Secretary, Mr K.R. Lakhanpal, tomorrow in his office.<br /><br />Among others, who have been asked to attend the meeting include the Principal Secretary, Industries, the Managing Director of the Punjab Agro Industries and the Secretary of the Punjab Mandi Board.<br /><br />What is being offered on a platter to the RIL is a piece of a 20-acre land at Mohali. The land belongs to the Punjab Mandi Board and was purchased by it about 18 years ago. The land is just close to the railway station, a prime location.<br /><br />Of course, the Punjab Mandi Board is opposing the sale of the land to the RIL at a price it was acquired 18 years ago. “At present the worth of the land, if it is sold by earmarking plots, is worth Rs 200 crore. However, if the land is developed as a commercial site and sold for showrooms, it can fetch a price up to Rs 1,000 crore', say real estate analysts.<br /><br />However, when this land was acquired by the Mandi Board, its price was only Rs 2 crore. The government has"Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1146606727975536322006-05-02T14:52:00.000-07:002006-05-02T14:52:07.976-07:00Electricity Privatization in Delhi<a href="http://www.thehindu.com/2006/04/30/stories/2006043012130300.htm"> Jan Sunwai on power, water crisis sought</a><br /><br /><i>Power privatization in the Capital a `miserable failure' </i><table width="800"><tbody><tr><td valign="top" width="448"><li><br /></li><li><i>Option for consumers to choose new meter demanded </i></li><li><i>Selling price of power `exorbitantly' high</i></li></td></tr></tbody></table>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1146606647864597902006-05-02T14:50:00.000-07:002006-05-02T14:50:47.996-07:00The Hindu : Opinion / Leader Page Articles : Of hi-tech, low efficiency, and mallsA good articulation of development debate in India.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/03/stories/2006050305061000.htm">The Hindu : Opinion / Leader Page Articles : Of hi-tech, low efficiency, and malls</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1146062613427547472006-04-26T07:38:00.000-07:002006-04-26T07:43:33.460-07:00Some thoughts on corporate fundingRecently, the issue of approaching corporations for funds came up at an Asha meeting. What was interesting about it was the absence of much discussion on the issue. Very little was said, most people didn’t seem very opposed to the idea and probably had not thought about it enough.<br /><br />What's wrong with corporate funding, the question arises. Clearly, more funding means more projects, higher levels of monetary involvement in various aspects of our projects including infrastructure and so on. And corporate funding is just another source of funding, the argument goes. More dollars in the bank using which we can do more things. I suspect many of us would see no issue here. What indeed<em> is</em> the problem with corporate funding? Oh sure, there are those who hate corporations and all that, but darn, they’re just raging leftists who can never take a balanced, objective view of things, who think with their heart more than their brain.<br /><br />Yet the issue is critical in my opinion. Let me state my position first – I am opposed to corporate funding. Since there are many doctrinally assumed reasons for why one might be opposed to corporate funding, let me start with what are <strong>not</strong> some of the reasons for my position. No, it's not out of ethical considerations, even though I am opposed to corporations as an institution. They are fascist structures, totalitarian institutions of the worst kind, vested with enormous power by the state. However, owing to this very power, they are omnipresent. They dominate every walk of life. If I were to make a list of how dependent my life is on them, the list would be endless - beginning with food to medicine to where I work to search engines to book stores to sources of entertainment, etc. At the risk of digressing, let me hasten to add that my opposition to corporations coupled with my rather direct dependence on them does not make me a hypocrite. Why am I raising this issue, you might ask. Well, there are many that hold what is to me a rather strange point of view – that since one is so dependent on this magnificent institution, one must therefore feel obliged to not oppose or criticize it (I will leave you to reflect upon the deep-rooted totalitarian strains behind this point of view).<br /><br />Back to the original point, I do hate 'em. But that is not why I'm opposed to their funding. In fact, I have no problem with using matching funds, using corporate resources such as machines, office-space and software for non-profit work (imagine doing our non-profit work without the web, google and all!). We cannot choose the world we live in, after all. Since the world is dominated by an institution and since we have to live in this world, it follows quite naturally that we use the institution to our ends as much as possible.<br /><br />No, that is not the point at all. My opposition to corporate funding stems from something different. Note first that all said and done, funding is important. After all, it does substantially widen the scope of things you can do. It helps you dream bigger. It helps broaden the impact of our work. But, and this is often missed, this comes with a price. I strongly feel once an organization grows accustomed to a certain level of funding and the things that go with it, it makes it much harder to accept or even consider a lower level of funding. The threat of donors withdrawing, of the same money not being raised the next year, becomes real. Whether we like it or not, this becomes a big consideration in whatever we do. In other words, there is a rather significant hidden cost that we must bear in mind in planning our funding strategies, namely the burden of <strong><em>renewability</em></strong> – how easily can the funds be renewed?<br /><br />It is especially critical to keep this in mind if as an organization, we seek to constantly challenge our approach and even change strategy if needed (in short, if we’re serious about socio-economic change). Just imagine the constraints that funding would impose on you should you wish to change direction. Taking the example of Asha, say we wish to switch to a more activist role as an organization. Say we wish to broaden our focus, to go beyond education. Say we wish to allow Asha volunteers to be grass-root social workers. Well, these are all significant changes in the way the organization is structured and we have to understand that these changes will be that much harder to achieve if the burden of fund renewability is high. No matter that an overwhelming majority of volunteers feels it is the right thing to do.<br /><br />Now, corporate funding is usually huge and unlike individual donations which are spread out among many individuals, corporate funding can easily be concentrated in few hands. Moreover, it is worth recalling that corporations never donate out of philanthropic motivations. That is legally prohibited. No, I’m not kidding. That is legally prohibited. To them, it is a public-relations exercise. Why does this matter, you ask. We get the money, who cares what the donor’s motives were; perhaps it was tax deductions; who cares? Again that is not the point. The issue is that the corporation’s commitment to the cause is weak, by its very definition. Well, that clearly implies the corporation might easily switch the cause to which it is contributing. The switch is determined purely by public relations, things like what is a hot topic, where is media attention higher, etc.<br /><br />As a result, the burden of renewability that corporate funding carries is much, much, much more. We will be effectively held hostage to it. <em>That</em> to me is the crux of why corporate funding is undesirable. And this applies not just to dollar contributions. Say tomorrow Asha decides to seriously take up sending learning aids, on a large scale, to all its projects. And say a corporation is willing to contribute for free. We ought to be very careful before accepting, for exactly the above reasons. In fact, I would oppose it.Raghav Kaushikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04395645274625313974noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1144180137577969282006-04-04T12:48:00.000-07:002006-04-04T12:48:57.773-07:00The Price Of Being A Woman: Slavery In Modern India<a href="http://www.countercurrents.org/gen-huggler040406.htm">The Price Of Being A Woman: Slavery In Modern Iindia By Justin Huggler</a>: "<br /><br /><span style="font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><strong><span style="font-size:180%;">T</span></strong>he desire for sons has created a severe shortage of marriageable young women. As their value rises, unscrupulous men are trading them around the subcontinent and beyond as if they were a mere commodity<br /><br /></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1142887087441669982006-03-20T12:38:00.000-08:002006-03-20T12:38:07.650-08:00Water Management: As disputes over water linger, India faces a sponge bath future<a href="http://www.indiatogether.com/2006/mar/env-water.htm">India Together: As disputes over water linger, India faces a sponge bath future - 20 March 2006</a>: "WATER MANAGEMENT<br />Sponge bath future<br />Maharashtra's latest step towards water management has raised a large controversy, pitting strong views against one another. But lost amidst the arguments is an important fact - the solutions for our water crises are not going to be easy, because we've left ourselves very few options."Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1142035613313960522006-03-10T16:06:00.000-08:002006-03-10T16:06:53.350-08:00SEZ: The high cost of 'easy' foreign exchange - 9 March 2006<a href="http://www.indiatogether.com/2006/mar/eco-freezones.htm">India Together: The high cost of 'easy' foreign exchange - 9 March 2006</a><br /><br /><span class="sh"> A new sop came into effect for net-foreign exchange earning businesses in designated export zones from February 10 -- a 15-year income tax holiday. But are the costs of the revenues foregone worth the claimed benefits of more investment and jobs? <span class="shh"> M Suchitra </span> examines the reality and does not find a rosy picture.</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1139792980438518832006-02-12T17:08:00.000-08:002006-02-12T17:09:40.456-08:00A study in contrast - SEZ bill and RTE billSome background:<br /><br />SEZ (Special Economic Zone) Act:<br /> Special Economic Zone Act 2005, is a act which stipulates rules for setting up these zones and incentives offered by the government. SEZ can be established anywhere within the country (there are some size restrictions) and units setup within these will get special incentives. The major incentives include: 1. Single window clearance for central and State laws. 2. Special infrastrucutre within SEZ. 3. SEZ are "foreign" for the purpose of custom duty. There wont be any duties on items exported to SEZ from India. 4. Units setup within the SEZ do not pay any income taxes and many other taxes for the next 10 years.<br /> Most of the incentives for the Act are listed out in the bill itself.<br /><br />http://sezindia.nic.in/sez-rules2006.pdf<br />http://www.sezindia.nic.in/SEZ%20Act,%202005.pdf<br /><br />RTE (Right to Education) draft bill:<br /> This is bill to provide fundamental right to education to children aged 6-14 years of age. Its lists out what it means to have fundamental right to education. The bill is very vague and lacks details. My opinion, is that is not at all remarkable enough to change the education system or status in India. There is nothing new in the bill.<br /><br /><br />There are several points I want to make:<br /> a) SEZ bill is a business friendly bill which is utterly unjustifiable. Why should SEZ units, which dont pay any taxes, get better infrastrucute and incentives while other businesses pay taxes and get bad infrastructure?. Doesnt this equate to what middle class say about slums. Middle class claim that slums dont pay any taxes and use the infrastructure (water, sanitation) and hence should be demolished. Why should we encourage SEZ's then?<br /><br /> b) There are only size restictions on what cant be an SEZ. So all big businesses and projects will now be setup in an SEZ and get all tax benefits (pay no taxes). So where will govt get its taxes from? Only the indiviuals?<br /><br /> c) I think of the SEZ bill as a huge corporate subsidy. Economists talk about reducing the various social subsidies. I dont see that much oppostion to this type of subsidy. Rather none of the articles refer to as subsidy. Isnt this a subsidy given to profit making businesses and why is it justified?<br /><br /> Now I come to the contrast between the two bills mentioned before:<br /> 1. SEZ bill has passed parliament and came into effect on Fb 10th.<br /> RTE bill is in draft form and there is no set time frame of when it will be presented. In 1993 Supreme court declared education as fundamental right and only in 2002 was the constitution changed and 2005 a draft bill prepared.<br /> Infact in SEZ case some 117 SEZ's are already approved.<br /> This shows how much govt has commitment towards the bill.<br /><br />2. SEZ bill is specific and all incentive details are listed out in it. RTE bill is vague and details are onitted. It omits things as to what provisions will be made for special children or what does it mean by neighbourhood or equitable education.<br /><br />3. There have been massive protests to get RTE bill out by many public groups and still govt hasnt moved. People are suffering and children lives are at stake. While SEZ bill will provide incentives to industry which is still growing at a healthy rate of > 10% (Industrial growth in India for past few years has been > 10%). So why the urgency to get the SEZ bill?.<br /><br />4. There are huge discussions in the planning commission on the financial impact of the RTE bill. State governments are opposed to funding the bill. But there havent been any committees set up to determine the financial loss in terms of lost taxes or businesses moving to SEZ's. No state govt are complaning. Infact state governments are eager to provide additional incentives. Our Commerce ministry is talking only about additional investment which this will bring and nothing about lost taxes.<br /><br />Though not a systematic study, this clearly shows how govts work/ busineeses work. Businesses when given subsidy are happy but when subsidy is given to poor or money spent on social sector they call it "populist" and talk about federal prudence and budget deficits.<br />Govts. (even our democratic one) work by means of lobbying and for busineeses. They only look after constituencies for short while at time of elections.<br /><br />This needs to change.<br /><br />I might look into doing a more systematic study of this later.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1138927944227224472006-02-02T15:53:00.000-08:002006-02-02T17:52:45.280-08:00Analysis: Right to Education BillOver the previous few weeks we in Asha have been discussing the Draft Right to Education Bill, 2005. The goal of this excercise is to come up with a Asha Seattle's stance on the bill. Different opinions were expressed in the discussions which were interesting to listen at times. In this multi-part blog entry I would put forth my opinions and discuss several background documents.<br /><br />Some background info:<br /><a href="http://www.prsindia.org/pdfs/Right_to_Education_Bill_2005_draft_14Nov05.pdf">Draft Bill</a><br /><a href="http://www.prsindia.org/pdfs/cabe_committee_report_on_free_and_compulsory_education_bill.pdf">CABE Committee report on free and Compulsory Education</a><br /><a href="http://www.prsindia.org/pdfs/cabe_report_on_girls_education_and_common_school_system.pdf" target="_blank" class="links_Text">CABE Committee Report on Girls’ Education and Common School System</a><br /><a href="http://www.prsindia.org/pdfs/legislative_brief_Right_to_Education_Bill_Nov_2005.pdf">Short good read on the bill & analysis</a> by <a href="http://www.prsindia.org/index.htm">PRS</a>.<br /><br />My critique of the bill is based on the following points:<br />1. Childrens Age Group:<br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Current Position</span>:<br /> The draft bill and the 93rd ammendment defines fundamental right to free and compulsory education for children in age group 6-14.<br /><span style="font-style: italic;">My View</span>:<br /> I think the right should include all children upto the age of 18 or until they have completed 12th grade.<br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Why: <span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-style: italic;"><br /><br />0-6 age group: </span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;"><br /></span></span></span> Education for the 0-6 age group might mean providing basic health and nurtrituion facilites to this age group. It might mean providing anganwadi and creches (day care facilites).<br />In India more than 45% of the children suffer from malnutrition in this age group. Scientifically it has been proved that this is among the most important period in a childs brain development.<br />The aim of the bill is to provide everybody with equitable quality of education. If this age group is not addressed in the bill a large propotion of the children will not get opputrunity of quality education as they are disadvantaged before they reach the age of 6.<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />14-18 age group:<br /></span>One of the goals of education is to equip children with means to live a fulfilling life which includes providing some sort of skills to earn livelihood. Education for 14-18 age group can be tailored to provide such skills in form of education to go for higher studies or additional vocational education.<br /><br />There are several other reasons like:<br />- In the 1993 Supreme Court Judgement in case of Unnikrishnan vs State of Andrha Pradesh the court recognized the right of education for upto 14 years of age and from 14-18 age group depending on the financial ability of the state.<br />- India is signatory to the United Nations Resolution on Rights of the Child which recognizes the right to education for everybody upto 18 years of age.<br /><br />Critics of my argument may agrue that the govt. currently addresses the 0-6 age group through various schemes like ICDE scheme and its also part of the constitution as part of Article 45. But this doesnt make it a fundamental right for 0-6 age group children which the state is liable to. Is there any valid reason for this age group not being addressed in the bill?. None. Its just lack of political will. The financial commitment on the govt by extending the bill to include 0-18 age group is not signficant if there is political will.<br /><br />2. Government's Commitment:<br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Current Stand:<br /> </span>The government will provide neighorbood schools in all areas within 3 years and till then provide transportation charges for children to the schools.<br /> Free education is vaguely defined as govt schools will not charge any fees.<br /> Quality of education is defined mostly in terms of accesibility to schools.<br /><span style="font-style: italic;"><br />My View:<br /> </span>I think the government should provide quality neighborhood schools in all areas within 1 year.<br /> I think governement should in addition provide a) free textbooks b) uniform c) transportaion charges if any d) any other expenses incurred on education by children of lower income families.<br /> Within one year government should ensure that all govt schools are of the same level in terms of insfrastructure (building, teacher's education, teacher-student ratio etc) as today's Kendriya Vidyalaya schools. Within 3 years per-child expenses on education in all schools should be comparable to KV schools today. Govt should setup strict evaluation mechanism for monitoring how schools are performing in terms of imparting education. This will mean looking beyond infrastructure to things like children learning standards in schools. The bill should include provisions by which Govt can be held responsible if it doesnt acheive the above in stated time frame.<br /><br />Why:<br /> I believe "Everybody should get equal opportunity for education". No child should be denied quality education. Education for all should be a priority as it has been ignored for many years.<br /> Critics may argue that this is overly ambitious. Is it?. Just look at the Golden Quadrilateral project or the National Highway project. The govt considered it a priority and within a few years we have roads comparable to free ways in America. So I am sure it can be done.<br /> Oh we dont have money, the other argument will go. Do we really dont have money?. The government is spending a lot on various infrastructure projects. I think education being the most important priority funds can be diverted towards that for 1-2 years. Also I beleive we dont really need that much money that other sectors will be completely ignored. A few places where untargeted subsidies are reduced/restructured (LPG!, fertilizer! ...) or special incentives given to rich industries (Special economic zones!, free/subsidized land!) removed will provide with the needed money. If Govt commits I am sure there wont be any trouble finding the money.<br /><br />In the next part I will cover my other criticisms to the bill. Comments/questions are welcome.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1138729905109346522006-01-31T09:51:00.000-08:002006-01-31T09:51:47.833-08:00India Together: The first Annual Survey of Education report - 31 January 2006<a href="http://www.indiatogether.org/2006/jan/edu-aser.htm#js">India Together: The first Annual Survey of Education report - 31 January 2006</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1136859076440984372006-01-09T18:10:00.000-08:002006-01-09T18:11:16.470-08:00And how do teachers become accountable?Most of us know that the state of education (or even literacy, which is a very different thing) in India is abysmal. The literacy rate (which comes with the usual fudge factor, and “if you can sign your name you’re literate”) in India is still around 70% for men, and 55 or so percent for women. Most of us have different opinions on why this is so, and different opinions on how to fix it.<br /><br />There are grand suggestions that all education in India be privatized (since parents prefer private schools anyway, given that most government schools are pathetic). Others want a rapid and massive increase in the money spent on education (currently ~4% of the GDP), or private schools bearing the burden and expense of mass education. Some others want higher salaries and better options for teachers. The first suggestion, of superceding the government completely in all education is quite impractical. In fact, the countries with the best educational levels have excellent public school systems (even the United States) which does serve especially the neglected or poorest sections of society. As far as spending goes, India’s spending is decent (when compared to most countries), and falls in between the middle spenders and the high spenders. And there’s no reason to believe that the same bureaucracy that hasn’t delivered in 58 years is suddenly going to do so. The money spent is probably not going to reach its destination. It hasn’t so far. Even though on paper there’s a primary school within 5 km of every village in most of the country the results are not impressive. And it would be against basic liberties to require private schools to bear the burden of mass education. As far as the third goes, actually government teachers are rather well paid. A teacher can expect to earn about Rs. 10000 a month, with some additional perks. Surprisingly, most private school teachers (especially in smaller schools, which form the vast majority) earn between Rs. 3000-Rs. 6000. Yet, their performance is far better. Why is that?<br /><br />At a very basic level (with out going in to other aspects) it boils down to two factors: accountability and power. <br /><br />Government schoolteacher jobs are highly coveted positions, and here’s why. If you are a government teacher in a village, you’re amongst the most well off, and the most powerful. And you don’t need to do any teaching in your life if you don’t want to. <br /><br />The position is yours for keeps. Appointments are highly affected by political or organizational connections. Once appointed, it’s almost impossible for you to be dismissed from service. There is little in place in terms of inspections (with inspectors actually having the power to dismiss teachers). Teachers are transferred routinely, but if the teacher is “connected”, he/she can avoid transfers, or transfer himself to the neighboring village, 3 kilometers away, and continue to be incompetent. There is no requirement that the teacher actually completes any part of the syllabus given, nor is there any incentive for students of a teacher to “pass” or “fail”. There are many reports of teachers never attending a single day of school, or even them having hired proxy’s to teach in the class (while they run their family business or whatever). Teacher absenteeism is massive (in some states absenteeism is up to 40%, with even more teachers present but not teaching). In contrast, in a private school, even for a teacher earning Rs 3000 a month, if the students perform badly, or there are clear cases of incompetence, the teacher is sacked. There’s no shortage of graduates in the country who want to teach. How good the education they impart is, that is a different matter. But we’ll keep the litmus test for now to students “passing” or being functionally literate.<br /><br />Accountability.<br /><br />Government school teachers also happen to be extremely powerful. Why? Because amongst other things, they become election poll officials during elections. And the schools under them become election polling booths. Clearly, the power they wield during an election is obvious. The teacher’s union is not just a small vote bank, but can actually determine the outcome of elections.<br /><br />Power, and no accountability.<br /><br />But how can this be fixed? The government has a number of proven and successful options. The first is obviously greater involvement of parents in the running of schools. If there is a parent association (at village levels) actively involved in the school’s functioning, with the power to question or even suspend teachers who do not attend classes or teach, teachers will be forced to do their jobs. Accountability is enforced, and learning indexes dramatically improve. Another proven method are different types of “voucher systems”. An example of a voucher system would be that all poor parents are given a “cash voucher”, with the clause that it can only be redeemed (for it’s value) as school fees for their kids. The parents would be free to enroll their kids in any school, but those vouchers can only be used in lieu of school fees. If there is a surplus, it cannot be encashed. This way the money is used in education alone.<br /><br />There may be other options as well, that are just as successful. These have been successfully implemented in different parts of the world to varying degrees, and have been successful. Gurucharan Das and Amartya Sen are just a few amongst many who have argued for such reform in their columns or writing.<br /><br />But how can any such policy be pushed forward in the Indian "system"? The teachers (as a single entity) are important for politicians, who are likely to be disinclined towards giving parents more control (this could cost them their seats). If parent bodies are formed in villages, will they be truly democratic? Will the bureaucracy honestly handle a voucher scheme, or will it be mired in inefficiency and corruption? Will teachers themselves try to oppose a voucher scheme (since that means the school will have to shape up or close down). <br /><br />Open forum: How can these basic changes be implemented within the Indian system? These changes (I believe) are far more important and effective and likely to have bigger consequences than privatizing all education, or doubling the spending on education.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1135796735441821112005-12-28T11:05:00.000-08:002005-12-28T11:05:35.513-08:00 Legislative Brief: Right to Education Bill <a href="http://www.indiatogether.org/2005/dec/edu-lbrighted.htm">Legislative Brief: Right to Education Bill - 28 </a>: "Right to Education Bill, 2005
<br />The constitution now guarantees the right to education to all children between the ages of 6 and 14, but how is this to be upheld? This legislative brief by M R Madhavan and Ruchita Manghnani presents the many questions before Parliament, as it discusses the Right to Education Bill that will give effect to the guarantee. "
<br />
<br />Some Excerpts:
<br />
<br />Key Features
<br />
<br /> * Right of Every Child
<br />
<br /> Every child between the age of 6 and 14 years has the right to full-time free and compulsory education in a neighbourhood school.
<br />
<br /> Non-enrolled children of age group 7-9 years have the right to be admitted in an age-appropriate grade within one year of the commencement of the Act, and of age group 9-14 years have the right to be provided special programmes that will enable them to attend such grade within three years.
<br />
<br /> Children with severe or profound disability, who are unable to attend a neighbourhood school, have the right to be provided education in an appropriate environment.
<br />
<br /> A child cannot be held back in any grade or expelled from a school till Class VIII. Any expulsion requires an order of the School Management Committee (SMC), which will be given only after all other corrective measures have been exhausted, and parents/guardians have been heard. The local authority will take steps to enroll such a child in another neighbourhood school.
<br /> * Responsibility of the State
<br />
<br /> The State shall ensure availability of a neighbourhood school for every child within three years. In case of non-availability, free transport or free residential facilities shall be provided. The state/UT government shall determine every year the requirement of schools, facilities, and their locations; establish additional schools as required; deploy teachers and create facilities for their training.
<br />
<br /> The State shall develop a mechanism to monitor enrolment, participation and attainment status of every child, and take corrective steps wherever required. Information in this regard will be made available in the public domain, including on an on-line basis.
<br /> * School Admissions
<br />
<br /> State schools and fully aided schools shall provide free education to all admitted children. Partly aided schools shall provide free education to at least such proportion of admitted children to the extent that government funds its annual expenses, subject to a minimum of 25%. Unaided schools and special category schools shall provide free education to at least 25% students; the government shall reimburse the school to the extent of the per child expenditure in government schools or the school fee, whichever is lower.
<br />
<br /> No school can conduct any screening procedure of any child or parents at the time of admission. Children will be selected for admission in a random manner. Capitation fees are prohibited.
<br /> * School Management
<br />
<br /> All non-government schools have to be recognized by a Competent Authority or shut down. The Bill specifies certain norms (such as teacher-student ratio, physical infrastructure etc) to be fulfilled by all schools as a pre-requisite for being recognized.
<br />
<br /> All State and aided schools are required to form School Management Committees (SMCs) with at least 75% of the members being parents/guardians, and the other members representing teachers, the community and the local authority. SMCs will manage the school, including the sanction of leave and disbursal of salary to teachers. The SMC/local authority shall also have the power to assess teachers' performance and impose minor punishment.
<br />
<br /> Teachers of state schools will be appointed to a specific school, and teachers already serving will be assigned to a specific school within two years. They will not be transferred from the school so assigned.
<br />
<br /> The teacher has the duty to transact and complete the curriculum, regularly assess the learning level of each child, provide supplementary instruction if required, and apprise every parent/guardian about the progress of learning and development of the child.
<br />
<br /> Teachers are prohibited from giving private tuitions. Teachers shall not be deployed for any non-educational purpose other than census, election and disaster relief duties.
<br />
<br /> * Content and Process
<br />
<br /> Schools and academic authorities formulating curriculum shall conform to the values enshrined in the Constitution. Schools should operate in a child friendly and child centred manner.
<br />
<br /> No child shall be required to appear at a public examination before completing Grade VIII. No child shall be awarded physical punishment in any form in school.
<br />
<br /> * National Commission for Elementary Education (NCEE)
<br />
<br /> NCEE shall be appointed by the President on the recommendation of a committee comprising the Prime Minister, Speaker of Lok Sabha, Minister for Human Resources Development and Leaders of Opposition in the two Houses of Parliament.
<br />
<br /> NCEE shall monitor all aspects, including quality of education. It will act as Ombudsman for this Act.
<br />
<br /> * Other Major Provisions
<br />
<br /> No person shall prevent a child from participating in elementary education. No person shall employ or engage a child in a manner that renders her a working child.
<br />
<br /> It is the responsibility of every parent/guardian to enroll his child/ward who has attained the age of 6 years and above in a school and facilitate her completion of elementary education (till Grade VIII). If a parent/guardian persistently defaults in discharging this responsibility, the SMC may direct him to perform compulsory community service by way of child care in the school.
<br />
<br /> Any person who has a grievance about the establishment, provisioning and management of a school may submit a written representation to the SMC/ local authority, which shall take appropriate action and inform the applicant within 90 days. If the applicant is unsatisfied with such action, she may submit a representation to such authority as prescribed (by the state/UT/central government), which shall take appropriate action and inform the applicant within 90 days.
<br />
<br /> The state/UT government may form a State-level Regulatory Authority for inquiring into grievances which remain unredressed even after the steps mentioned above.
<br />
<br /> A child shall be admitted in Grade I only after attaining the age of five years and ten months before the beginning of the academic year.
<br />
<br /> The Bill specifies penalties for persons and schools contravening the provisions regarding capitation fees, screening tests, recognition and preventing children from participating in elementary education.
<br />
<br /> * Finances
<br />
<br /> The central government shall provide financial assistance to state governments in accordance with such formula regarding sharing of costs as determined in consultation with state governments. The state government shall provide financial assistance to local authorities.
<br />
<br /> Though the draft Bill does not specify cost implications, a paper by the Central Advisory Board of Education (CABE) committee indicates a tentative estimation of total additional costs between Rs 3,21,000 crore and Rs 4,36,000 crore over six years.
<br />
<br />PART B: KEY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
<br />
<br />Objectives of the Bill
<br />
<br />The Bill has a clear objective that every child between the age of 6 and 14 years has the right to elementary education that is (a) free, (b) compulsory, (c) of equitable quality, and (d) available in her neighbourhood. This education will be available between Grade I and VIII, and provided at a recognized school satisfying specified norms. The Bill implies that there will be no non-formal schools and teachers will have to possess qualifications as defined in the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993. Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1135362643209812762005-12-23T10:24:00.000-08:002005-12-23T10:30:43.213-08:00Another School Barrier for African Girls: No ToiletThe same problem is present in virtually every developing country. A good article which looks at the problem from sub-saharan girls perspective, but the same things apply to girls in India, South East Asia, other places.<br /><br />BALIZENDA, <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/ethiopia/index.html?inline=nyt-geo" title="More news and information about Ethiopia.">Ethiopia</a> - Fatimah Bamun dropped out of Balizenda Primary School in first grade, more than three years ago, when her father refused to buy her pencils and paper. Only after teachers convinced him that his daughter showed unusual promise did he relent. Today Fatimah, 14, tall and slender, studies math and Amharic, Ethiopia's official language, in a dirt-floored fourth-grade classroom.<br /><br /><p>Whether she will reach fifth grade is another matter. Fatimah is facing the onset of puberty, and with it the realities of menstruation in a school with no latrine, no water, no hope of privacy other than the shadow of a bush, and no girlfriends with whom to commiserate. Fatimah is the only girl of the 23 students in her class. In fact, in a school of 178 students, she is one of only three girls who has made it past third grade.</p><p>Even the women among the school's teachers say they have no choice but to use the thorny scrub, in plain sight of classrooms, as a toilet. </p><p>"It is really too difficult," said Azeb Beyene, who arrived here in September to teach fifth grade. Here and throughout sub-Saharan Africa, schoolgirls can only empathize. In a region where poverty, tradition and ignorance deprive an estimated 24 million girls even of an elementary school education, the lack of school toilets and water is one of many obstacles to girls' attendance, and until recently was considered unfit for discussion. In some rural communities in the region, menstruation itself is so taboo that girls are prohibited from cooking or even banished to the countryside during their periods.</p><p><img src="file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/tulika/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot.jpg" alt="" /></p><p><a href="javascript:pop_me_up2('http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2005/12/22/international/20051223_ETHIOPIA_SLIDESHOW_index.html', '20051223_ETHIOPIA_SLIDESHOW', 'width=750,height=600,scrollbars=yes,toolbars=no,resizable=yes')">Photos</a><br /></p><p> But that impact is substantial. Researchers throughout sub-Saharan Africa have documented that lack of sanitary pads, a clean, girls-only latrine and water for washing hands drives a significant number of girls from school. The United Nations Children's Fund, for example, estimates that one in 10 school-age African girls either skips school during menstruation or drops out entirely because of lack of sanitation. </p><p>The average schoolgirl's struggle for privacy is emblematic of the uphill battle for public education in sub-Saharan Africa, particularly among girls. With slightly more than 6 in 10 eligible children enrolled in primary school, the region's enrollment rates are the lowest in the world. </p><p>Beyond that, enrollment among primary school-aged girls is 8 percent lower than among boys, according to the United Nations Children's Fund, Unicef. And of those girls who enroll, 9 percent more drop out before the end of sixth grade than boys. </p><p>African girls in poor, rural areas like Balizenda are even more likely to lose out. The World Bank estimated in 1999 that only one in four of them was enrolled in primary school.</p><p>The issue, advocates for children say, is not merely fairness. The World Bank contends that if women in sub-Saharan Africa had equal access to education, land, credit and other assets like fertilizer, the region's gross national product could increase by almost one additional percentage point annually. Mark Blackden, one of the bank's lead analysts, said Africa's progress was inextricably linked to the fate of girls.</p><p> "There is a connection between growth in Africa and gender equality," he said. "It is of great importance but still ignored by so many."</p><p>The pressure on girls to drop out peaks with the advent of puberty and the problems that accompany maturity, like sexual harassment by male teachers, ever growing responsibilities at home and parental pressure to marry. Female teachers who could act as role models are also in short supply in sub-Saharan Africa: they make up a quarter or less of the primary school teachers in 12 nations, according to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.</p><p>Florence Kanyike, the Uganda coordinator for the Forum of Women Educationalists, a Nairobi-based organization that lobbies for education for girls, said the harsh inconvenience of menstruation in schools without sanitation was just one more reason for girls to stay home.</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14959448.post-1135188913905849862005-12-21T10:12:00.000-08:002005-12-21T10:27:10.743-08:00WTO Hongkong - "Absymal" Failure?<span style=";font-family:times new roman;font-size:130%;" >Last week ended the WTO talks at Hong Kong - a part of the "Development Round" of talks. The write-up tries to cover in short what was achieved and what was lost - I will give a brief and people can dig into new stories for more detail. (I wont necessarily cover all the points & not to 100% accuracy as Trade is way too complicated).<br /><br />Before that guess an answer to these questions (taken from <a href="http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3201185.stm?markResults=true&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;a_01=3&a_02=3&a_03=4&a_04=2&a_05=4&a_06=2&a_07=4&a_08=3&x=53&y=19" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> BBC Quiz</a>) and mail back to me:<br /></span><span style="color: rgb(153, 153, 153);font-family:times new roman;font-size:130%;" ><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">1. How much of the price of a jar of instant coffee purchased in a supermarket goes to the coffee grower? Options A. 50% B. 20% C. 10% D.1%<br />2. How much do rich countries spend on subsidising their farmers everyday? Options A. $100m B. $500m C. $1 billion D. $3 billion</span></span><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:times new roman;font-size:130%;" ><span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="color: rgb(153, 153, 153);"></span></span><br /></span><table style="color: rgb(153, 153, 153);font-family:times new roman;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td valign="top"><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"></span><br /></span></td></tr></tbody></table><span style=";font-family:times new roman;font-size:130%;" ><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> </span>Goals:<br />Overall the goals of the "Doha" or "Development" round of talks was to focus on developing countries/their demands. The round overall has been not being going good after failures and deadlock at Seattle, Cancun, Singapore ...<br /><br />Most of the goals focused on reducing/eliminating the "agricultural" subsidies in the developed world - US, Japan & Europe mainly. A quote african delegation gave after the talks was illustrative of the amount of subsidies given in the developed world - </span><span style=";font-family:Arial,sans-serif;font-size:130%;" >"The situation will remain that it would be better to be a cow in Japan, subsidised for $7 per day, than to be a human being living in Africa". These subsidies have a whole lot of tampering affects - lots which are too difficult to even imagine.<br /><br />Hong Kong talks were meant to break deadlock on agricultural subsidies. Even before the talks started Europe was not ready to reduce these to a large extent - mainly France was opposing this. Though blame was given to Europe neither US or Japan wanted to cut subsidies sustantially. Infact US eliminated some subsides but through a back door created even more subsidies, saying technically they are not subsidies.<br /><br />What Happened:<br /><br />Almost everybody expected the talks to fail from starting. Europe came up with a new proposal to allow poorest countries (42 or so) to trade without any tarrifs. The proposal saw opposition from US and Japan as they wanted to protect Cotton & rice repectively for local market. It was passed with many exemptions to US/Japan. So its little help but not much. And guess who opposed this deal?. Some of the carrabiean and other poor countries - why? Figure out.<br /><br />Europe agreed to end "export" subsides(which are only 3.5% of Europe total subsidies) by 2013. But most poor countries felt this was too less.<br /><br />Some services & non-agricultural market were opened up in developing world. But not much. This was demand by the developed world. The poor countries opposed this but some fast developing countries like India/Brazil supported this.<br /><br />Protests: There were strong protests outside WTO talks with around 10,000 people participating. Some groups which had protested previously were now inside the conference room as they were invited and their views also heard.<br /><br />Going Forward:<br /><br />WTO atleast hasnt become completely irrelevant - though lost most of it credibility. This is bad in my opinion. If WTO falters the poor & developing world loses a platform where they can negotiate hard with the developed world. Bilateral/Multi-lateral trade agreements like NAFTA/CAFTA/ASEAN etc will become more prominent. In these platforms poor countries have less power to bargain or ask for anything and rich countries get huge benefits.<br /><br />This does not mean that poor/developing world should accept unfair agreements at WTO. But it means that they need to stand together and bargain harder and get agreements with developed world at this forum.<br /><br />Articles:<br /><a href="http://www.oxfam.org/en/programs/campaigns/maketradefair/index.htm" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.oxfam.org/en<wbr>/programs/campaigns/maketradefa<wbr>ir/index.htm</a><br />Deal at WTO - <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4539108.stm" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi<wbr>/business/4539108.stm</a><br />In Depth Coverage - <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/business/2004/world_trade/default.stm" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in<wbr>_depth/business/2004/world<wbr>_trade/default.stm </a><br /><br />There are many other articles all over the press - if you want anything specific and cant find ping me, I might be able to help.</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0