Monday, December 19, 2005
Indian Science Report is of no use and a waste of tax payers' money: An open letter
Sent : Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:36 AM
To : firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
CC : email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject : Indian Science Report is of no use and a waste of tax payer money
I feel preparing Indian Science Report is a waste of human power, money and time. When the government is not utilizing the report for the benefit of the people and country then what is the authenticity of working hard to prepare Indian Science Report? Let me take an example. The Indian Science Report has clearly mentioned about the state-wise regional imbalance while locating national educational institute. However, after reading and quoting that “State-wise regional imbalance of national educational institute in India” from Indian Science Report, our beloved prime minister has announced in the same day and meeting ‘Indian Institute of Science for Education and Research (IISER)’ at Pune and Kolkata without even bothering what is mentioned in the report.
Earlier NDA govt proposed National Institute of Science at Allahabad, Bhubaneswar, Pune and Chennai when there was no report like ‘Indian Science Report’ which analysed “State-wise regional imbalance of national educational institute in India”. So the question why Allahabad and Pune were considered did not matter a lot at that point of time. The nation could wait two more years after initial proposal of ‘National Institute of Science’ to announce modified version of it as IISER, now the nation could definitely wait another couple of months to take this vital decision about the location by considering state wise regional imbalance of national educational institute! This bring many doubts to our mind.
Was the announcement in hurry for the government? Was not it political to fulfill the desire of certain supporting political parties, so that delay could spoil the decision like the earlier proposal of National Institute of Science? Isn’t the state wise regional imbalance while locating national educational institute in India politically driven rather just a scientific policy and affair by scientific decision makers? Are the scientific decision/policy makers neutral and politically not driven? If the scientific decision and policy makers could have taken this decision on their own, then they must have considered the ‘Indian Science Report’ by INSA before announcing IISER at Kolkata and Pune.
Surisingly next IIFT is again proposed in Kolkata despte West Bengal hosts national educational institutes like IIT, IIM, ISI, Shanti Niketan, why it was not proposed in Patna or Bhubaneswar, the states where there is no national educational institute?
Even if the institutes were already proposed, then the prime minister and the government could wait little more time, at most it could take two more months, to finalize the location after considering state wise regional imbalance of national education institute as mentioned in Indian Science Report!
If ‘Indian Science Report’ is not considered by scientific policy makers, then it would have been like playing double standard while making scientific decision without going to scientific record and national need?
In fact, even if they did not consider ‘Indian Science report’ then also “National Institute of Science (NIS)” and “Indian Institute of Science for Education and Research” would have been the same institute and already proposed locations for NIS would not have been overlooked.
Indeed, the central government would not have denied in their affidavit filed in Cuttack High court that there was no proposal for national institute in Bhubaneswar.
If there was no ill concern, then why Kolkata and Pune were selected over Chennai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Bhubaneswar, Chandigarh, Kochi, Lucknow, Indore, Ahemadabad? Do these cities have any deficiencies for hosting a national science institute and/or growing science? Many of them host many center of excellence in education and research.
So sir, if we know things work in this manner then why to waste tax payers money, human resources and so many valuable time to prepare such a document?
With best regards
Waseda Step 21