Saturday, April 29, 2017
Friday, April 28, 2017
Time for a National Debate on Direct Election of CM - Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan
Now that there is a vigorous debate about simultaneous elections to Lok Sabha and State Assemblies.
The best way to accomplish that goal is election of the head of government in states by the people in a direct election, with clear separation of powers, fixed tenure, term limitations, and the freedom to appoint the cabinet from outside the Assembly. In a large, aggregate election in the whole state, the risks of vast investment in vote buying are too high, and rewards are too low. Therefore leaders and parties will depend on the personality, character, record and credibility of the candidate, and the agenda, rather than on vote-buying. At the same time, as the legislative majority is no longer necessary for the survival and functioning of the executive, the profit making opportunity of the legislator diminishes substantially (he can no longer pressurize government for transfers, contracts and other favours). One might spend 5 to 10 crores for an assembly seat but is highly unlikely that one will take risk of spending few thousands of crores to become C.M .Therefore, the risk of high investment in vote-buying becomes unsustainable, as the rewards are few. The whole system will go into a virtuous cycle, and black money and corruption will decline significantly.
Along with Direct Election of CM we should start debating on Proportional Representative Electoral System in States
Proportional Representation in States
The requirement of marginal vote in the winner-take- all first-past- the-post system is at the root of vote buying in a poor country with our historical and political background. In the quest for winning votes, most major contenders for power – candidate and parties – are forced to spend lavishly and buy votes. Vast, unaccounted expenditure has become the necessary entry fee for serious electoral competition; but it does not guarantee victory. Thus while money does not guarantee political success, it had become a huge entry barrier, has distorted political competition and incentives in politics, has attracted wrong kind of people and repelled most of the public-spirited citizens, and created a system of corruption, bad governance, cynicism and under-performance.
If we allocate seats in proportion of the share of votes of a party in a state, then marginal vote is not vital; winner does not take all; there is no desperation to buy votes; ethical groups and parties will have voice; consensus becomes necessary in governance; representation is available to all views; and ethical politics and entry of truly public-spirited citizens become assets, not liabilities for parties.
There are various models of such Proportional Representation (PR). But simple, state-based models with a reasonable threshold of vote requirement to prevent excessive fragmentation, and multi-member constituencies to continue link between people and their representative will work best in Indian conditions.
Such a PR system is technically easy to introduce – it only requires a change in law. However, it is unlikely to materialize at the national level now, when a major party has a clear majority, and is a beneficiary of FPTP system. Nevertheless, if there is political consensus at the national level, PR can be introduced in States. Real politics and governance challenges are in states. As seen in the UK, there is no need to have the same FPTP model at national and state levels. In the UK, while the House of Commons is elected on FPTP model, regional parliaments in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales are elected through PR. So are members of European Parliament elected so far (until Brexit becomes a reality). Similarly London city mayor is elected directly by all people.
Therefore PR model for state assembly elections is a viable, practical reform which will transform nature of politics and governance in states. As the real governance touching citizens is at state and local levels, it will be transformative in nature. And it can be achieved by a simple law of parliament as the Constitution provides space for multi-member constituencies.
Courtesy: Social Post News
The best way to accomplish that goal is election of the head of government in states by the people in a direct election, with clear separation of powers, fixed tenure, term limitations, and the freedom to appoint the cabinet from outside the Assembly. In a large, aggregate election in the whole state, the risks of vast investment in vote buying are too high, and rewards are too low. Therefore leaders and parties will depend on the personality, character, record and credibility of the candidate, and the agenda, rather than on vote-buying. At the same time, as the legislative majority is no longer necessary for the survival and functioning of the executive, the profit making opportunity of the legislator diminishes substantially (he can no longer pressurize government for transfers, contracts and other favours). One might spend 5 to 10 crores for an assembly seat but is highly unlikely that one will take risk of spending few thousands of crores to become C.M .Therefore, the risk of high investment in vote-buying becomes unsustainable, as the rewards are few. The whole system will go into a virtuous cycle, and black money and corruption will decline significantly.
Along with Direct Election of CM we should start debating on Proportional Representative Electoral System in States
Proportional Representation in States
The requirement of marginal vote in the winner-take- all first-past- the-post system is at the root of vote buying in a poor country with our historical and political background. In the quest for winning votes, most major contenders for power – candidate and parties – are forced to spend lavishly and buy votes. Vast, unaccounted expenditure has become the necessary entry fee for serious electoral competition; but it does not guarantee victory. Thus while money does not guarantee political success, it had become a huge entry barrier, has distorted political competition and incentives in politics, has attracted wrong kind of people and repelled most of the public-spirited citizens, and created a system of corruption, bad governance, cynicism and under-performance.
If we allocate seats in proportion of the share of votes of a party in a state, then marginal vote is not vital; winner does not take all; there is no desperation to buy votes; ethical groups and parties will have voice; consensus becomes necessary in governance; representation is available to all views; and ethical politics and entry of truly public-spirited citizens become assets, not liabilities for parties.
There are various models of such Proportional Representation (PR). But simple, state-based models with a reasonable threshold of vote requirement to prevent excessive fragmentation, and multi-member constituencies to continue link between people and their representative will work best in Indian conditions.
Such a PR system is technically easy to introduce – it only requires a change in law. However, it is unlikely to materialize at the national level now, when a major party has a clear majority, and is a beneficiary of FPTP system. Nevertheless, if there is political consensus at the national level, PR can be introduced in States. Real politics and governance challenges are in states. As seen in the UK, there is no need to have the same FPTP model at national and state levels. In the UK, while the House of Commons is elected on FPTP model, regional parliaments in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales are elected through PR. So are members of European Parliament elected so far (until Brexit becomes a reality). Similarly London city mayor is elected directly by all people.
Therefore PR model for state assembly elections is a viable, practical reform which will transform nature of politics and governance in states. As the real governance touching citizens is at state and local levels, it will be transformative in nature. And it can be achieved by a simple law of parliament as the Constitution provides space for multi-member constituencies.
Courtesy: Social Post News
Tuesday, April 25, 2017
Lok Satta launches postcard campaign
The Lok Satta Udyama Samstha, Karimnagar district unit, launched a postcard campaign demanding that the State government introduce the Right to Public Services Act albeit Citizens’ Services Guarantee Act to ensure accountability and curb corruption in the administration.
Lok Satta district president N. Srinivas and general secretary Prakash Holla launched the campaign from the Government Women’s Degree College in the town. On the occasion, a total of 50 students sent postcards to Chief Minister K. Chandrasekhar Rao demanding him to introduce the Citizens’ Services Guarantee Act. The Lok Satta leaders said they have decided to write over 10,000 postcards to KCR.
Courtesy: The Hindu
Lok Satta district president N. Srinivas and general secretary Prakash Holla launched the campaign from the Government Women’s Degree College in the town. On the occasion, a total of 50 students sent postcards to Chief Minister K. Chandrasekhar Rao demanding him to introduce the Citizens’ Services Guarantee Act. The Lok Satta leaders said they have decided to write over 10,000 postcards to KCR.
Courtesy: The Hindu
Saturday, April 22, 2017
Friday, April 21, 2017
Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom by Dr.Jayaprakash Narayan
This Brainstorm on the future of our republic has been interesting, elegant and insightful, and hopefully it may even stimulate the thinking of a few who are open to a genuine dialogue. Often in Indian public discourse we are reminded of Thomas Edison’s words: “There is no expedient to which a man will not resort, to avoid the labour of thinking.”
The recurring theme of the debate so far is the gulf between our traditional attitudes and liberal values. Clearly the constitution, laws, institutions and policies – not merely as declarations of intent, but as practical tools and a road map to bridge this gulf and achieve the desired goals – are critical in shaping the future of our republic. Excessive emphasis on societal attitudes and traditional values will lead to fatalism, just as excessive optimism about the limitless possibilities of technology in transforming our society will lead to irrational exuberance. The bridge and road map for the collective are as critical as individual freedom in the marketplace and free exchange of goods and services in promoting, liberty, wealth, prosperity and harmony.
Far too many people are now using democracy as an alibi for our failures, for we reduced democracy to voting and shouting without meaningful participation, empowerment and ownership. A democracy works when short-term political success and long-term public good are substantially, if not wholly, aligned. If we create structures, institutions and practices that inevitably create irreconcilable conflict between political success and public good, then such a democracy is dysfunctional, and the republic is in peril. The key to this alignment between power and public good has to be as local as possible, in a way the voters become citizens and the links between the vote and the public good, taxes and services, and authority and accountability are manifest to most, if not all, people on a daily basis.
What we need is an opportunity for a thousand flowers to bloom: people commit mistakes, but learn from them; successes are replicated; voters become citizens; people become owners and sovereigns; enlightened self-interest trumps sectarian or parochial prejudices. This is the political equivalent of millions of free individuals exchanging goods and services for their own gain, and the unseen hand of the market delivering optimal outcomes to the whole society.
There is space and need for protest. But if a million mutinies have no direction or outcome, and only act as a safety valve, it is enormous energy wasted. Far too many things the state ought to deliver are in appalling state – education, healthcare, basic services, rule of law, local governance. As a result the ‘mutinies’ and ‘movements’ have to expend tremendous energy and exhibit uncommon heroism to achieve ordinary deeds. Any nation that demands extraordinary efforts for pedestrian outcomes, or relies on messiahs and invests touching faith in ‘superheroes’ and ‘maximum leaders’ is in for perpetual underachievement and disappointment.
A great and prescient Telugu poet, Gurajada, wrote nearly 125 years ago – well before our national leaders even thought of a free India: “A nation is not a piece of earth; it is the people.” The sooner we give up our addiction to panaceas and quick fixes, the more willing we are to recognize that people make their own collective destiny if only they are empowered and enabled to understand the consequences of their choices and actions, the faster we will successfully address our dilemmas. The real question is, are we, the elites, ready to overcome our pet peeves and narcissism of small differences? Are we ready to trust our people to make choices, commit mistakes, imitate best practices and improve the common good out of enlightened self interest, just as they participate in the market for their own benefit and facilitate collective gain; not as acts of great nobility and sacrifice?
India’s vastness, diversity, remarkable eclectism, and five thousand years of continuing civilization make us unique. From the global perspective, our success is critical for stability and harmony around the world.
India, lest it be forgotten, is as populous as 150 other countries combined. By encompassing all of these people in a single political entity, it dramatically reduces the complexity of global governance—even if it does not always feel like that. Had the republic not succeeded in refuting Churchill, had it disintegrated into multiple sovereign states, the world’s negotiating tables might have needed to accommodate dozens of additional quarrelling players.
I am an eternal optimist. Human societies always learn from past experience – their own and that of others. We need to accelerate this process by reimagining the Indian state and allowing genuine participation and ownership. The inchoate discontent of millions of long-suffering people in itself cannot transform our institutions. It needs purposive action backed by clear consensus among the elites – political, bureaucratic, media, academic and intellectual. I hope this Brainstorm, in some small way, contributes to that process of building elite consensus.
Courtesy: Think Pragati
The recurring theme of the debate so far is the gulf between our traditional attitudes and liberal values. Clearly the constitution, laws, institutions and policies – not merely as declarations of intent, but as practical tools and a road map to bridge this gulf and achieve the desired goals – are critical in shaping the future of our republic. Excessive emphasis on societal attitudes and traditional values will lead to fatalism, just as excessive optimism about the limitless possibilities of technology in transforming our society will lead to irrational exuberance. The bridge and road map for the collective are as critical as individual freedom in the marketplace and free exchange of goods and services in promoting, liberty, wealth, prosperity and harmony.
Far too many people are now using democracy as an alibi for our failures, for we reduced democracy to voting and shouting without meaningful participation, empowerment and ownership. A democracy works when short-term political success and long-term public good are substantially, if not wholly, aligned. If we create structures, institutions and practices that inevitably create irreconcilable conflict between political success and public good, then such a democracy is dysfunctional, and the republic is in peril. The key to this alignment between power and public good has to be as local as possible, in a way the voters become citizens and the links between the vote and the public good, taxes and services, and authority and accountability are manifest to most, if not all, people on a daily basis.
What we need is an opportunity for a thousand flowers to bloom: people commit mistakes, but learn from them; successes are replicated; voters become citizens; people become owners and sovereigns; enlightened self-interest trumps sectarian or parochial prejudices. This is the political equivalent of millions of free individuals exchanging goods and services for their own gain, and the unseen hand of the market delivering optimal outcomes to the whole society.
There is space and need for protest. But if a million mutinies have no direction or outcome, and only act as a safety valve, it is enormous energy wasted. Far too many things the state ought to deliver are in appalling state – education, healthcare, basic services, rule of law, local governance. As a result the ‘mutinies’ and ‘movements’ have to expend tremendous energy and exhibit uncommon heroism to achieve ordinary deeds. Any nation that demands extraordinary efforts for pedestrian outcomes, or relies on messiahs and invests touching faith in ‘superheroes’ and ‘maximum leaders’ is in for perpetual underachievement and disappointment.
A great and prescient Telugu poet, Gurajada, wrote nearly 125 years ago – well before our national leaders even thought of a free India: “A nation is not a piece of earth; it is the people.” The sooner we give up our addiction to panaceas and quick fixes, the more willing we are to recognize that people make their own collective destiny if only they are empowered and enabled to understand the consequences of their choices and actions, the faster we will successfully address our dilemmas. The real question is, are we, the elites, ready to overcome our pet peeves and narcissism of small differences? Are we ready to trust our people to make choices, commit mistakes, imitate best practices and improve the common good out of enlightened self interest, just as they participate in the market for their own benefit and facilitate collective gain; not as acts of great nobility and sacrifice?
India’s vastness, diversity, remarkable eclectism, and five thousand years of continuing civilization make us unique. From the global perspective, our success is critical for stability and harmony around the world.
India, lest it be forgotten, is as populous as 150 other countries combined. By encompassing all of these people in a single political entity, it dramatically reduces the complexity of global governance—even if it does not always feel like that. Had the republic not succeeded in refuting Churchill, had it disintegrated into multiple sovereign states, the world’s negotiating tables might have needed to accommodate dozens of additional quarrelling players.
I am an eternal optimist. Human societies always learn from past experience – their own and that of others. We need to accelerate this process by reimagining the Indian state and allowing genuine participation and ownership. The inchoate discontent of millions of long-suffering people in itself cannot transform our institutions. It needs purposive action backed by clear consensus among the elites – political, bureaucratic, media, academic and intellectual. I hope this Brainstorm, in some small way, contributes to that process of building elite consensus.
Courtesy: Think Pragati
Tuesday, April 18, 2017
JP Bats For Direct Election Of CMs
Dr N Jaya Prakash Narayan has
advocated in favour of getting Chief Ministers elected directly by the people
so that the MLAs can be prevented from playing the dirty defection games.
New Delhi: Dr N Jayaprakash Narayan, founder of Lok Satta and General
Secretary of Foundation For Democratic Reforms (FDR) has strongly advocated
direct election of the Chief Ministers. He was speaking at a seminar on
‘Immediate Election Reforms’ organised by the workers of India Against Corruption
under the leadership of Anna Hazare.
Dr JP has called for a national
debate on election reforms above the political parties. He said the people of
India are yet to realise the real value of the vote, once they realised it they
will not sell their votes for money. There is need for preventing the MLAs from
indulging in defection games and adopting corrupt practices. Politics should
not be allowed to become a family affair or a private affair of some
individuals, but it should be treated as a means to serve the people and to
improve their leaving standards. Dr JP has played an important role at national
and State levels in bringing about electoral and administrative reforms. He was
instrumental in the enactment of Right to Information Act.
Monday, April 17, 2017
Lok Satta Times April 16th-30th, 2017
Lok Satta Times April 16th-30th, 2017 can be downloaded from the following link.
http://ap.loksatta.org/documents/lstimes/lstimes-2017-04-16-30.pdf
http://ap.loksatta.org/documents/lstimes/lstimes-2017-04-16-30.pdf
