Monday, April 17, 2006
Are PM Dr. Manmohan Singh and FM P. Chidambaram also part of the budget grabbing going on in the HRD ministry? You be the judge.
Favouritisms in the 2006-2007 Indian budget
Goodies for allied states or states where the finance minister or the prime minister comes from, while states not allied with the central government are neglected and punished.
Lowlights of favouritism in the 2006-07 budget:
- IISERs in Pune, Kolkata and Punjab (states ruled by the UPA allies)
- Paddy processing research center in Tamil Nadu (The Finance minister's home state)
- Central university designation to renamed Port management of Chennai. (In the Finance minister's home state)
- 50 crore + 50 crore later each to University of Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata. (Mumbai and Kolkata are in states ruled by the UPA allies; Chennai is in the finance minister's home state.)
- 100 crores to Punjab Agricultural University. (A UPA ruled state. The PM grew up in Punjab.)
- Central Institute of Technology, Kokrajhar, Assam. (This is part of a deal made in 2003 with the Bodo Tribal Council. However, the Prime minister is a Rajya Sabha MP from Assam. Couldn't he also establish similar institutes in other troubled spots in India, such as in KBK.)
In our analysis of the 2005-2006 budget we showed that while the central government of India spent (in 2005-06) Rs 4.07 on higher education institutions (HRD-NH or HRD National highways) per person in Orissa, it spent Rs 177.12 in Delhi, Rs 28.10 in West Bengal, Rs 25.12 in Karnataka, Rs 17.79 in Tamil Nadu, Rs 17.09 in Maharastra, Rs 17.08 in UP, Rs 16.05 in Andhra, Rs 13.38 in Punjab, Rs 8.52 in Haryana, Rs 7.9 in Kerala, Rs 7.2 in MP, Rs 4.87 in Gujurat, Rs 2.59 in Rajasthan, and Rs 1.87 in Bihar.
Comparing in another way, the Government of India's spending per person with respect to HRD-NHs, in comparison to Orissa, is 43.52 times in Delhi, 6.9 times in West Bengal, 6.17 times in Karnataka, 4.37 times in Tamil Nadu, 4.2 times in UP, 4.2 times in Maharashtra, 3.94 times in AP, 3.29 times in Punjab, 2.09 times in Haryana, 1.94
times in Kerala, 1.77 times in MP, and 1.2 times in Gujarat.
We wrote to various people including the prime minister, Smt. Sonia Gandhi and the planning commission about it. But the 2006-07 budget with respect to the HRD-NH instead of addressing the inequity has made the inequity worse. Moreover, it shows the current government has made new allocations to states whose government is allied with them, states where the finance minister is from (Tamil Nadu) or the PM is elected from (Assam). This could be a coincidence; but it really puts a question mark on what kind of democracy India is. It begs questions such as: Do India's prime minister and finance minister see themselves as serving the country (all parts of it) or as fiefs who can allocate resources to the states they come from or their allies come from? We will enumerate the places new HRD investments have been allocated in the 2006 budget or have been announced and you be the judge.
1. Three new Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER) are proposed in Pune, Kolkata, and near Chandigarh in Punjab. These are all in states that are ruled by parties allied to the central government. IISER Pune and Kolkata have a budget of 50 crores now and IISER Punjab will have a similar budget. (IISERs are basically renamed National institute of Sciences that the earlier government proposed to have in Bhubaneswar, Pune, Allahbad and Chennai. Bhubaneswar is in Orissa, which does not have any premier higher education institution, and is currently ruled by the opposition NDA. Allahbad has an IIIT, and Chennai has an IIT.)
2. Paddy Processing Research Centre at Thanjavur will be developed into a national-level institute. (Thanjavur is in Tamil Nadu, the Finance minister's home state.)
3. The existing National Institute of Port Management, Chennai, has been renamed as the National Maritime Academy, and it is proposed to upgrade it into a Central University under an Act of Parliament. The University will have regional campuses at Mumbai, Kolkata and
Visakhapatnam. (Chennai is in the finance minister's home state. Mumbai, Kolkata and Vijag are all in states ruled by parties allied to the central government.)
4. 50 crores each now and 50 crores at the end of the year to University of Calcutta, the University of Mumbai and the University of Madras. (The first two are in states allied to the central government and the third is the state from where the finance minister hails.)
5. Rs.100 crore for an institution of excellence to a distinguished institution, the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. (Punjab government is allied to the central government. The Prime minister grew up in Punjab.)
6. Accord the status of an autonomous National Institute to the Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology, Tiruvananthapuram, Kerala. (Kerala has a Congress government, and is up for election.)
7. Central Institute of Technology, Kokrajhar, Assam. (Has a
congress government, up for election, and the prime minister's Rajya Sabha constituency. (However, this is part of a deal made in 2003 with the Bodo Tribal Council. Couldn't the government also establish similar institutes in other troubled spots in India, such as in KBK.)
Besides the above, two other proposals are made which do not have the above mentioned ties.
A. A Central Institute of Horticulture will be established in
Nagaland. (It is ruled by an NDA allied party.)
B. During 2006-07, Ministry of Tourism will establish 4 new
institutes of hotel management in the States of Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Jharkhand and Uttaranchal. (These are technical institutes rather than higher educational institutes, and have a much smaller budget.)
Based on the above and other details buried in the 2006-2007 budget: while the central government is scheduled to spend Rs 4.07 on HRD-NH (HRD ministry funded higher education institutions plus instituitions of national importance) per person in Orissa, it will spend Rs 183.08 in Delhi, Rs 41.20 in West Bengal (up from Rs 28.1), Rs 33.4 in Karnataka (up from 25.125), Rs 27 in Tamil Nadu (up from Rs 17.79), Rs 28.38 in Maharastra (up from 17.1), Rs 17.73 in UP, Rs 16.05 in Andhra, Rs 33.27 in Punjab, Rs 8.13 in Haryana, Rs 7.90 in Kerala, Rs 9.02 in MP, Rs 4.87 in Gujurat, Rs 2.59 in Rajasthan, and Rs 1.87 in Bihar.
In other words the Government of India's spending (in 2006-07) per person with respect to HRD-NHs, in comparison to Orissa, is 44.95 times in Delhi, 10.11 times in West Bengal (up from 6.9), 8.20 times in Karnataka (up from 6.17), 6.63 times in Tamil Nadu (up from 4.37), 4.35 times in UP, 6.97 times in Maharashtra (up from 4.2), 3.94 times in AP, 17.93 times in Punjab (up from 3.27), 2.11 times in Haryana, 1.94 times in Kerala, 2.21 times in MP, and 1.2 times in Gujurat.
We are really shocked by this allocation which worsens the inequity and illustrates favoritism as the principle behind the budget.
We understand that the states allied to the central government and the home states of the PM and Finance minister are also part of India. So the central government is right to invest in them and we are happy for those states. What we would like to point out is that the central government did not invest anything in the states that are in the bottom of the HRD list, such as Orissa, Rajasthan and Bihar. This is despite the fact that thousands of Orissans wrote to the Prime minister and Smt. Gandhi about this. The worst part is that the earlier government after having noticed this inequity had announced (though the HRD minister, the president, the UGC chair) the establishment of a National Institute of Sciences in Bhubaneswar and this government for inexplicable reasons (or perhaps to punish Orissa for not voting for it and rewarding the others states) has decided to rename it (to IISER) and establish in three other states, which already were in the top among the Indian states with respect to HRD funding.
We also understand that as parliamentarians the Oxford educated PM Dr. Manmohan Singh, and the Harvard educated finance minister Mr. P. Chadambaram have every right to look after their constituencies and develop them. They must do that. For that they should use their MPLAD funds. The Indian budget is the budget of all of India not the fief of PM, the FM or the subset of states that are allied to the government.
We would sincerely request the reader to bring this to the notice of media outlets of India. Perhaps their exposure of this shameless behavior of our most learned ministers will change the way budgets are done in our country and perhaps we will move towards a more equitable country with all parts shining together.
(ps: Recently, the central government finally decided to honor the earlier government's commitment to establish 6 new AIIMS-like institutions in the backward states of Bihar, Chhatisgarh, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttaracnchal. However the allocated budget for these institutions in the 2006-07 budget is miniscule. It remains to be seen if the announcement was a lip service or the budget is going to be increased to really start these institutions.)
Chitta Baral 3/24/06
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
My response to Kiran Karnik
Campaign For NIS/IISER
From: Chitta Baral
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, Milind@nic.in, 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 Bcc: email@example.com,
firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Apr 11, 2006 10:31 PM Subject: Re:
Kiran Karnik ,President, Nasscom, India's Reaction to our Campaign
For NIS/IISER Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Add sender to
Contacts list | Delete this message | Show original | Message text
garbled? Dear Mr. Karnick:
Following is my response to your mail to Sachi. I am copying it to
various Delhi based editors, other members of SAC-PM and members of
the planning commission.
I would like this letter to be treated as an open letter to all of
India and refer people to the sites
for the background of how the Indian budget is drastically
increasing inequity in higher education, how Orissa (and Bihar and
Rajasthan) have been at the losing end, how blatant hijacking of an
announced for institution has taken place, and how thousands of
letters, and several news articles have not had any visible positive
impact on our neo-Kings the esteemed prime minister, the esteemed
finance minister and the esteemed HRD minister and his court. Rather
the 2006 budget http://chitta.googlepages.com/2006budget1 not only
shows their blatant disregard but their budget grabbing attitude
wherby almost all new higher education money is allocated to UPA
ruled states, the finance minister's home state and the PM's Rajya
1. You wrote: I quite understand the dismay with what is seen as a
"shifting" of the IISER from Bhubaneswar to Kolkata; however, isn't
primary education of greater concern, especially in a state like
Orissa? If so, isn't this an area in which the State govt has
greater responsibility than the centre?
My Response: Primary education is indeed of greater concern. Many of
us are making efforts in this direction. Please see
2. You wrote: Orissa is a state blessed with ample resources. If
others are exploiting its natural resources, the answer does not lie
in "Central neglect" nor in economic blockades (as some doubtless
well-meaning folks have suggested; such movements do nothing for the
poor, except bring more hardship).
My Response: I agree with the last sentence. I and many others have
made the point about protesting in way that is not economically
harmful. Please see my writing on this at
3. You wrote: Every state can find some statistic to "prove" that
the Centre is "neglecting" it. ... Certainly, pressure on the
Centre is part of the political process. However, the focus on an
IISER is really playing to the gallery. I wonder if an IIT in
Guwahati has helped to suddenly transform Assam, or whether the
celebrated IIT at Kanpur has given a boost to the development of UP?
In the heyday of the PSU, huge Central investments were made in
"backward" States (HEC in Ranchi and the steel plants in Rourkela
and Bhilai are examples). Have they brought prosperity (even
employment) to the local people? I do think we have to look at other
solutions than Central largesse.
My Response: I disagree with most of the above. Yes, there are
bogus statistics. But does that mean you completely disregard
statistics. Please have a look at the spreadsheets
http://www.baral.us/hrd06.pdf http://www.baral.us/hrd05.pdf and the
and let us know what exactly you find wrong in them.
I am sure that you agree that human resource (HR) is the most
important resource of a state or a country. Now we both agree that
primary education is important.
But do you think higher education and easy access to it is not
Yes, in the past many of the top institutions may not have had big
impact in the local area. But things are changing. IIT KGP is going
to have a medical school soon. A biotech park is coming up near KGP.
In the US Stanford and MIT have had huge impact in the immediate
area they are located in and same is going to happen in India. In
Bangalore, IISc, and the electronics public sectors (ITI, BEL etc.)
gave it the initial impetus to become the electronics and now the
software city that it has become. In Orissa, many graduates of Inst
of Physics are faculty in various colleges across Orissa.
Elaborating on that, I will give you one specific example, that
relates to NASSCOM, regarding immediate impact an IISER will have in
Bhubaneswar and Orissa. The Bhuabneswar-Cuttack-Puri area now has 21
engineering colleges with most having IT and Computer science
programs. If there was an IISER/NIS/IIT in Bhubaneswar, the faculty
of these 21 colleges would be able to pursue higher degree at the
IISER/NIS/IIT while being employed (and without leaving town), thus
improving the quality of these 21 colleges, and thus improving the
quality of graduates of these colleges, thus improving the input to
the various software companies that NASSCOM represents. (Elsewhere
we have argued how Orissa has showed that it can nurture top
institutions. Among all NITs, NIT Rourkela is among the top 6. XIM
Bhubaneswar is among the top business schools. Inst of Physics and
in BBSR does quite a bit of research. etc.)
The other point is Orissa is part of India. The Indian budget is not
central government largesse (as you say) but is for all of India,
not just for the UPA ruled states or the Finance minister and Prime
minister's home states.
How do we Indians tolerate the current government (as also most of
the past Indian governments) treating the HRD budget as their fief
and allocating most of it to the states ruled by their allies (in
this case UPA) and/or the states/cities where the FM and PM are
How come all of India (including the SAC-PM, the planning commission
etc.) is tolerating and condoning such injustice to parts of it?
How do you and others in the SAC-PM in clear conscience be part of a
body (SAC-PM) that is invoked by the HRD minister with respect to
the decision making that involves enriching states (IISER in Kolkata
and now there is a news piece about an IISER in Kanpur) that already
have top notch institutions (IIT, ISI, Central U in West Bengal;
IIT, IIIT, many central Univs in UP) and take away a proposed
NIS/IISER from a state (Orissa) that has nothing? (Please see
details on this at http://www.baral.us/nis3.pdf. )
How come all of India is tolerating and condoning (including the
SAC-PM, the planning commission etc.) such fief like behavior by its
PM, FM and HRD minister?
No wonder now they want to push 49% reservation down the
throat of IITs and IIMs.
How come Indians are thinking themselves as subjects instead as
The Indian budget is not a gift or largesse as you put it, but a
budget in which all of India should have a share.
I would urge you to have a look at http://www.equitableindia.org and
the links in its left bar and reflect on it.
Do you think such inequity is fair?
As a leading citizen of India, and member of the Scientific advisory
committee to the Prime Minister should not you help us in taking the
Indian govt (our government) to task for this unfairness; for
increasing the existing inequity; for the hypocrisy of saying (as in
case of the PM's speeches) that India should be more equitable and
then doing exactly the opposite.
As long as we Indians treat our government as kings, think ourselves
as subjects, think the government budget allocation as a gift or
largesse rather than our own budget, India will only improve in its
spots and its core will remain impoverished and backward.
We sincerely hope that you and others in the SAC-PM, in the
planning commission and in the media will have the courage to stand
up for all of India, and not just the shiny parts of it.
sincerely and with best regards
Chitta Ranjan Baral Professor of Computer Science and Engineering
Affiliate Professor, Biomedical Informatics Arizona State University
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Kiran Karnik (NASSCOM)" <> Date: Sat, 8
Apr 2006 17:02:51 +0530 Subject: RE: (Boycott Congress-Save Orissa)
HRD Discrepancy and Orissa's Backwardness are linked finds Prof
Chitta Baral To: Sachi Satapathy
As a believer in the power of technology to be used for good, I
am impressed by the campaign that you have triggered via e mail.
However, as a sympathizer of the aspirations of the disadvantaged, I
must say I have concerns. I quite understand the dismay with what is
seen as a "shifting" of the IISER from Bhubaneswar to Kolkata;
however, isn't primary education of greater concern, especially in a
state like Orissa? If so, isn't this an area in which the State govt
has greater responsibility than the centre? Every state can find
some statistic to "prove" that the Centre is "neglecting" it. The
fact is that the key factor for development is the quality of
governance, especially at the local level. Orissa is a state
blessed with ample resources. If others are exploiting its natural
resources, the answer does not lie in "Central neglect" nor in
economic blockades (as some doubtless well-meaning folks have
suggested; such movements do nothing for the poor, except bring more
Certainly, pressure on the Centre is part of the political
process. However, the focus on an IISER is really playing to the
gallery. I wonder if an IIT in Guwahati has helped to suddenly
transform Assam, or whether the celebrated IIT at Kanpur has given a
boost to the development of UP? In the heyday of the PSU, huge
Central investments were made in "backward" States (HEC in Ranchi
and the steel plants in Rourkela and Bhilai are examples). Have they
brought prosperity (even employment) to the local people? I do think
we have to look at other solutions than Central largesse.
One can go on. For every argument, for every statistic, there
will be one that counters it. Constructive solutions are required: a
movement to educate not a movement to disrupt. It is better to light
a candle than to curse the darkness, I feel.
As a well-wisher of Orissa, I do hope that this campaign, which
seems to have galvanized many, will come up with positive ideas and
use the energy and passion which it reflects for the rapid
development of the disadvantaged.
My mail box has been flooded with mails on this topic. I would,
therefore, request you to kindly take my name off the mailing list.
I will find other ways of keeping in touch with this issue. With
regards, Kiran Karnik
It has the list of all SAC-PM members as well as their email addresses.
The list also appeared in
We must write them about the NIS/IISER issue.
Purna Mishra's response to Mr. Karnick
Subject: RE: My reply to Mr. Karnik and MohantyDear Mr. Karnik,
I appreciate your good feeling for Orissa and your commitment to
Orissa and her marginalized population.
I was little surprised when I read your suggestion that Orissa must
focus on primary education. I do not believe any one will disagree
with you that the quality of basic education in India is suffering
from lack of focus and adequate investment and is needed to build a
I left India in 1982 to pursue graduate studies in Computer Science
in US. Over the years, I have been to India several times a year and
over the last year and half working closely with a few software
development companies (all members of Nasscom) in India to
collaborate on the product development for building the next
generation real-time enterprise performance management systems.
I do not believe your email to Sachi truly reflect your position as
the president of Nasscom or the Nasscom as the organization. Here
is why I believe your letter and your public positions are sending
For example, while speaking at the national seminar on IT workforce
development organized by Netaji Subhas Open University you had asked
the West Bengal government to build in human resource and make
students at the university level employable by teaching them skills
required for the industry. Of course the industry you were talking
about is IT, ITeS, BPO, and KPO. I could not agree more when you
said at the same venue that education should be regarded as the
means to production of employable human capital and stressed on the
need for higher education so that knowledge can be used as a tool to
development of wealth. I absolutely agree a good quality higher
education in science and technology is essential to development of
In fact, I am glad that Nasscom and India Inc have jointly
recommended to the Finance Minister to boost the spending on higher
education as the prescription for sustained growth and on January
9th, you asked the Central Government to accord the same status and
importance to higher education as is being given to primary
education. As any professional truly interested in growth and
prosperity of India and ordinary Indians I am elated with your stand
and position. Your leadership to suggest the development on higher
education at par with primary education by creating a national
mission on higher education as the National Literacy Mission must be
adopted and put in to practice. It is exciting that Nasscom is
exploring to sign a memorandum of understanding with the University
Grants Commission to help incorporate industry-relevant skill-sets
as part of specific curriculum. Your partnership with Dr. Arun
Nigavekar (UGC Chairman) to help incorporate industry-relevant
skill-sets as part of specific curriculum is exciting and brings a
new line of thinking for India. According to the recent
NASSCOM-Mckinsey report, the IT/ITeS sector is running up an
employability crisis which could dent India’s pre-eminence as the
preferred global offshoring destination. To tide over this quality
shortfall, NASSCOM is suggesting setting up focused higher education
zones, deregulating the higher education regime in stages and going
in for a demand-based funding system for colleges and universities,
industry-owned, government-facilitated integrated skill development
programs and massive awareness creation about career prospects in
the IT/BPO industries, especially in upcountry cities/towns (Tier-II
cities in India). Colonel M. Vijay Kumar Director STPI Hyderabad
speaking on the IT scenario in Hyderabad vis-à-vis Bangalore has
stated publicly that “In Bangalore, IT and the software industry,
dates back to a decade-and-a-half. The presence of institutes such
as IIS, RDO Labs and ISRO have added to the scientific temperament
and ambience of Bangalore. Major Public Sectors in electronic sector
like HAL, BEL, IT have thrived in Bangalore, giving rise to lot of
private entrepreneurship. This has acted as a catalyst for the
software industry development in Bangalore.”
In earnest I must ask you what is good for India, Bengal, Andhra,
and Bangalore should be emulated and put into practice by Orissa.
How can Orissa attract these higher paying jobs to Orissa without
access to quality educational infrastructure, other public
investments, and a policy for setting up quality higher education
institutions in science and technology?
While Orissa lacks political strength and acumen, we all the
supporters of Orissa and her citizens need to review what we can do
to influence the government and other private institutions to set up
quality higher education institutions in science and technology in
Orissa. We are counting on your leadership and support.
Purna C. Mishra President, Logile, Inc.
>This is my response to Mr. Karnik and Mr. Mohanty's email on focusing our
>I will like to submit my response by reviewing the excellent study
>commissioned by Nasscom and KPMG in 2004 on “Choosing a location for
>offshore operations in India”.
>This is what Mr. Karnik said in that excellent study “IT / ITES - BPO
>exports from India are expected to rise by 26 per cent to reach USD 12 – 13
>billion in 2003 – 2004 and the industry could well sustain the 30 – 40 per
>cent growth envisaged over the next few years. Hidden amidst the growth
>story is the fact that operating costs for ITES - BPO are steadily rising –
>salary levels have been rising by 10 – 15 per cent per annum over the last
>two years and ITES - BPO is fuelling a property boom in at least five of
>the top eight cities in India. Rising attrition levels in the key cities
>for ITES - BPO in India suggest future issues around inducting skilled
>resources from the major cities in India into the ITES - BPO profession.
>Real profitable growth for ITES - BPO will thus require the percolation of
>ITES - BPO into Tier-II cities.”
>Orissa was not included in the study.
>My question to Mr. Karnik and Mohanty would be why these companies would
>come to a Tier-II city in Orissa? Is it because the city has a lot of
>people educated up to primary education? Did Nasscom study include the
>quality of primary education as a basis of percolation of ITES? The study
>focused on availability of quality professionals as a key basis of
>percolation which is not available in Orissa.
>Most of the centrally funded universities are under state control for
>faculty recruitment and admission. If you look at the Viswa Bharati most
>of the students come from West Bengal and they get an excellent education
>courtesy of the Central Government. In Orissa, other than NIT Rourkela,
>the technical institutes are funded by the state government which does not
>have adequate means to provide a quality education. For example, UCE Burla
>gets close to Rs. 4 Crore in assistance from the state where as if it would
>have been a centrally funded institute, it would been getting close to 10
>It is quite surprising that Mr. Karnik is saying that “Certainly, pressure
>on the Centre is part of the political process. However, the focus on an
>IISER is really playing to the gallery.” One should not apply a political
>pressure to get these advanced institutions. They should be based on the
>report published by “India Science Report” which has asked for a non
>political basis to build the core science infrastructure in India.
>I agree with Mr. Karnik that IIT Guwahati or Kanpur has not helped
>transforming UP or Assam. These institutes were decided primarily on
>political basis and that is why it made no difference. We need to look at
>IISC Bangalore, IIT Chennai, IIM Ahmedabad, IIM Calcutta and IIT Kharagpur
>and see how they have benefited the respective states. I will like to urge
>the readers to review the industrial policy of West Bengal and according to
>the report the state has used extensive references to IIM Calcutta, IIT
>Kharagpur and other centrally funded universities as core to the
>availability of skill professionals in West Bengal.
>As India migrates from low end IT and BPO to a higher end knowledge
>provider in packaged software, logistics, Biotech, and Information
>management, a society based on good primary education will be at a
>disadvantage. One need to look a little east and see why the south east
>Asian countries with better primary education is at a disadvantages to
>India in competing to attract the higher paying knowledge based jobs.
>Orissa needs good primary education. Here Orissa is not at a disadvantage
>to West Bengal or Andhra. Please check the report “Poverty, Disparities,
>or the Development of Underdevelopment in Orissa” by ARJAN DE HAAN and
>AMARESH DUBEY for a better perspective.
>This forum will achieve its objective if it can at least make the central
>government realize that institutes for providing quality higher education
>must be regionally balanced so that a poor Oriya or Bihari or Rajasthani
>kid can dream as much as his/her counterpart from West Bengal or Maharastra
>or Andhra dreams about his/her future.
>What the government has done and it is unfortunate that Mr. Karnik supports
>is to develop two different India. One which requires service of primary
>educated youths as laborers or daily wage workers, and the other which
>provides these low skill people.
>I do not want my state to be a colony of India.
Kiran Karnik's reaction to our efforts
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 17:02:51 +0530
Subject: RE: (Boycott Congress-Save Orissa) HRD Discrepancy and Orissa's Backwardness are linked finds Prof Chitta Baral
To: Sachi Satapathy <email@example.com>
am impressed by the campaign that you have triggered via e mail. However, as a sympathizer of the aspirations of the disadvantaged, I must say I have concerns. I quite understand the dismay with what is seen as a "shifting" of the IISER from Bhubaneswar to Kolkata; however, isn't primary education of greater concern, especially in a state like Orissa? If so, isn't this an area in which the State govt has greater responsibility than the centre? Every state can find some statistic to "prove" that the Centre is
"neglecting" it. The fact is that the key factor for development is the
quality of governance, especially at the local level. Orissa is a state
blessed with ample resources. If others are exploiting its natural
resources, the answer does not lie in "Central neglect" nor in economic
blockades (as some doubtless well-meaning folks have suggested; such
movements do nothing for the poor, except bring more hardship).
Certainly, pressure on the Centre is part of the political
process. However, the focus on an IISER is really playing to the gallery. I
wonder if an IIT in Guwahati has helped to suddenly transform Assam, or
whether the celebrated IIT at Kanpur has given a boost to the development of UP? In the heyday of the PSU, huge Central investments were made in
"backward" States (HEC in Ranchi and the steel plants in Rourkela and Bhilai are examples). Have they brought prosperity (even employment) to the local people? I do think we have to look at other solutions than Central largesse.
will be one that counters it. Constructive solutions are required: a
movement to educate not a movement to disrupt. It is better to light a
candle than to curse the darkness, I feel.
seems to have galvanized many, will come up with positive ideas and use the energy and passion which it reflects for the rapid development of the
therefore, request you to kindly take my name off the mailing list. I will
find other ways of keeping in touch with this issue.
Thursday, April 06, 2006
...UPA government is soft peddling on the NIS issue... From Statesman
Naveen takes swipe at UPA govt
Statesman News Service
BHUBANESWAR, April 6: Chief minister Naveen Patnaik added an NDA flavour to a purely BJP platform during the Bharat Surakshya Yatra here today by addressing the public on the achievements of his government and the good governance during the NDA regime.
He took many, including his own partymen, by surprise by sharing the platform with BJP leaders. Perhaps conscious of the moment, Mr Patnaik spoke about the initiatives taken during the NDA rule under the leadership of Atal Behari Vajpayee.
The contrast was sharp, Mr Patnaik dwelt on his government’s achievements ~ Mission Shakti, Pani Panchayat and other rural development schemes, which had very little to do with the Hindutva theme of most of the other speakers.
“We have been focusing on rural development and progress of the state over the last six years,” he said. The NDA government had registered an eight per cent growth rate, besides developing highway infrastructure and rural roads through PMGSY, he said.
Orissa had benefited in terms of cyclone assistance, enhanced funding for KBK districts and plans to establish NIS, Mr Patnaik said. But the UPA government is soft peddling on the NIS issue, he alleged.
While Mr Patnaik spoke in Oriya (written in Roman script), his Jharkhand counterpart Arjun Munda delivered the speech in Oriya extempore, drawing much applause from the crowd.
Even Rajnath Singh spoke a few words in Oriya, while BJP leader Venkaiah Naidu apologised for not being able to speak in Oriya.
Mr Singh described Mr Patnaik as a popular chief minister, while Mr Naidu describes him as the darling of the people.
Mr Munda and Mr Raman Singh, the chief minister of Chhattisgarh, castigated the UPA government in their speeches.
They blamed the Centre for the increased terrorist and Naxalite activities in the country.
Mr Venkaiah Naidu said yatras were part of the Indian tradition and a way to reach out to the people.
He criticised the UPA government by saying —People are weeping, while the government is sleeping.
In his inimitable style, Mr Naidu said NDA had one leader and stood for the National Democratic Alliance whereas the UPA is an Ulta Pulta alliance. While the NDA regime had a Prime Minister, there is a PM, SPM (super prime minister), a UPM (ultra pm in the form of Lalu Yadav) and the CPI-M.”They have the Right which proposes, the Left which opposes and the mind which disposes without any direction,” he quipped.
Referring to the resignation of Mrs Sonia Gandhi, he said it was a drama enacted to preempt her disqualification.
Mr Naidu appealed to the Muslims to look back and see themselves how much they had benefited during the several decades of rule by Congress in this country.
for a more generalized analysis of how inequity in HRD
has been created and is being created. The sad fact is that
the 2006-07 HRD budget shows how our learned Oxford educated
Ph.D Prime minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and our Harvard educated
finance minister Mr. P. Chdambaram seem to be part of this resource grab for their states, treating India's HRD budget as their fief. See http://chitta.googlepages.com/2006budget1 for this aspect of the inequity.
Its really really sad.