India Today Group Online > Web Exclusive > Au ContrAiyar

Web Exclusive

	DAILY NEWS \| ASTROLOGY \| ARCHIVES \| INDIA TODAY \| HOME

V Shankar Aiyar

AU CONTRAIYAR

Its not about LDCs

Downsizing is not about getting rid of lower division clerks but shrinking the cabinet and thus the government, says V Shankar Aiyar in Au ContrAiyar.

Ministry of Urban Development

Although the ministry claims that it formulates policy to support and sponsor urban hosing, nobody is quite sure what exactly this ministry does besides looking after the office/housing of babus and mantris besides occassionally airing views on Urban Land Ceiling Act. In fact no other government in the world has such a huge department for urban development that achieves so little. It employs 33176 people and costs Rs 305.91 crore.

Ministry Of Textiles

Again a ministry which is a vestige of the Raj given the fact that much of textiles and garment output is now in the private sector. If at all there is a role it could be limited to policy. Number of employees: 5532. Wage bill: Rs 57.21 crore

Ministry of Civil Aviation

Once the ministry sells off IA, AI (and HCI) its role will be limited to running the airports and air safety institutions.
Can it then defend: a staff strength of : 1687 in 2000 (up from 1483 in 1999) and wage bill of Rs 17.39 crore.

Somehow the popular image of the government is one of lower division clerks sitting in a row doing, well, nothing. Perhaps this visual works well as a metaphor for what the government delivers - or does not deliver. But targetting these middle and lower middle class souls - as some commentators tend to - will not achieve a smaller government. In fact, it would be counter-productive as they form a substantial slice of the services sector - the engine of the apple cart called the economy. Besides in India, nay Bharat, a government job is social security by another name.

Downsizing or the politically correct phrase -- rightsizing, is primarily about shrinking the government's absolute area of influence. It is thus about questioning the need for over 75 ministers and several ministries which have no reasin to be: For Instance the Union Ministry For Steel.:
Steel was decontrolled in January 1992. Yet the ministry continues to "look after" the sector. It would be instructive to separate what they claim to look after (the myth) from the reality:
Myth: Co-ordination and planning of the growth and development of iron and steel industry in the country
(including re-rolling mills, alloy steel and ferro alloy industries, refractories) both in the public and private sectors;
Reality: With licensing done away, there is really no room for any co-ordination or planning in the private sector.
Myth : Formulation of policies in respect of production, pricing, distribution, import and export of iron & steel,
ferro alloys and refractories;
Reality: These issues are now decided by the market and the government really has no role.
Myth: Development of input industries relating to iron ore, manganese ore, chrome ore and refractories etc required mainly by the steel industry.
Reality: Fig leaf, since input industries are similarly decontrolled.

In short, barring the running of SAIL and associate entities, the ministry really has no locus standi to be on the list of ministries - not at least in its current size and form. The organisation structure of the ministry reveals that the ministry directly employs 602 employees (up from 585 in 1999). Sure, it is one of the smaller ministries but it still manages to provide seating to: a secretary; one additional secretary; three joint secretaries; five directors; a chief controller of accounts; three deputy secretaries. The cost: Rs 6.77 crore for the year 2000-01. Interestingly it also has a development commissioner - a post the ministry reveals "dates back to the days of Raj when it was set up as Iron & Steel Control Organisation in Aug. 1941". Clearly, this is one ministry that could be wound up. SAIL and associates could be "looked after" by the ministry of heavy industry. The space at Udyog Bhavan deserves better usage.

Rightsizing is also about the resolving the lack of rational for ministries at the centre and the state duplicating non-delivery. Sample this list: agriculture, home, housing, urban development, fisheries, information technology, cooperation, animal husbandry, food processing, public distribution, environment, forests, tourism, health and family welfare, education, labour… Almost every department also functions at the state level. In fact, subjects like agriculture, health and education are primarily the responsibilities of the state government yet the centre is not shy of maintaining these boards in the corridors of north block.

The question one needs to ask is if these ministries deliver or even formulate policies worth their cost. Or is their existence justified by political expediency, about MPs from various parties who are needed to support the so-called era of coalition. With gross fiscal deficit (really the level of its indebtedness) crossing 10 per cent of GDP (including states) there is need to actively pursue slashing expenditure beyond the cursory cuts. Or very simply: beyond reducing the number of lower division clerks.

(V. Shankar Aiyar is Associate Editor, INDIA TODAY. He is based in Mumbai.
Write to V. Shankar Aiyar.)

Top

Chat transcripts

Mail this to a friend
Archives