#everydayquiz #Read Daily
#The hindu #business standard #DNA #indian express
THE DNA: Jat agitation reconsidered
It took us 20 hours
on a Sunday last month to get to Delhi from Jaipur traversing the districts of
Bharatpur, Aligarh, Mathura and Agra — Jat terrain — but where the road routes
were not yet closed unlike in Haryana, which was said to be burning.
Lampooning
the Jats was already underway on social media — popular comments were about
Jats congregating in SUVs. The urban middle class quickly used the opportunity
to decry the entire affirmative action programme — one WhatsApp post proposed
that the “sickness be removed from the roots” advocating quotas only for
economically backward sections, orphans and martyrs (for the nation) and those
affected by disabilities. All this in the face of numerous studies that have
demonstrated the benefits of India’s affirmative action programme including
land reforms legislation, which has created a new dalit presence in the Indian
middle class. Needless to say, these have also highlighted problems of
implementation, particularly with respect to the deepened marginality of
certain adivasi groups. But the latter is largely from mis-recognition, ie, the
inclusion of groups who are not quite deserving rather than from any intrinsic
flaws of affirmative action. There is also the need to institute a system of
exit that many observers have pointed to.
The Jat, Patidar and
Gujjar agitations then raise the question of re-classification rather than challenging
the legitimacy of affirmative action. Do these communities deserve OBC (Other
Backward Class) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) status? The answer is two fold. One,
that goes into the history of pastoral-peasant communities. Two, an analysis of
their current socio-economic and political status.
Historically
speaking, one must press the point about the internal diversity of communities,
particularly the Jats and Gujjars. Irfan Habib’s article on the Jats of Punjab
and Sind identifies them with the Zutt who roved the Indus as described by Arab
geographers of the 8th century. Large numbers of Jats, Gujjars and Bhattis
continued to be nomadic till 1800 or so and were sedentarised subsequently. In
the Braj region the Jats were peasants with a low status because of their
association with the plough. They were classified as sudras although their oral
and genealogical traditions intimate ksatriya claims. Both the Vrindavan
documents and the A’in-i Akbari describe peasants at the bottom of society.
Peasant rebellions, however, were not just economically driven — they were also
the outcomes of upward mobility and political aspirations. The rebellion of Jat
zamindars in the late 17th-18th century led by Suraj Mal enlarged Jat zamindari
at the expense of Rajput zamindari.
Colonialism ruptured
the peasant’s relationship with land and its produce, severing their access to
the commons; it denied communities their political autonomy and intruded on
their legal and customary practices and institutions. This was unlike the Mughal
Empire and regional kingdoms, which effectively practiced legal pluralism.
Certain pastoral,
peasant and forest-based communities were pushed towards impoverishment and
insurgency. Ranajit Guha’s classic Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in
Colonial India gives us an account of 110 revolts by Santhals, Mundas, Kols,
Bhils, Mewatis and Gujjars in the 117 years between 1783 and 1900. Sections of
the Jats prospered having been identified as sturdy Victorian peasants. As
beneficiaries of colonial technologies in irrigation and transport, Jat farmers
of western Meerut and north-eastern Mathura took to advanced cash-crops. While
some Jats participated in the Revolt of 1857, others collaborated with the
British such as the Jat raja of Mursan in Aligarh.
Jagirdari and
zamindari land reform legislation and the Green and White Revolutions have also
benefitted Jats in the aftermath of Independence. Land control has also
deepened structures of patriarchy and caste among the Jats as Prem Chowdhury
has demonstrated. The levirate union among Jats called karewa, usually with the
husband’s younger brother but sometimes also with other kin, was propagated as
widow remarriage but effectively denied widowed women a right of inheritance of
property in land. In Rajasthan and Haryana women are economic assets who
contribute to agricultural labour and tend to animals. Bride price has been
largely replaced by dowry and has become a substitute for women’s right to
property.
Jat pasts then do
not tell a uniform story about economic and social backwardness. This was
recognised by the National Commission for Backward Classes that rejected
requests for conferring OBC status on the Jats of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Delhi
and Madhya Pradesh but recommended inclusion of the Jats of Rajasthan in the
OBC list for central services.
While liberalisation
helped a section of the dominant castes of village India become part of a
burgeoning rural middle class, there are also Jat small and marginal farmers
and tenants. This is the case likewise with Patidars, Marathas and Kapus. There
is a parallel story of the last decade or so signalling a growing crisis of
Indian agriculture. Failing monsoons have exacerbated the shrinking
landholdings of peasants. Many observers have commented upon the low growth in
rural wages that is outpaced by the rate of inflation.
The ruling class
must look into this rather than fall back on the easy resort of enhancing
quotas. Regrettably, both major political parties have been playing the
politics of reservation. The BJP’s granting of OBC status to Jats in 1999 was
followed by the Congress in Rajasthan and Haryana and the UPA’s announcement of
quotas for Jats in nine states in 2014. More often than not, backward status is
granted in the absence of survey data for or against specific caste claims.
The third story that
relates to communities is one of the intertextuality of movements — the Jat
movement in Haryana has followed the same format as the Gujjar mobilisation in
Rajasthan with the leadership of an Arakshan Sangharsh Samiti, road and rail
blocks targeting NH8 and the destruction of property and assets. Further, there
is a competitive dynamics at work — Gujjars wants ST status in Rajasthan
following the Meenas and Haryana Jats now want OBC status akin to Rajasthan
Jats. The evidence also suggests a crisis internal to communities — changing land
use and the rapid spread of cities, which has created new inter-generational
and inter-communal conflicts. India as the subcontinent of communities
characterised by self-governing institutions is undergoing rapid
transformation. Welcome to the New India!
trav·erse
Travel across or through
lam·poon
Publicly criticize (someone or something) by using ridicule, irony,
or sarcasm.
con·gre·gate
Gather into a crowd or mass.
nu·mer·ous
Great in number; many.
in·trin·sic
Belonging naturally; essential.
rove
Travel constantly without a fixed destination; wander.
sedentarised
(Sedentarisation) In evolutionary anthropology and archaeology,
sedentism, is a term applied to the transition from nomadic lifestyle to a
society which remains in one place permanently. Essentially, sedentism means
living in groups permanently in one place.
peas·ant
A poor farmer of low social status who owns or rents a small piece
of land for cultivation (chiefly in historical use or with reference to
subsistence farming in poorer countries).
rup·ture
(especially of a pipe, a vessel, or a bodily part such as an organ
or membrane) break or burst suddenly.
lev·i·rate
A custom of the ancient Hebrews and other peoples by which a man
may be obliged to marry his brother's widow.
bur·geon
Begin to grow or increase rapidly; flourish
THE HINDU: Government cuts its losses on
EPF
Facing mounting criticism, the Narendra Modi government at the
Centre has decided to drop its Budget
proposal to tax a portion of the EPF (Employees’
Provident Fund) corpus upon withdrawal. An ill-conceived move both context- and
content-wise, it has deservedly been given a burial. “In view of the
representations received, the government would like to do a comprehensive
review of this proposal, and, therefore, withdraw the proposal in paragraph 138
and 139 of my Budget speech,’’ Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said in a
statement in the Lok Sabha. The government has also withdrawn the proposal to
limit tax-free contributions by the employer to the provident fund account of
an employee to Rs.1.5 lakh a year. This did not gel with the Budget speech
rationale for taxing EPF savings — to bring parity in tax treatment between the
EPF and the National Pension System (or NPS, where employers can pay up to 10
per cent of salary as contribution without any such cap). By putting the EPF
back into an EEE tax regime (where contributions, income as well as the
accumulated corpus are all exempt from tax), the government’s volte-face would help retain the EPF’s popularity
among the salaried class, most of whom are part of it not out of choice but by
statutory default. The Finance Minister had himself called them hostages to the
EPF in his last Budget, but instead of setting them free, he thought it better
to tax them citing fair taxation principles. It is still not clear whether the
government had initially thought it could pull the taxation proposal past its middle-class constituency. In
the event, the tax on EPF withdrawal gave additional ammunition to an
aggressive Opposition, including the Congress party. Differences within the
National Democratic Alliance and the Cabinet finally ensured the climbdown by
the Finance Ministry.
While announcing a return
to status
quo on the EPF, the Finance
Minister has rightly retained the Budget provision allowing NPS subscribers to
withdraw 40 per cent of the corpus without any tax liability. The remainder 60
per cent will attract a combination of withdrawal tax and deferred tax on the
annuity products one buys. In a way, partial tax relief for the NPS will narrow
the existing tax-induced gap between the EPF and the NPS. The strident
opposition to EPF tax must be read in the context of the virtual absence of a
social security net of any worth in India. There are no two views on the need
to move towards a ‘pensioned society’. However, this cannot happen abruptly or
in a coercive manner — people need to be nudged over time to gear up for such
transitions. Whatever the intention, it was the ‘out-of-the-blue’ approach of
the government that triggered an uproar. A sheepish rollback is a smart move,
ahead of a round of Assembly elections. It is to be hoped that this U-turn will
trigger a larger debate on ushering in a holistic social security ecosystem in
the country.
mount
Climb up (stairs, a hill, or other rising surface)
ac·cu·mu·late
Gather together or acquire an increasing number or quantity of.
volte-face
a sudden change from one set of beliefs or plan of action to the opposite
hos·tage
A person seized or held as security for the fulfillment of a
condition.
am·mu·ni·tion
A supply or quantity of bullets and shells.
climbdown
an occasion when you change your opinion or admit that you were wrong:
status
quo
the present situation or condition:
stri·dent
Loud and harsh; grating.
abruptly
Quickly and without warning; "he stopped suddenly"
co·er·cive
Relating to or using force or threats.
out-of-the-blue
If something happens out of the blue, it is completely unexpected
ush·er
Show or guide (someone) somewhere.
THE HINDU: Don’t compromise on privacy
The Aadhaar Bill,
which the government introduced in the Lok Sabha last week, has not come a day
too soon. More than six years have passed since the first attempt was made to
give legal validity to Aadhaar, an ambitious project that seeks to provide
unique identification numbers to each individual in a country of over a billion
people, collecting demographic and biometric information in the process. And
through these years, amid many legal and political challenges and a change in
government, over 98 crore numbers have been issued. The stated idea of the
Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and
Services) Bill, 2016, is to provide for “efficient, transparent, and targeted
delivery of subsidies, benefits and services”. This, along with a clause that
says the unique numbers will not be considered as proof of citizenship, is
welcome. And yet, the process of legislating for Aadhaar has not been wholly
reassuring. The Bill has attracted immediate criticism for being introduced as
a money bill, by virtue of which it does not require approval of the Rajya
Sabha, where the BJP-led government does not have the numbers to ensure its
passage. Bypassing the Upper House’s vote does give the Bill an easy route to
becoming law. The question is, given that Aadhaar
was a signature project of the
Congress-led UPA, could not the government have made the effort to reach out to
lawmakers across the board on such a crucial, bipartisan issue?
Wider political consensus
and scrutiny are vital. Section 7 of the Bill, for instance, makes proof of
Aadhaar necessary for “receipt of certain subsidies, benefits and services”.
This must be read in the backdrop of a Supreme Court ruling that said Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory. A
key concern over the collection of personal information on this scale is data
protection. There are provisions in this Bill that seem to address the concern,
including one that prohibits any official from revealing information in the
data repository to anyone. But the exceptions cause unease. Two provisions are
particularly troubling. The first is Section 29(4), by which no Aadhaar number
or biometric information will be made public “except for the purposes as may be
specified by regulations”. The second, which experts have already flagged, is
Section(33), under which the inbuilt confidentiality clauses will not stand when
it concerns national security. The only reassurance could be that in such cases
the direction has to come from an official who is not below the rank of a Joint
Secretary to the government. Nonetheless, without robust laws to protect their
data, citizens would be rendered vulnerable. It is not about just snooping. It
is also being said that in order to be useful and effective, Aadhaar data might
have to be used alongside other databases. That could trigger further privacy
questions. There is little doubt that India needs to streamline the way it
delivers benefits, and to empower citizens with a basic identification
document. But this cannot be done without ensuring the strictest protection of
privacy.
re·as·sure
Say or do something to remove the doubts and fears of someone.
vir·tue
Behavior showing high moral standards.
con·sen·sus
General agreement.
scru·ti·ny
Critical observation or examination.
ro·bust
Strong and healthy; vigorous.
rend·er
Provide or give (a service, help, etc.)
vul·ner·a·ble
Susceptible to physical or emotional attack or harm.
snoop
Investigate or look around furtively in an attempt to find out
something, especially information about someone's private affairs.
THE BUSINESS STANDARD : Contrarian
clause
The amendment to the Mines
and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act passed in March 2015 was rightly
praised for introducing the relatively transparent auction system for natural
mineral resources, building on the trend set by the e-auctions of coal and
telecom spectrum. As with most legislation introduced in recent times, however,
some problems have emerged in practice. For example, a particular clause,
12A(6), has hurt the dynamism of the sector. It reads: “The transfer of mineral
concessions shall be allowed only for concessions which are granted through
auction.” This unequivocal statement was designed, no doubt, to provide a level
playing field for those companies that paid large sums in competitively bid
auctions vis-Ã -vis those that acquired their mines relatively cheaply through
the old system of allocations with all its implications of opacity and
corruption.
A level playing field is a creditable objective, and should indeed be the purpose of government policy. But enabling an exit option only for one set of rights-holders, while denying it for another, is not the way to do it. It locks into policy-induced legacies those companies with mines and mineral concessions that pre-date the amendment. The wider obstructive implications of this are already manifest in the number of merger and acquisition deals that are stuck as a result, such as the Aditya Birla Group-owned UltraTech Cement’s plan to acquire the entire cement capacity owned by Jaiprakash Associates, Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group’s plan to sell the cement business of Reliance Infrastructure and Holcim’s plans to sell its assets in India following a global merger with French cement giant Lafarge. All these cement businesses have captive mines of limestone, a mineral critical to cement manufacture that comes under the ambit of the amended MMDR Act.
The irony of this restrictive clause is that it has become an impediment to other significant developments impacting the Indian business landscape. The sales of Jaypee and Reliance Infrastructure’s cement businesses, for instance, are part of a plan to reduce huge debt burdens. This, in turn, would have gone a long way towards taking some pressure off the stressed assets crisis that is afflicting the Indian banking system, especially government-owned banks. As diversified companies, both can go ahead with the sales but only after an extremely complex and time-consuming corporate restructuring to get round the provisions of the Act. In Holcim’s case, the inability to offload its India assets precludes it from conforming to a Competition Commission of India (CCI) stricture following the merger with Lafarge, an example of one Indian law at odds with another. Indeed, Lafarge’s efforts to sell its eastern assets to Birla Corporation to conform to similar CCI orders foundered for the same reason.
The government has indicated that it is amenable to amending the Act to accommodate these legacy issues. To maintain the level playing field, however, it should subject the legacy mines to the same set of conditions – set out in Section 12 – that apply to mines acquired through auctions with perhaps a premium, payable to the government and linked to the duration of the ownership of assets that were acquired virtually free in the heydays of the discretionary allocations regime.
A level playing field is a creditable objective, and should indeed be the purpose of government policy. But enabling an exit option only for one set of rights-holders, while denying it for another, is not the way to do it. It locks into policy-induced legacies those companies with mines and mineral concessions that pre-date the amendment. The wider obstructive implications of this are already manifest in the number of merger and acquisition deals that are stuck as a result, such as the Aditya Birla Group-owned UltraTech Cement’s plan to acquire the entire cement capacity owned by Jaiprakash Associates, Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group’s plan to sell the cement business of Reliance Infrastructure and Holcim’s plans to sell its assets in India following a global merger with French cement giant Lafarge. All these cement businesses have captive mines of limestone, a mineral critical to cement manufacture that comes under the ambit of the amended MMDR Act.
The irony of this restrictive clause is that it has become an impediment to other significant developments impacting the Indian business landscape. The sales of Jaypee and Reliance Infrastructure’s cement businesses, for instance, are part of a plan to reduce huge debt burdens. This, in turn, would have gone a long way towards taking some pressure off the stressed assets crisis that is afflicting the Indian banking system, especially government-owned banks. As diversified companies, both can go ahead with the sales but only after an extremely complex and time-consuming corporate restructuring to get round the provisions of the Act. In Holcim’s case, the inability to offload its India assets precludes it from conforming to a Competition Commission of India (CCI) stricture following the merger with Lafarge, an example of one Indian law at odds with another. Indeed, Lafarge’s efforts to sell its eastern assets to Birla Corporation to conform to similar CCI orders foundered for the same reason.
The government has indicated that it is amenable to amending the Act to accommodate these legacy issues. To maintain the level playing field, however, it should subject the legacy mines to the same set of conditions – set out in Section 12 – that apply to mines acquired through auctions with perhaps a premium, payable to the government and linked to the duration of the ownership of assets that were acquired virtually free in the heydays of the discretionary allocations regime.
un·e·quiv·o·cal
Leaving no doubt; unambiguous.
o·pac·i·ty
The condition of lacking transparency or translucence; opaqueness.
man·i·fest
Clear or obvious to the eye or mind.
i·ro·ny
The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally
signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
im·ped·i·ment
A hindrance or obstruction in doing something.
pre·clude
Prevent from happening; make impossible.
hey·day
The period of a person's or thing's greatest success, popularity,
or vigor.
dis·cre·tion·ar·y
Available for use at the discretion of the user.
dis·cre·tion
The quality of behaving or speaking in such a way as to avoid
causing offense or revealing private informatio
THE
INDIAN EXPRESS: The star, the shadow
The apologists can go on defending Maria Sharapova. But women’s
tennis’s biggest brand has failed a dope test earlier this year, stands
provisionally suspended till a ban is announced, and the sport will have to
start learning to live with that fact. Within hours of Sharapova’s sensational
revelations in Los Angeles, Nike, Porsche and Tag Heuer bailed from their
sponsorships of the glamorous tennis star who has won five majors. And tennis,
a sport still reeling from a match-fixing storm, has been struck by a wrecking
ball of Sharapova-esque proportions, further dragging it down. This is the most
high-profile failed drug test in sport in recent times, matching that of Ben
Johnson
and Lance Armstrong.
and Lance Armstrong.
Tennis will rue that moment when its most marketable face and
sport’s highest-paid sportswoman, as also her management that worked
painstakingly to shape her image, were so callous about opening an email that
listed her medication as a banned substance. There was unequivocal acceptance
of guilt in the press conference, where she owned up to the failed test.
Establishing the alleged wrongdoing — or not — will take up the next few
months. But Sharapova’s detractors will seize every excuse, even as her
marketing profile starts losing sponsors and hits the brand, despite the
cleverly and bravely addressed press conference.
Meldonium, the Latvian drug, is considered to be rampantly used
across sports with The Times, London, quoting “182 positives” from the 8,300
random doping-control urine samples tested — a staggering number of those
curing magnesium deficiencies and treating diabetic symptoms. It presents an
almighty headache for the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) when sportspersons
are seen to be pushing the limits of the anti-doping legal framework, availing
of the loopholes even as Wada’s labs play catch-up. Sharapova looks prepared to
grit it out. But sadly for tennis, the damage might already be done.
-esque
(forming adjectives) in the style of; resembling.
rue
Bitterly regret (something one has done or allowed to happen).
painstakingly
In a fastidious and painstaking manner; "it is almost a waste
of time painstakingly to learn the routines of selling"
cal·lous
Showing or having an insensitive and cruel disregard for others.
un·e·quiv·o·cal
Leaving no doubt; unambiguous.
de·trac·tor
A person who disparages someone or something.
grit it out
to accept a difficult situation and deal with it in a determinedway
No comments:
Post a Comment