📰 Kashmir the single issue, says Imran
Army and the political leadership are on one page to take dialogue with India forward, says Pak. PM
•Pakistan’s Army and political leadership are on “one page” to take dialogue with India forward, said Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan on Wednesday at the ground-breaking ceremony for the Kartarpur corridor, where Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Bajwa was also present.
•The four-kilometre corridor from the border with India will allow pilgrims easy access when completed, and will be ready in time for Sikh founder Guru Nanak’s 550th birth anniversary on November 23, 2019.
•Speaking to an audience that included Union Ministers Harsimrat Kaur Badal and Hardeep Puri who travelled to Pakistan as envoys of the Indian government, Mr. Khan thanked them and Punjab Minister and Congress leader Navjot Sidhu in particular for his role in taking forward the Pakistani proposal for the corridor with New Delhi.
•“I want to say that today I as the Prime Minister [of Pakistan], my party, all our political parties, and our army are on one page. We want to move forward,” PM Khan told a large gathering of Sikhs from Pakistan and Sikh pilgrims from India.
•In a speech largely reaching out to the Indian government to “break the shackles of the past” and restart engagement, Mr. Khan also struck a discordant note on Kashmir, referring to the dispute as the “single issue” between India and Pakistan. India has maintained that terrorism sponsored by Pakistan is holding back the dialogue process. Asked about the reference, Ms. Badal toldThe Hindu that the PM’s remark didn’t change the Indian stand.
•“Kashmir is a part of India and that remains our position,” Ms. Badal said after the ceremony. “[PM Khan] has said he wants peace with India and I am sure we can work something out. Today is an auspicious start for that peace process, and I am sure that with the grace of Baba Nanak we can sort out things.”
📰 UGC’s new norms for recruitment
•Doctoral degree holders from the top 500 foreign universities are now eligible for direct recruitment as an assistant professor in Indian varsities, according to the UGC. According to the new recruitment norms, the top 500 ranking of the university shall be referred from four famous world university ranking systems — Quacquarelli Symonds, Times Higher Education rankings and the Academic Ranking of World Universities of the Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
📰 Without maternity benefits
The government’s maternity benefit programme must be implemented better and comply with the Food Security Act
•Yashoda Devi was five months pregnant with her third child when we met her in Jharkhand in June. She was in extreme pain. The doctor had told her that she was very weak and had advised her to improve her nutritional intake. But Ms. Devi did not have money to follow the doctor’s advice.
Not serving its purpose
•Ms. Devi was one of the 98 women we interviewed in the course of a small survey in 12 villages spread across two blocks of Jharkhand: Manika in Latehar district and Khunti in Khunti district. We enquired about the financial and physical hardships experienced by the respondents during pregnancy and delivery, and also studied the implementation of the Pradhan Mantri Matru Vandana Yojana (PMMVY), a maternity benefit programme, nearly one year after it was officially launched.
•Under the National Food Security Act (NFSA) of 2013, every pregnant woman is entitled to maternity benefits of ₹6,000, unless she is already receiving similar benefits as a government employee or under other laws. The PMMVY was announced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on December 31, 2016. Unfortunately, it violates the NFSA in several ways. First, the benefits have been reduced from ₹6,000 to ₹5,000 per child. Second, they are now restricted to the first living child. Third, they are further restricted to women above the age of 18 years.
•The scheme largely defeats the purpose it is supposed to serve: according to a recent analysis, it excludes more than half of all pregnancies because first-order births account for only 43% of all births in India. In our sample, less than half of the women met the PMMVY eligibility criteria. Among those who were eligible, a little over half had applied for maternity benefits.
•The application process is cumbersome and exclusionary: a separate form has to be filled, signed and submitted for each of the three instalments, along with a copy of the applicant’s mother-child protection card, her Aadhaar card, her husband’s Aadhaar card, and the details of a bank account linked to her Aadhaar number. The compulsory linking of the applicant’s bank account with Aadhaar often causes problems. Further, the PMMVY provides little assistance to women who lose their baby, because the successive payments are made only if the corresponding conditionalities are met.
Many hardships
•The worst form of hardship reported by pregnant women in our sample, among those related to lack of funds, was the inability to improve their nutritional intake or even to eat properly during pregnancy.
•Ms. Devi, during and before her second pregnancy, was working in someone else’s field where she was paid in kind (5 kg of grain per day). This time, as she was in pain, she was unable to work for wages during her pregnancy. This reduced the family’s income, already strained by the last delivery’s debts when they had to spend more than ₹12,000 by borrowing and selling assets. Ms. Devi said that if she had received maternity benefits under the PMMVY, she could have used the money to take care of her health and eat nutritious food as advised by the doctor. Like her, 42% of respondents in the sub-sample of women who were working for wages before pregnancy with an average wage of ₹126 per day of work could not work during their pregnancy and earned zero wages. In our sample, on average, respondents spent ₹8,272 on their deliveries alone. Half of the respondents who had spent money during delivery or pregnancy said that they had to borrow money to meet the expenses. It was also common for the families of the respondents to sell assets or migrate to cover these costs. The PMMVY could help protect poor families from these financial contingencies.
•The provision for maternity entitlements in the NFSA is very important for women who are not employed in the formal sector. The PMMVY, however, undermines this provision due to the dilution of the entitled amount and the exclusion criteria. Even in this restricted form, the scheme is yet to reach eligible women as the implementation record has been dismal till date. In our sample, 30 women had applied for maternity benefits, but none of them had actually received any PMMVY money. No doubt some women did receive PMMVY benefits in both districts by June (this was confirmed by the block offices), but the numbers were so small that none of them emerged in our sample. The scheme seems to be achieving very little for now, in Jharkhand at least. There is an urgent need for better implementation as well as for compliance of the scheme with the NFSA. Maternity benefits should be raised to ₹6,000 per child at least, for all pregnancies and not just the first living child.
📰 Dire strait: on Russia-Ukraine sea clash
Russia must be persuaded to lower tensions with Ukraine
•Russia’s capture of three Ukrainian naval ships and over 20 crew members in the disputed Azov Sea has refocussed international attention on the conflict on Europe’s eastern corridors. The rapid escalation in tensions following the flare-up is evident. Kiev has declared martial law and demanded that the sailors be treated as prisoners of war. A court in Russian-annexed Crimea, meanwhile, has ordered many of them to be held in pre-trial detention, charging them with illegally entering its territorial waters. Ukraine insists that the patrol of the Kerch Strait, where the vessels were impounded, was authorised under a bilateral agreement with Moscow. A new bridge over the strait that connects mainland Russia with Crimea has raised concerns about Moscow’s greater control and influence in the region. The latest incident coincides with the anniversary of the November 2013 Maidan Square protests in Ukraine demanding integration with Europe, which was the prelude to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine’s Crimea in 2014. The protracted conflict has so far claimed about 10,000 lives and displaced millions, and no lasting resolution is in sight. The 2014-15 Minsk peace accords prohibited air strikes and heavy artillery firing. But the dispute has dragged on into a smouldering low-intensity combat. The Ukraine-Russia conflict has also widened religious schisms. The independence granted to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church from the Russian entity in October was criticised by Moscow. In turn, the election this month of the legislatures of two breakaway enclaves of Kiev, with Moscow’s endorsement, drew criticism from Ukraine, leading European powers and the U.S. as violations of the Minsk accords.
•There has been renewed Western diplomatic pressure since the weekend’s skirmishes, with the UN Security Council and NATO calling on Moscow and Kiev to de-escalate tensions. But besides forcing Russian President Vladimir Putin to toughen his rhetoric vis-à-vis the big powers, the hardships from the economic sanctions since Crimea’s occupation have achieved little by way of confidence-building in the region. European powers are divided between those advocating greater diplomatic engagement with the Kremlin and others wanting to press with further sanctions to punish perceived Russian political interference. But there has been little appreciation of the provocation for Moscow from NATO’s continued expansion into the former Eastern Europe and the erstwhile USSR. The geopolitical imperative of greater engagement with Moscow has never been more urgent, as hawks in the U.S. administration make no secret of their preference for confrontation over dialogue. The recent escalations could serve well the leaders of both Russia and Ukraine to divert attention from the sagging popularity levels at home. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko faces a general election next year, which, it is widely forecast, he will lose. But the humanitarian situation arising from the continuing conflict brooks no delay in arriving at a speedy resolution.
📰 Protect indigenous people
Implementation of the various provisions to protect the tribals of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands has been poor
•The debates following the recent alleged killing of an American national, John Allen Chau, by the Sentinelese have put the spotlight on the vulnerability of an indigenous community that has lived for thousands of years with little contact with outsiders. The Sentinelese have been more fortunate than the Jarawas, though. The Andaman Trunk Road, among other projects, has cut into the heart of the Jarawa reserve, which has not only disturbed their ecological environment but has also changed their lifestyle and dietary habits and endangered them.
•There are four ancient Negrito tribal communities in the Andaman Islands (the Great Andamanese, Onge, Jarawa and Sentinelese) and two Mongoloid tribal communities in the Nicobar Islands (the Shompen and Nicobarese). Except the Nicobarese, the populations of the other tribes have reduced drastically over the decades.
From Nehru to now
•What has been India’s policy towards these tribals? Jawaharlal Nehru’s Tribal Panchsheel were the guiding principles after Independence to formulate policies for the indigenous communities of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Based on them, the Andaman and Nicobar Islands (Protection of Aboriginal Tribes) Regulation (ANPATR), 1956 was promulgated by the President. This Regulation protected the tribals from outside interference, specified the limits of reserved areas and said no land in a reserved area shall be allotted for agricultural purposes or sold or mortagaged to outsiders. Those violating the land rights of the tribals were to be imprisoned for one year, fined ₹1,000, or both. Despite this, there continued to be constant interactions between the tribals and settlers/ outsiders.
•A policy of non-intervention was also proposed by an expert committee on the directions of the Supreme Court. The committee submitted its report in July 2003. The trigger for this was a 1999 petition that sought to bring the Jarawas into the mainstream. The committee recommended protecting the Jarawas from harmful contact with outsiders, preserving their cultural and social identity, conserving their land and advocated sensitising settlers about the Jarawas.
•In 2005, nearly 50 years after it was promulgated, the ANPATR was amended. The term of imprisonment as well as the fine were increased. However, in the years in between, the Andaman Trunk Road had already ensured increased interaction with the tribals. In the case of the Jarawas, this had led to the spread of diseases, sexual exploitation, and begging. Similarly, a policy for protecting the Shompen tribes was released only in 2015. However, in spite of the 2005 amendment, videos of commercial exploitation of the Jarawas in the name of “human safaris” were widely reported in the media. Following this, the government amended the ANPATR yet again in 2012, creating a buffer zone contiguous to the Jarawa tribal reserve where commercial establishments were prohibited, and regulating tourist operators. Despite all these amendments and provisions, there continue to be numerous reports of civilian intrusion into the Jarawa tribal reserve.
International conventions
•International policy has changed over the decades. While the Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention, 1957, of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) insisted on an integrationist approach towards tribal communities, the 1989 convention insisted on a policy of non-intervention, “recognising the aspirations of these peoples to exercise control over their own institutions, ways of life and economic development.” India ratified the 1957 convention but has not ratified the 1989 convention. However, despite not signing it, India tried to tread the path of non-interference.
•Therefore it it puzzling that in August the government relaxed the restricted area permit (RAP) for 29 islands in the Andaman and Nicobar, including North Sentinel Island. If the government has decided to ease the restrictions in a phased manner, this could adversely affect the indigenous population in the long run. Such commercialisation of tribal spaces could lead to encroachment of land, as we see in other parts of the country. Considering the significance of the indigenous tribes of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, the government needs to reorient its priorities towards protecting them from outside influence. India needs to sign the 1989 convention of the ILO, and implement its various policies to protect the rights of the indigenous population. It should also make efforts to sensitise settlers and outsiders about them. That Chau was helped in his journey shows a lack of understanding about the Sentinelese. Only concrete efforts can prevent such an incident from happening again.
📰 Lancet urges response to heatwave exposure surge
Indians faced almost 60 mn heatwave exposure events in 2016, says journal
•Indian policy makers must take a series of initiatives to mitigate the increased risks to health, and the loss of labour hours due to a surge in exposure to heatwave events in the country over the 2012-2016 period, the Lancet Countdown 2018 report recommends.
•From 2014-2017, the average length of heatwaves in India ranged from 3-4 days compared to the global average of 0.8-1.8 days, and Indians were exposed to almost 60 million heatwave exposure events in 2016, a jump of about 40 million from 2012, the report released Thursday showed.
•Heatwaves are associated with increased rates of heat stress and heat stroke, worsening heart failure and acute kidney injury from dehydration. Children, the elderly and those with pre-existing morbidities are particularly vulnerable.
•Almost 153 billion hours of labour were lost globally in 2017 due to heat, an increase of 62 billion hours from the year 2000.
•Observing that a recent report “places India amongst the countries who most experience high social and economic costs from climate change”, the study makes several recommendations. These include identifying “heat hot-spots” through appropriate tracking of meteorological data and promoting “timely development and implementation of local Heat Action Plans with strategic inter-agency co-ordination, and a response which targets the most vulnerable groups.”
•The report prepared jointly with the Public Health Foundation of India also urges a review of existing occupational health standards, labour laws and sectoral regulations for worker safety in relation to climatic conditions.
•The India Meteorological Department had reported that from 1901 to 2007, there was an increase of more than 0.5°C in mean temperature, with considerable geographic variation, and climate forecasts by research groups project a 2.2-5.5°C rise in temperatures in northern, central and western India by the end of the 21st century.
•The number of hours of labour lost also jumped between 2000-2017 across India, the Lancet said.
Farm labour vulnerable
•For the agriculture sector alone, this rose to about 60,000 million hours in 2017, from about 40,000 million hours in 2000. Overall, across sectors India lost almost 75,000 million hours of labour in 2017, from about 43,000 million hours in 2000.
•The agriculture sector was more vulnerable compared to the industrial and service sectors because workers there were more likely to be exposed to heat.
•The findings are significant for India as agriculture makes up 18% of the country’s GDP and employs almost half the population. A recent World Bank report on South Asia’s hotspots predicted a 2.8% erosion of the country’s GDP by 2050, accompanied by a fall in living standards due to changes in temperature, rainfall and precipitation patterns.
•If the average global temperature rose by more than one degree Celsius from the present, India could “annually” expect conditions like the 2015 heat wave that killed at least 2,000, according to the ‘Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C,’ commissioned by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC), last month.
•Next week, the Conference of Parties — a compact of about 190 countries signatory to the UN treaties to address global warming — is set to begin talks in Katowice, Poland, to iron out a ‘rule book’ to implement the Paris Agreement of 2015. The agreement was a landmark accord, in which countries agreed to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by limiting the global temperature rise this century to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5°C.
📰 In a spirit of accommodation
The RBI, the RBI board and the government must understand the limits to which they can push each other
•The saying, ‘all’s well that ends well’, appears to be most appropriate in the case of the recent spat between the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the government. However, the agreement arrived at could as well have been settled before things went public. Even though the agreement itself has raised certain fresh questions, by and large it is a satisfactory one. Without going into the merits of the issues raised, two important questions have arisen, which relate to the relationship between the RBI and the government and between the RBI management and its board. Even if one cannot come to definitive conclusions, it is important to note the ramifications of the issues raised.
Earlier episodes
•Section 7 of the RBI Act, in a sense, sets out the relationship between the government and the RBI. This section gives the government the right to issue directions to the RBI in public interest. Strangely, the framers of the Act seemed to have had in mind frequent use of the section as it says: “The central government may from time to time give such directions....” Leaving that aside, it is a fact that the government had not issued such directions. But it does not mean that the government did not have its way. When Benegal Rama Rau resigned as RBI Governor in 1957 on an issue on which he differed from the government, Jawaharlal Nehru wrote to him: “You have laid stress on the autonomy of the Reserve Bank. Certainly it is autonomous, but is also subject to the Central Government’s directions... Monetary policies must necessarily depend upon the larger policies which a government pursues. It is in the ambit of those larger policies that the Reserve Bank can advise.”
•The tone of the letter was harsh. Similarly, some years later when another Governor, H.V.R. Iengar, raised the issue of ad hoc Treasury Bills, Finance Minister T.T. Krishnamachari said: “What to my mind is necessary is to ensure that Government policy is formulated in this respect after very full discussion with the Reserve Bank and that the latter is kept informed from time to time of any changes that Government feel called upon to make before they are made.”
•These episodes effectively set the tone and nature of the relationship between the government and the RBI. In one more instance, the RBI, in 1985, decided to allow banks the freedom to fix the interest rate on term deposits up to maturity of one year. The government was consulted before the circular was issued. Later, the government changed its mind. Of course, there was some uneasiness among public sector banks and the freedom given was not properly managed. The government wanted the RBI to withdraw the circular, which was done. Governor R.N. Malhotra and I, at the time, Deputy Governor of the RBI, agonised over the issue for several hours before writing the new circular withdrawing the earlier one. After issuing the new circular, I wrote to the Finance Ministry reiterating again why we had taken the earlier decision. Monetary policy measures were never announced without the concurrence of the Finance Minister.
•The recent change in the monetary policy framework setting up the Monetary Policy Committee and giving it full freedom to determine the policy rate is a giant step forward in terms of giving the RBI autonomy. Literally, the Finance Minister gets to know the decision along with others.
A distinction
•But it must be noted that the first step in this direction was taken by Manmohan Singh when he was the Finance Minister. When I approached him to do away with the system of the issue of ad hoc Treasury Bills which had the effect of monetising fiscal deficit, he readily agreed to this. It was this act of statesmanship by Dr. Singh which put the RBI on the road to autonomy. There is, however, a distinction between autonomy as a monetary authority and autonomy as a regulator.
•In the first case, autonomy has to be full once the mandate is given. In the second case, autonomy is somewhat blurred because the mandate is broad and vague. However, coming to the issues that were thrown up in the current spat, these are mostly operational and it would have been unwise for government to use Section 7 to issue instructions. It would have sent out the wrong signals both at home and abroad. It is good that the government has desisted from using Section 7. Nevertheless, one must say that Section 7 hangs like the sword of Damocles. It is important to have continuous and sustained dialogue, and an atmosphere of give and take is much needed.
RBI and board
•The second issue is about the relationship between the RBI management headed by the Governor and the board. The debate arose because of the contentious issues between the government and the RBI being referred to the board. The question that has been raised is whether the board as it is constituted today can discuss such issues and compel the Governor to act according to the majority view.
•In order to understand the relationship between the government and board, we have to go back to Clause 2 of Section 7, which says: “The affairs and business of the Bank shall be entrusted to a Central Board of Directors which may exercise all powers and do all acts and things which may be exercised or done by the Bank.”
•However, Clause 3 says: “Save as otherwise provided in regulations made by the Central Board, the Governor... shall also have powers of general superintendence and direction of the affairs and business of the Bank and may exercise all powers and do all acts and things which may be exercised or done by the Bank.”
•Some argue that Clause 3 abridges the powers of the board. To me, the right way of interpretation is that both the board and the Governor have concurrent powers in almost all matters. The board has members nominated by the Central government from various walks of life, including industry. It does create a problem. This can result in a conflict of interest because the actions taken by the RBI could directly affect their interest. Therefore, the tradition that had evolved is that the board has largely functioned as an adviser.
•Two things need to be clarified in this context. First, it is not as if the board has not passed resolutions on matters which are operational and policy oriented. The change in the Bank rate in the past had the prior approval of the board. In fact, in the weekly meetings of the RBI Board, the first resolution used to be on the Bank rate. But with the Governor’s concurrent powers, in the past, on occasions, the Bank rate had been changed without going to the board. Second, strictly speaking, the board has the powers to discuss and even pass resolutions, which have been done. But given the nature of the board and the interests of the members, it becomes difficult to let the board to take binding decisions.
Endnote
•It is, however, true that in the case of the Federal Reserve System in the U.S., the board does take decisions with voting if necessary. But then the nature of the board is very different. Section 7 is a mix of things. First, it gives powers to the board, and second, it gives powers to the Governor as well. The way the relationship between the board and the Governor has evolved over time in India is a good one. The board by and large has played an advisory role.
•Against this background, while the Governor can act on his own, he must listen to what the members feel and the sense of the board must be fully reflected in his actions. The crux of the problem is that the RBI, the board and the government must understand the limits to which they can push. A spirit of accommodation must prevail.
📰 Central bank recap: on Urjit Patel's deposition before parliamentary panel
Urjit Patel provides reassuring signals on NPAs and the RBI-Centre détente
•There are two important takeaways from the deposition of Reserve Bank of India Governor Urjit Patel before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance on Tuesday. First, the banking industry is over the hump on non-performing assets (NPAs), which peaked in the quarter ending March 2018 at 11.18% of advances. Both gross and net NPAs have registered a decline for two consecutive quarters — June and September 2018. Crucially, there has been a sharp fall in slippages (fresh NPAs added to the existing heap) from 7.3% in March 2018 to 3.87% in September. This is certainly good news as it indicates that the skeletons are mostly out of the cupboard now. Of course, there is still the onerous task of resolving the bad loans stock, which is at a little over ₹10 lakh crore now. Profitability of banks will continue to remain under stress as they provide for the bad loans in their books and/or take hair-cuts on recoveries through the insolvency process. Meanwhile, banks will also have to be wary of their small loans portfolio, especially those made under the Pradhan Mantri Mudra Yojana, which already add up to ₹6.77 lakh crore. These will need close monitoring.
•The second important aspect of Mr. Patel’s deposition was his spirited defence of the RBI’s autonomy. Though he was careful not to say anything that would break the détente forged by the Centre and the central bank at its last board meeting on November 19, he made three forceful points: that the RBI’s autonomy is important to protect depositors’ interests; monetary policy has to be the exclusive domain of the RBI; and its reserves are central to maintaining its AAA rating. These statements are probably aimed at nipping in the bud any attempts to change the governance structure of the central bank. After the last board meeting, there have been reports that the Centre is planning to push for board committees to be set up to “assist” the RBI in the discharge of its work. Monetary policy is anyway the preserve of the Monetary Policy Committee created two years ago under the RBI Act, but there are other equally important functions which the Centre may be attempting to control through the board. The issue of autonomy is clearly the gorilla in the room and driving it out is not going to be an easy task. Yet, for the Centre and the RBI there is no alternative but to continue talking on this subject even while ensuring that it does not cast a shadow over their other respective roles and responsibilities. The issue of RBI autonomy is not something that first emerged during this government’s tenure, nor is it likely to be solved in its remaining tenure.
📰 New data show economy never hit high-growth phase
India’s recovery from global financial crisis took longer than previously thought
•India’s GDP growth never crossed over into a ‘high-growth’ phase of above 9% in the last decade or more, new back series data from 2004-05 released by the government on Wednesday show. The data also show that India’s recovery from the global financial crisis took longer than previously thought.
•The government, in 2015, changed the methodology and the base-year for the computation of its economic performance, moving towards a Gross Value Added (GVA) method from the earlier GDP calculations and bringing forward the base-year to 2011-12 from 2004-05. This, however, meant that the newer estimates could not be compared with the older data. The back-series release on Wednesday provides the growth estimates for previous years using the new methodology.
•The new data release shows that GDP growth during the UPA years averaged 6.7% during both UPA-I and UPA-II. The old series had pegged these at about 8.1% and 7.46%, respectively. In comparison, the current government has witnessed an average GDP growth rate of 7.35% during the first four years of its term.
•“The major takeaway from the data is that the economy doesn’t seem to have recovered from the global financial crisis as quickly as previously thought,” former Statistics Secretary and Chief Statistician of India TCA Anant told The Hindu. “That is something we should look much closer at.”
•“There was a general point about the manner in which we did the old computations which was generally very insensitive to current data,” Mr. Anant added. “There were a number of ways in which the old series computations simply did not measure current changes quickly enough, which the new series in fact does.”
•Further, he explained, sectors such as mining and manufacturing show that the impact of the financial crisis lingered.
Mining sector
•“The other element is that the behaviour of the mining sector, which not only affected the mining sector but also trade segment, are elements in it,” Mr. Anant said. “Remember the de-coupling happened… there was a collapse in mining which happens more or less immediately post the financial crisis. We don’t see this in any of our data till 3-4 years later. The new series data captures that. The manufacturing sector shows growth falls off fairly quickly after a one-year boost after the crisis.” The new data shows that manufacturing sector growth plummeted to 4.7% in 2008-09 and then grew sharply to 11% in 2009-10. Thereafter, however, growth slowed to 3.1% within two years and remained below 6% till 2014-15. The mining sector, similarly, seemingly recovered from the contraction seen in 2008-09 for a couple of years, but then again plummeted to a contraction of 17.5% in 2011-12 and didn’t cross even 1% growth till 2014-15.
•The new back series data diverges significantly from a draft report released by the National Statistical Commission earlier this year, which showed that growth during the UPA years crossed 9% on at least three occasions, and even hit 10.23% in 2007-08.
•“The Statistical Commission numbers had problems with them,” former Chief Statistician of India Pronab Sen said. “The current method is robust to the extent that instead of doing this as a purely arithmetic exercise, they tried to relate the estimates to observed indicators. They have used the Annual Survey of Industries (ASI) data for manufacturing, the sales tax data for trade and so on.”
•However, Mr. Sen also pointed towards how the manner in which the data has been released has dented the credibility of both the methodology used and of the Central Statistics Office.
•“My concern comes out from the fact that this back series was essentially released by Niti Aayog, which is a political institution,” Mr. Sen said. “This has never happened. When a political institution releases national statistical data, it puts a huge question mark on the credibility of the data and the political independence of the statistical agencies. The credibility of CSO has been badly dented, not because of the data but because of the manner in which the release has been done.”
•“The statistical methods on the face of it are fine,” he added. “The point is, it’s almost impossible to replicate what they have done. They will tell you which method was used for which sector, but there are several different methods you can use, so the question is what were the results given by the other methods and why did they apply this particular method to this specific sector.”
‘Voodoo economics’
•Calling it “voodoo economics” of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley duo, Congress' chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala issued a statement alleging that the back series day has been manipulated.
•“The entire GDP Back Series Data released today reflects the desperate attempt of a defeatist Modi Government to undermine India’s growth story over last 15 years. Modi government and its puppet Niti Aayog want the people to believe that 2+2= 8! Such is the gimmickry, jugglery, trickery and chicanery being sold as ‘back series data’,” he said.
•“Niti Aayog’s revised GDP numbers are a joke. They are a bad joke. Actually they are worse than a bad joke. The numbers are the result of a hatchet job. Now that Niti Aayog has done the hatchet job, it is time to wind up the utterly worthless body,” former Finance Minister P. Chidambaram tweeted.
