#everydayquiz Welcomes You, #improve Vocab #IMproveEnglish #Read Daiy
THE
HINDU: Nuclear ambiguities
India’s
nuclear politics was in the limelight again last week, and not for the best of
reasons. More than five years after it signed the Convention on Supplementary
Compensation (CSC), India ratified
the insurance pooling agreement, which pertains to civil liability in the event
of a nuclear accident in any of the acceding countries.
Prima facie,
this was a good move, bringing to an end a game of will-they-or-won’t-they,
which had cast India in poor light internationally and which sat uncomfortably
beside three hard-fought nuclear landmarks — the India-U.S. Civil Nuclear
Agreement (CNA) and the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver, both passed in
2008, and India’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act (CLNDA), which became
law in 2010. However, India’s CSC ratification does not clear the air so far as
an important stumbling block to bilateral nuclear commerce is concerned: is
CLNDA truly in conformity with the CSC, as Indian officials have repeatedly
claimed, or does it cast a shadow of doubt on supplier liability, which is a
matter of critical importance to U.S. nuclear corporations? The ambiguity stems
from two clauses of CLNDA, Sections 17(b) and 46. Under Section 17(b),
liability for a nuclear accident can be channelled from the operator, which is
the Nuclear Power Corporation of India, to suppliers of nuclear material, specifically
if the accident is due to an act of the supplier or his employee, which
includes supply of equipment or material with patent or latent defects or
sub-standard services. Section 46 permits victims of a nuclear incident to sue
the operator or the supplier for damages applying tort law, even though such
proceedings would be beyond the scope of CLNDA and its liability cap, and thus
exposing suppliers to unlimited liability. Both clauses are likely to raise
suppliers’ cost of insurance cover, possibly beyond what is feasible
commercially and within the confines of competitive energy pricing.
India’s
CSC ratification is a reminder of the steep fall from the heady days of the
announcement of the CNA a decade ago to the weak and unconvincing efforts by
the Narendra Modi administration, following U.S.
President Barack Obama’s visit to India, to persuade corporations such as
General Electric-Hitachi and Westinghouse that they would not be liable in the
event of an accident. India’s reliance on contractual rules and parliamentary
debates to explain away supplier concerns has been greeted with scepticism by
representatives of U.S. nuclear corporations — first on the grounds that no
rule can supersede constitutional statute, and second, as there are other,
on-record views in Parliament that contradict those cited by the MEA. While the
liability morass has stymied U.S. investment in Indian reactors, Russia, France
and Japan have moved forward with their respective bilateral agreements for
nuclear commerce. This suggests that the recognition of India as a responsible
nuclear power by the international community — the U.S. and the other NSG
states — has allowed for windows of opportunity for nuclear commerce in India,
even in the post-Fukushima world.
lime·light
Intense white
light obtained by heating a cylinder of lime, formerly used in theaters.
waiv·er
An act or
instance of waiving a right or claim.
stum·ble
Trip or
momentarily lose one's balance; almost fall.
sue
Institute legal
proceedings against (a person or institution), typically for redress.
con·trac·tu·al
Agreed in a
contract.
su·per·sede
Take the place
of (a person or thing previously in authority or use); supplant.
mo·rass
An area of
muddy or boggy ground.
sty·mie
Prevent or
hinder the progress of.
THE HINDU: Harbinger of change
in global trade
The formal signing of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership (TPP) by the 12
member-countries of the mega-regional free trade agreement is a milestone for
international trade and, by extension, the global economy. With worldwide trade
having slowed sharply since the 2008 financial crisis and now faced with
headwinds from China’s slowdown, the deal, yet to be ratified, could provide a
much-needed fillip to growth. As the World Bank noted in a study in January on
the macro-economic implications of the TPP, the pact could, by 2030, help boost
the overall GDP of member-countries by 1.1 per cent. And given that the
grouping includes two of the world’s three largest economies — the U.S. and
Japan — and overall accounts for more than one-third of the world’s economic
output, the spillover benefits would be significant. Moreover, given the
diversity of the member-countries — from the mineral-rich, trade-intensive
Latin American economies of Peru and Chile, to the NAFTA triumvirate of Canada,
the U.S. and Mexico, ASEAN members Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei and Vietnam,
trans-Tasman neighbours Australia and New Zealand, and Japan — the TPP also
demonstrates a willingness to look beyond domestic political considerations and
hammer out a far-reaching agreement that could act as a template for future
multilateral trade deals. Yet, the pact is far from a done deal as it still
needs to win legislative backing in the member-states. That may be far more
difficult than the seven-year-long negotiations, with both the Democratic
presidential candidates and two leading Republican contenders in the U.S.,
Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, opposed to it. Mr. Trump and Democrat Bernie Sanders are the most vocal critics, arguing
that the TPP will cost American jobs.
For
India, the agreement provides an opportunity to reflect on its approach to
multilateral trade talks, while underscoring the need to build a strong
multi-disciplinary cadre of specialist free-trade analysts and negotiators. Though
the World Bank projects a limited ‘trade diversion’ impact on non-members,
including aggregate GDP losses of about 0.1 per cent by 2030, India could
suffer market share losses in certain categories of exports as a result of
preference erosion. With the South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) having
made little to no difference to India’s terms of trade in the neighbourhood,
and the country having ceded substantial ground at the latest Nairobi meeting
of the World Trade Organisation, it is high time the government proactively
girded for the challenges ahead. Like China, where an editorial in the
state-run Global
Times exhorted the Asian
giant’s leadership to focus on strengthening its own economy than worry about
the TPP, India too needs to aim at setting its house in order. From ensuring
the creation of a domestic common market through adoption of the long-delayed
Goods and Services Tax, to building its own multilateral bloc of emerging and
developing economies that can act as a bulwark against TPP-like groupings,
India has its task cut out.
head·wind
A wind blowing
from directly in front, opposing forward motion.
rat·i·fy
Sign or give
formal consent to (a treaty, contract, or agreement), making it officially
valid.
spill·o·ver
An instance of
overflowing or spreading into another area.
tri·um·vi·rate
(in ancient
Rome) a group of three men holding power, in particular ( the First
Triumvirate ) the unofficial coalition of Julius Caesar, Pompey, and
Crassus in 60 BC and ( the Second Triumvirate ) a coalition
formed by Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian in 43 BC.
gird
Encircle (a
person or part of the body) with a belt or band.
bul·wark
A defensive
wall.
BUSINESS STANDARD: Govt shouldn't waste all
energy on GST Bill
Political troubles for the proposed goods and
services tax (GST) legislation do not seem to be ending. It is clear that the
overtures made by the National Democratic Alliance government in November
during the winter session of Parliament failed to persuade the Congress to
reach an understanding on passing the Constitution amendment Bill on GST. As is
evident after last week's meeting to decide the schedule of the forthcoming
Budget session of Parliament, the Congress and other Opposition political
parties are keen on cornering the government - particularly in the Rajya Sabha,
where it is vulnerable because of its lack of majority - on issues such as the
President's rule in Arunachal Pradesh and the death of a Dalit student in
Hyderabad Central University. This has clouded the prospects of a smooth
passage of the Constitution amendment Bill on GST in the Budget session, a
critical requirement if the transformative tax reform is to take effect during
the next financial year.
What has made matters worse is Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recent charge that only one family was responsible for disrupting Parliament. In an election meeting in Assam last Friday, the prime minister said: "One family is so rigid that they do not allow the Rajya Sabha to function." Even though Mr Modi did not name the Gandhi family, Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi has hit back saying that the prime minister should stop making excuses and instead run the government. Prospects of legislative work including the passage of the GST Bill have thus turned poorer in light of the rising political temperature. If the Congress is guilty of playing disruptive politics and stalling legislative reform, the government should also take the blame for not having made a sincere effort in reaching out to the Opposition after recognising its lack of a majority in Rajya Sabha. Instead, the government's leaders have provoked the Opposition just ahead of the Budget session.
Apart from political troubles, the GST Bill is also a victim of a failure on the part of the government and the Opposition parties to narrow their differences on its broad structure. The government has rightly suggested that fixing a cap on the tax rate in the main law would be inadvisable and the Congress should see reason in that argument. Similarly, the government should show its willingness to address the Congress' concerns on a needless one per cent tax on inter-state transfer of goods, which will help only producing states and undermine the spirit of the GST regime, and also on the formation of a dispute settlement authority with states having a reasonable say in its decision-making powers. Unfortunately, not much progress has taken place in settling these three crucial differences.
Given the fractious nature of politics affecting legislative work in Parliament and the unresolved differences over key elements in the GST Bill, it is perhaps time the government recalibrated its timelines for rolling out the new tax regime across the country. Its road map should be defined by its recognition of what is politically feasible. There are a host of other reforms that the Union government can get implemented in states where it has a friendly and cooperative government. Instead of spending all its political energy on the GST Bill, which has hit a major roadblock, the Union government should not lose sight of many other state-level reforms like those in labour laws, leasing of land and agriculture.
What has made matters worse is Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recent charge that only one family was responsible for disrupting Parliament. In an election meeting in Assam last Friday, the prime minister said: "One family is so rigid that they do not allow the Rajya Sabha to function." Even though Mr Modi did not name the Gandhi family, Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi has hit back saying that the prime minister should stop making excuses and instead run the government. Prospects of legislative work including the passage of the GST Bill have thus turned poorer in light of the rising political temperature. If the Congress is guilty of playing disruptive politics and stalling legislative reform, the government should also take the blame for not having made a sincere effort in reaching out to the Opposition after recognising its lack of a majority in Rajya Sabha. Instead, the government's leaders have provoked the Opposition just ahead of the Budget session.
Apart from political troubles, the GST Bill is also a victim of a failure on the part of the government and the Opposition parties to narrow their differences on its broad structure. The government has rightly suggested that fixing a cap on the tax rate in the main law would be inadvisable and the Congress should see reason in that argument. Similarly, the government should show its willingness to address the Congress' concerns on a needless one per cent tax on inter-state transfer of goods, which will help only producing states and undermine the spirit of the GST regime, and also on the formation of a dispute settlement authority with states having a reasonable say in its decision-making powers. Unfortunately, not much progress has taken place in settling these three crucial differences.
Given the fractious nature of politics affecting legislative work in Parliament and the unresolved differences over key elements in the GST Bill, it is perhaps time the government recalibrated its timelines for rolling out the new tax regime across the country. Its road map should be defined by its recognition of what is politically feasible. There are a host of other reforms that the Union government can get implemented in states where it has a friendly and cooperative government. Instead of spending all its political energy on the GST Bill, which has hit a major roadblock, the Union government should not lose sight of many other state-level reforms like those in labour laws, leasing of land and agriculture.
o·ver·ture
An introduction
to something more substantial.
per·suade
Cause (someone)
to do something through reasoning or argument.
vul·ner·a·ble
Susceptible to
physical or emotional attack or harm.
dis·rupt
Interrupt (an
event, activity, or process) by causing a disturbance or problem.
dis·rup·tive
Causing or
tending to cause disruption
stall
(of a motor
vehicle or its engine) stop running, typically because of an overload on the
engine.
pro·voke
Stimulate or
give rise to (a reaction or emotion, typically a strong or unwelcome one) in
someone.
frac·tious
(typically of
children) irritable and quarrelsome.
re·cal·i·brate
Calibrate
(something) again or differently
road·block
A barrier or barricade
on a road, especially one set up by the authorities to stop and examine
traffic.
THE FINANCIAL EXPRESS: Corridors of Power: Fattening MGNREGA is a
national shame, not pride
The unemployment allowance scheme of the Congress-led UPA-1
government, started on February 2, 2006, the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural
Employment Guarantee scheme, and which is recognised more by the name of the
Act under which it has been brought, MGNREGA, has suddenly turned into
“nation’s pride”, from being one of the symbols of the UPA’s corrupt dole
politics.
On
the completion of ten years of the scheme, the NDA government is now showering
all kinds of praise on this one of the UPA’s so-called game-changer schemes,
inviting criticism from the Congress for a change in perception to reap
political benefits. The Congress party, obviously, has reasons to point fingers
at the NDA for this, as Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself
had earlier called MGNREGA a living monument of the Congress party’s failure.
Of
course, the ruling NDA dispensation can claim that the scheme today has been
transformed and is now efficiently run to be called “nation’s pride”, but the
fact remains that MGNREGA, mainly, is a scheme for those not having any
employment.
So,
what does the BJP-led NDA government wants to tell people by giving
MGNREGA such an exalted status? That it is not sure of generating proper
employment for people, which it has promised? Or, is it that the government
wants to keep this window open in the coming years also, to infuse money into
rural areas to tackle rural distress due to monsoon failures like the ones in
the last two years instead of tough agricultural reforms? Or, with one-third of
its current tenure already ending, the NDA government is realising that it is
good to launch Make-in-India, Start-up India, Digital India, etc, but it is equally important to keep the
subsidy and dole politics alive, which it rejected in the 2014 Lok Sabha
elections and promised a growth-led model?
Whatever
be the reason, finance minister Arun Jaitley has
said that the government is committed to strengthen MGNREGA, to which he has
allocated R37,000 crore in the current financial year—the highest-ever
budgetary support to the scheme. In the coming years, he has also promised more
funds to the scheme, as it is a demand-driven one. The argument is that, in the
wake of the slowdown in the global economy, India has to boost public spending
in rural areas to boost growth prospects, and a “transformed” MGNREGA is the
first choice of the government to do this because of the steps taken to revive
the scheme—timely release of funds to states to provide work on demand, an
electronic fund management system, consistent coordination between banks and
post offices, besides monitoring of pendency of payments. From April 1, all
wage payments to MGNREGA workers will be done through Direct Benefits Transfer.
Currently, 94% of wage payments are directly deposited in the accounts of
beneficiaries. An additional 50 days of employment in nine drought-affected
states through MGNREGA is also on the list of the revival claims.
Tracing
the 10-year journey of MGNREGA, the rural development ministry in its report
has interestingly said: “It is remarkable that, as the implementation of the
MGNREG Act enters the 10th year, independent research evaluations equivocally
report that, despite implementation gaps, the Mahatma Gandhi NREGA has
continued to achieve several milestones in the collective Indian journey
towards grounding the values of equality and social justice as enshrined in the
Constitution of India.” Since the start of the scheme, R3,13,844.55 crore has
been spent on it, and of this, 71% has been spent on wage payments to workers.
Just
for the record here, the mandate of the scheme has been to enhance livelihood
security of rural households “by providing at least 100 days of guaranteed wage
employment in a financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer
to do unskilled manual work.” In case employment is not provided within 15 days
from the date of registration of the demand for work or the date from which
work has been demanded in case of advance applications—whichever is later—the
worker is legally entitled to a daily unemployment allowance. The central
government bears the entire cost of wages of manual unskilled workers, and 75%
of the cost of material and wages of skilled and semi-skilled workers; the
remaining part is borne by the states, including the unemployment allowance.
At
present, 13 crore households have MGNREGA job cards with about 28 crore
workers—over the past 10 years, 5 crore households have been provided
employment every year—and the average wage earned per beneficiary has gone up
from R65 per person-day in 2006 to more than R150 in different states now.
However, India’s big problem has been that of not enough jobs being created,
and though it is not a good idea to rely on MGNREGA for job creation, even at
its peak it created just 1.2 crore full-time jobs, based on 250 days of work
per person per year—just 2-3% of total employment in the country.
The
real issue here is that the industry is not able to create the required number
of jobs. According to Crisil, the employment elasticity of industry has fallen
from 0.78 in 1999-2004 to 0.57 in 2004-11. This means government policy has to
focus on stimulating employment-intensive sectors. If the situation remains the
way it is today, more people will have to rely on farm jobs. Now, should the
government try to address this problem through MGNREGA instead of relying on
generating more employment in manufacturing and services sectors? Even if this
might appear attractive politically, it is a bad policy.
Going
ahead, however, MGNREGA is all set to be made the core of all
centrally-sponsored schemes (CSS). The chief minster’s panel of the NITI Aayog
on restructuring of the CSS has suggested that social schemes in the National
Development Agenda should be classified as “Core” and “Optional”. The core
schemes would have compulsory participation by states, whereas amongst the
optional schemes, states will be allowed to choose some or all of them.
The
core schemes will include MGNREGA as well as schemes for social inclusion.
“Among the Core schemes, MGNREGA + Scheme for Social Inclusion would be ‘the
Core of the Core’ and shall be the first charge on funds available for the
National Development Agenda,” the panel has recommended and the upcoming Budget
on February 29 is likely to announce this model.
Though
there is no doubt that PM Modi has done a good job by adopting UPA’s other
game-changer, Aadhaar, to curb leakages and targeted delivery of the
government’s subsidy and entitlements delivery, but he should be extremely
cautious in handling the other two, MGNREGA and Food Security Act. It will be
sad to see the NDA policies turning into a carbon copy of the UPA in doling out
money from the government exchequer in the name of helping the poor.
MGNREGA
is an unemployment allowance scheme and its use should be restricted to as
minimum as possible. The Food Security Act, too, needs to be applied
judiciously. The government’s job should be to focus on providing employment,
not unemployment allowances (direct or indirect) through subsidies and
entitlements.
dole
Benefit paid by
the government to the unemployed.
show·er
(of a mass of
small things) fall or be thrown in a shower.
per·cep·tion
The ability to
see, hear, or become aware of something through the senses.
dis·pen·sa·tion
Exemption from
a rule or usual requirement.
ex·alt·ed
(of a person or
their rank or status) placed at a high or powerful level; held in high regard.
tack·le
The equipment
required for a task or spor
dis·tress
Extreme
anxiety, sorrow, or pain.
pendency
A suspension
bridge is a type of bridge in which the deck is hung below suspension cables on
vertical suspenders. Outside Tibet and Bhutan, where the first examples of this
type of bridge were built in the 15th century, this type of bridge dates from
the early 19th century
drought
A prolonged
period of abnormally low rainfall; a shortage of water resulting from this.
equivocally
Ambiguously: in
an ambiguous manner; "this letter is worded ambiguously"
curb
A stone or
concrete edging to a street or path.
dole
Distribute
shares of something.
judiciously
In a judicious
manner; "let's use these intelligence tests judiciously"
en·ti·tle·ment
The fact of
having a right to something.
source: everydayquiz.blogspot.com
Link for Downloading our blog android App >>>Click here
#SSC #IBPS #SBI #RBI #NABARD #NICL #NIACL #CAT #NMAT #everydayquiz
No comments:
Post a Comment