📰 States weigh options on IAS cadre rule changes
Six of them have written to Centre opposing any such move.
•The Union government is planning to acquire for itself overriding powers to transfer IAS and IPS officers through Central deputation, doing away with the requirement of taking the approval of the State governments.
•The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) wrote to the States on January 12 that the Union government proposes to amend Rule 6 (deputation of cadre officers) of the Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules 1954.
•The Centre’s move is set to put it in a collision course with the States, particularly those ruled by the Opposition. The Hindu has learnt that at least six State governments had written to the DoPT opposing any such move, which include the States governed by the BJP and its allies.
•The letter comes in the wake of shortage of All India Services (AIS) officers in Union Ministries. The DoPT said in its communication that the States “are not sponsoring an adequate number of officers for Central deputation”, and the number of officers is not sufficient to meet the requirement at the Centre.
•The DoPT had earlier sent three letters on December 20 and 27 and January 6 seeking comments from the States but after six States opposed the move and the rest did not respond, it further revised the proposal. The States have been given time till January 25 to respond. A senior government official said if the States did not respond, the Ministry would send reminders and then notify the rules by publishing it in the Gazette of India.
Bengal stand
•West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi that the proposed amendment is against the “spirit of cooperative federalism” and the “amendment unilaterally mandates the State government to make such a number of officers available for deputation as prescribed under [the] Central Deputation Reserve.”
•Last year, the DoPT had directed West Bengal Chief Secretary Alapan Bandyopadhyay to report to its office hours after Ms. Banerjee allegedly skipped a review meeting on Cyclone Yaas with Mr. Modi. The 1987-batch IAS officer had never been on Central deputation and was to superannuate on May 31. He is now fighting a case against the Centre.
•Kerala’s Law Minister P. Rajeeve, said the government would oppose the Centre’s proposal to amend the IAS (Cadre) rules “if it infringed on the cardinal principle of federalism”.
•Mr. Rajeeve told The Hindu that the Left Democratic Front government was yet to weigh the issue.
•Mr. Rajeeve said the administration would examine whether the proposed amendment was a bid to subvert the State’s authority guaranteed by the Constitution.
•It would oppose any proposal to concentrate all executive power in the Central government. “The government will study the matter and develop a calibrated response soon,” the Minister said.
•Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan had recently backed his Tamil Nadu counterpart M.K. Stalin’s strong opposition to the draft Indian Ports Bill. Kerala and Tamil Nadu felt the Bill weakened the State’s control over ports and harbours. Congress leader and former Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala said the proposed amendment to the IAS cadre rules would enfeeble the State’s political control over the bureaucracy. It would hobble effective governance and create avoidable legal and administrative disputes. Moreover, the Centre could weaponise the bureaucracy against an elected State government. The Congress had opposed similar attempts by the Centre to quash provincial authority.
•Sources in the Maharashtra Chief Minister’s office said the government would be sending a letter opposing the Centre’s proposed amendment. However, no official word was given on the content and grounds on which the amendment would be opposed.
•When contacted, Maharashtra Chief Secretary Debashish Chakraborty said he was not aware of any letter and the department concerned was the General Administration Department (GAD) for the same. “Nothing to my knowledge as these changes in rules and regulations are very common. The concerned department is GAD.” The GAD is headed by Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray.
•According to the DoPT, for example, Bihar has a strength of 248 IAS officers, but only 32 are posted with the Centre. Out of 180 officers in Odisha, 25 are posted with the Central government. In Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh, the number of cadre officers and those posted at the Centre stood at 125/20, 322/20 and 536/32 respectively.
Four amendments
•Four amendments are proposed to Rule 6. One of the major changes proposed is if the State government delays posting a State cadre officer to the Centre and does not give effect to the Central government’s decision within the specified time, “the officer shall stand relieved from cadre from the date as may be specified by the Central government.” Presently, officers have to get a no-objection clearance from the State government for Central deputation.
•The other change proposed is the Centre will decide the actual number of officers to be deputed to the Central government in consultation with the State and the latter should make eligible the names of such officers. According to existing norms, States have to depute the All India Services (AIS) officers, including the Indian Police Service (IPS) officers, to the Central government offices and at any point it cannot be more than 40% of the total cadre strength.
•The third proposed amendment says that in case of any disagreement between the Centre and the State, the matter shall be decided by the Central government and the State shall give effect to the decision of the Centre “within a specified time.”
•The fourth change proposed is that in specific situation where services of cadre officers are required by the Central government in “public interest” the State shall give effect to its decisions within a specified time.
•The DoPT is the cadre controlling authority of IAS officers. Similar letters have been sent for deputation of Indian Police Service and Indian Forest Service Officers (IFoS) after approval from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the Environment Ministry respectively.
•The Hindu reported on June 9, 2021 about the Personnel Ministry’s letter to the States cautioning them that not sending enough officers may affect the future cadre review proposals.
•The DoPT had sent a similar letter in December 2020 but it was unable to fill vacancies at director and joint secretary level in various Central ministries. Around 40% or 390 Central Staffing Scheme (CSS) posts are at joint secretary level (more than 19 years experience) and 60% or 540 such posts are at the rank of deputy secretary (nine years) or director rank (14 years of service).
•As per the latest offer list on the MHA’s website, only 10 IPS officers from States have offered themselves to be available for Central deputation, including four Director General rank officers and only two Superintendent of Police rank officers.
•In 2020, the DoPT, to ensure that more officers come to the Centre, changed norms and made it mandatory for IAS officers from the 2007 batch onwards to mandatorily serve for two years in Central deputation within first 16 years of their service if they wanted to be empanelled for a joint secretary rank in the future.
•Before any officer of the AIS is called for deputation to the Centre, his or her concurrence is required. The Establishment Officer in the DoPT invites nominations from the State governments. Once the nomination is received, their eligibility is scrutinised by a panel and then an offer list is prepared, usually with the State government on board.
The roll-out of 5G services near airports is posing a challenge to airlines
•Almost 11 months after the United States’ leading telecommunications companies won bids for $81 billion worth of C-band radio spectrum to roll out 5G services, the much-awaited introduction hit a major snag this week after the country’s leading airlines warned of massive flight disruptions if the wireless technology was put into operation, especially around the nation’s airports. In a compromise on the eve of the planned roll-out on January 19, AT&T and Verizon agreed to delay introduction of the new wireless service near key airports. The two major telcos’ commitments notwithstanding, several domestic and international airlines flying to the U.S. have announced major rescheduling as well as the possibility of cancellation of flights to several destinations citing warnings from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and aircraft makers that accurate functioning of radar altimeters in some aircraft may be affected by the 5G radio frequencies. The altimeters provide information on an aircraft’s altitude and are a crucial part of flight operations for pilots, particularly while seeking to make low-visibility landings in inclement weather. At the heart of the impasse lies the fact that both the 5G services and some flight equipment operate on the same C-band radio spectrum, with only the frequencies varying. The FAA has said it is working with altimeter manufacturers to evaluate data from the wireless companies to determine how robust each model is, and, if required, have the devices retrofitted or replaced.
•The fact that the world’s largest economy is now faced with the risk of large-scale domestic and international air travel disruptions as a result of the relatively belated roll-out of 5G telecom services points to the peculiar problems of the U.S. market, including the particular frequencies allotted there for 5G. South Korea, China and Japan and several European nations have already successfully rolled out 5G services and the U.S. telcos have cited the lack of problems in these jurisdictions as evidence that the FAA and airlines need to do more to find solutions to the deployment of the wireless technology near airports. The FAA on its website has pointed to the specifics of the proposed 5G roll-out in the U.S. with a comparison to the situation in France and asserted that some key differences pose challenges. For one, the aviation regulator contends planned buffer zones for U.S. airports only protect the last 20 seconds of flight, while in France the last 96 seconds of flight are protected from any interruption from 5G signals. Also, 5G power levels are lower in France, with even the planned temporary nationwide lower power levels in the U.S. still expected to be 2.5 times more powerful. U.S. President Joe Biden and his administration will have their task cut out in pushing to hammer out a long-term solution to this impasse so as to minimise any further disruption to the already pandemic-hit global travel and trade sectors.
📰 The many problems of online anonymity
Pseudonymous social media handles and platforms that encourage them amplify issues around fake news
•How do you behave when no one’s watching you? All of us would be able to recall a classroom scene from our childhood. While the teacher would be busy writing something on the board, someone would throw a paper plane at the board. The livid teacher would turn back and ask who did that and the class would remain silent. Similarly, in a crowded auditorium, sometimes someone shouts a sarcastic remark and the people on stage have no idea who disturbed the peace.
Reasons for being anonymous
•That is more or less how anonymity works on social media. The most common type of anonymity involves the use of a pseudonym, a fake photo or the lack of one, and nothing specific in the bio. The opposite of this is when someone uses their actual first name and last name, provides their designation and company name, and mentions their interests. In such cases, anyone can Google that combination to identify that real person on, say, LinkedIn.
•Security researchers define anonymity as being ‘unidentifiable within a set of subjects’. But identity is not that linear. Some may use only the first name and nothing else – they are still anonymous. Some may use pseudonyms and mask their identity but leave traces of identifiable information through their content. Identity is also tied to behavioral patterns that may emerge from what is shared over a period of time. The deeper question is this: why do people want to be anonymous on social media?
•The most famous reason for anonymity is to be able to speak the truth against vindictive governments. But no matter how someone tries, governments these days, with enormous resources, may be able to trace the person.
•Another reason for seeking anonymity is a keenness to participate in online conversations without being judged for past experiences (victim of harassment, for instance) or for choosing non-heteronormative identities or for documenting deeply personal experiences that could be subject to sweeping judgments by others.
•Yet another common reason for seeking online anonymity is to not let the views be tagged to the real person being spoken about, in the offline world.
•And this is where the problem begins. When the anonymity-seeker knows that their real-world self (at home, workplace, neighborhood, immediate social setting) will not get impacted, they seem less inhibited and bolder about what they share and how they frame such opinions. This is the online equivalent of ‘How would you behave when you know no one is watching you?’ When such views are being shared by people who mask their identity, and particularly when these views are about others who have not chosen to be anonymous online, there is a conversational imbalance that harks back to the crowded room setting I had referred to earlier.
•We can argue that ideally, we only look at the opinion of the anonymous handles; that the person’s decision to remain anonymous should have no bearing on the conversation. And it’s true that not all anonymous handles tend to be abusive or hold extreme views. But it is equally true that the most angry, abusive, abrasive, and obfuscatory conversations/replies seem to come from anonymous handles.
•And more importantly, even if someone gets to know the identity of the person who is being vile or abusive, they have absolutely no way of using that information in any meaningful manner beyond simply judging that person. They can perhaps tag the person’s employer or family members (if available/traceable). Even then, the tagged entities may decide to not do anything about it, and simply leave the opinion as it is, for it is that person’s ‘freedom of expression’.
Encouragement by platforms
•All of the above examples refer to anonymity by choice. But what happens when platforms actively encourage participants to remain anonymous? The platforms know who the real person is (as part of sign up), but they hide any identifiable information when allowing such people to participate in online conversations.
•Consider a platform like Glassdoor where anonymous reviews are the norm. Glassdoor mentions in its community guidelines that “to safeguard privacy, we do not allow you to identify yourself or include any contact information (about yourself or others) in your posts”. Similarly, another online community, Fishbowl, thrives on anonymity. The platform says, “Your posts can be made privately using only your Company name or Professional title if you choose, but your presence on Fishbowl is public.” Then there’s Reddit, a platform famous for anonymity. Steve Huffman, Reddit’s co-founder, said, “When people detach from their real-world identities, they can be more authentic, more true to themselves”.
Sharing fake news
•The issue is not only about abuse or extreme opinions here but also of misinformation and disinformation. These are already massive problems. And anonymity, either by choice or enforced by platforms, gives the power to a person to evade judgment by public opinion. Only a legal mandate can hold them accountable for spreading lies, should the need arise.
•In simpler terms, if a person who chooses to be anonymous on Twitter shares some fake information about you that affects your reputation in varying degrees, your only option is to go to the police and then get the platform to take action. The platform itself won’t be able to verify if you are right or the anonymous handle is right, and won’t take a stand unless it is legally forced to. Since the other person is anonymous, you cannot use a less tedious approach, such as appealing to their employer, family or friends, to make them accountable for the disinformation.
•Given the tendency of people to behave in undesirable ways when their real-world reputation is not affected by what they say online, the proliferation of both pseudonymous social media handles and platforms that encourage pseudonymous profiles may amplify already existing issues around online disinformation and fake news.
•In an online confrontation, it’s almost as though one side has their eyes covered by a cloth and their hands tied to the back, while the other side has a bazooka in hand. You cannot rationally or emotionally appeal to a pseudonymous online entity. You cannot shame them into backtracking their disinformation. You need to convince someone else (either in a social media platform company or in a law enforcement agency) to take action.
📰 Democratise and empower city governments
The general approach towards urban empowerment, including financial capabilities, has remained piecemeal in India
•The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in a report, “State Finances, Study of Budgets of 2021-22”, released in November 2021, wrote: “With the third-tier governments in India playing a frontline role in combating the pandemic by implementing containment strategies, healthcare,... their finances have come under severe strain, forcing them to cut down expenditures and mobilise funding from various sources.”
•The RBI further commented that the functional autonomy of civic bodies must increase and their governance structure strengthened. This could happen by ‘empowering them financially through higher resource availability’.
•It is interesting that the RBI did echo the recommendations of the 15th Finance Commission report on local bodies that emphasised city governance structures and financial empowerment. The addition in the RBI report is from the praxis and the objective reality from during the novel coronavirus pandemic — which continues even now.
•However, there is only partial truth in the report. The emphasis is on resource availability, but how this will happen is not highlighted. At the most, it speaks only about generating more resources at the local level.
The essence
•While correctly identifying the role of the city governments in meeting the challenges the pandemic has thrown up, the report also points to the draining of resources. An RBI survey of 221 municipal corporations (2020-21) revealed that more than 70% saw a decline in revenues; in contrast, their expenditure rose by almost 71.2%.
•The RBI report also highlights the limited coverage of property tax and its failure in shoring up municipal corporation revenues. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data show that India has the lowest property tax collection rate in the world — i.e., property tax to GDP ratio. But this explains only one part of the story.
An old problem continues
•During the pandemic, while leaders from the Prime Minister to Chief Ministers to District Magistrate were seen taking a call on disaster mitigation strategies, city mayors were found missing. Why? Because under the disaster management plan of action, cities are at the forefront to fight the pandemic; however, the elected leadership finds no place in them. It is not just in disaster mitigation. The old approach of treating cities as adjuncts of State governments continues to dominate the policy paradigm.
•The general approach towards urban empowerment has remained piecemeal in India. Urban development is a state subject, which is more linked to political and democratic movements in States. The first intervention to understand ‘the urban’ (though there are references in the Five Year plans) and plan with a pan-Indian vision took place in the 1980s when the National Commission On Urbanisation was formed with Charles Correa as its chairperson.
•Another important intervention was in the first half of the 1990s with the Constitution 73rd and 74th Amendments. The latter refers to urban reforms — empowering urban local bodies to perform 18 functions listed in the 12th Schedule. But this was also the period of neo-liberal reforms, so the generation of own resources and a slow withdrawal of the state could be witnessed.
•Though the democratic transfer of 18 subjects was an important element, and necessary, there was, however, no mention of financial empowerment. It was linked more to the idea of “competitive cites” to attract investments in the urban centres by making their structures and land laws flexible. We now know that not much investment has happened, and cities have not really been able to enhance their financial capabilities.
•The only exception to the rule has been the people’s plan model of Kerala where 40% of the State’s plan budget was for local bodies (directly) with a transfer of important subjects such as planning, etc. This paved the way for a new dimension to urban governance.
Functional autonomy
•The RBI report has been right in highlighting that functional autonomy of city governments must be allowed. But this should happen with three F’s: the transfer of ‘functions, finances and functionaries’ to city governments. Without these, functional autonomy would be empty rhetoric. There are nearly 5,000 statutory towns and an equal number of census towns in India. Nearly 35% of the population lives in urban centres. And, nearly two-thirds of the country’s GDP stems from cities and almost 90% of government revenue flows from urban centres.
•Before value added tax and other centralised taxation systems, one of the major earnings of cities used to be from octroi. In fact, Pimpri-Chinchwad and Pune are examples of two very high revenue-earning municipalities dependent on octroi, as both cities have strong bases of industrial production. But this source of revenue collection was taken away by the State and the central governments. Instead, finance commissions recommended grants to urban local bodies based on a formula of demographic profile. Previously, while almost 55% of the total revenue expenditure of urban centres was met by octroi (e.g., Shimla), now, the grant covers only 15% of expenditure. In such a situation, it is difficult for the towns to sustain their ability to perform their bare minimum functions, especially with the latest Pay Commission recommendations.
•This has resulted in a vicious circle of burdening people more with taxes and further privatisation/outsourcing of the services of the municipalities. This is a pan-India phenomenon and the grading of cities and urban policies are linked to this.
•Now with Goods and Services Tax, the ability to tax has been ‘completely robbed’; cities find themselves in a worse state than States.
•The often-cited example is how cities in the Scandinavian countries manage their functions well — from city planning to mobility to waste management. But the truth is that a chunk of the income-tax from citizens is given to city governments. Imagine cities such as large urban agglomerates in India getting a percentage of income tax for managing the affairs of urban places. It would be phenomenal!
•A committee formed under the United Progressive Alliance (under the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development to review the 74th constitutional amendment), recommended that 10% of income-tax collected from the cities was to be given back to them as a direct revenue grant from the central government. Alas, it was never taken into consideration.
•What needs to be done? Cities must be treated as important centres of governance, where democratic decentralisation can bring in amazing results (as seen in Kerala). There will be transparency and adequate participation of the people.
•Second, cities should not be considered as entrepreneurship spaces where the sole driving force is to make them competitive to attract investments. We have seen how fallacious this argument is. They must be considered as spaces for planned development by giving adequate attention to resources.
•Our cities are hardly prepared for the impact of climate change; nor do they have adaptive strategies. The resources required for quantitative and qualitative data must be immediately provided to the cities to ensure a disaster risk reduction plan keeping vulnerable communities in mind.
Nothing ‘smart’
•Fourth, a piecemeal approach such as the concept of ‘smart cities’ must be shunned altogether. This approach further widens the gap between different sets of people. Rather, the grants from the Centre must be enhanced and cities asked to draw up their plans themselves based on priority seeking from city residents. Cities are people, as they say, and people must be a part of the decision-making process.
•Fifth, leadership in the cities must be elected for a term of five years. In some cities, the term of the mayor is for a year! Likewise, the third F, i.e., functionaries, must be transferred to the cities with a permanent cadre.
•Thus, in this exercise by the RBI, the good part is that there has least been a mention of cities, with local bodies as important centres of governance.
