Trust in government

09/01/2016

Democracy is the government of the people. Once the people have elected a party to power, the intellectuals, NGOs, social activists etc. should repose faith in the intentions, ability , fairness etc. of the government and allow the government to pursue its policies, programmes etc. vigorously and should not organise agitations etc. which would slow the programmes of the government. However, every one has freedom of speech etc and they can try to explain to the people  as to how the current government’s  policies are against their interests.If the people are convinced of the opposition’s view they would vote out the present government in the next elections and bring in a new party to power.

Further whatever a Minister 9r a bureaucrat does in g00d faith should not be questioned by a successor government. This is necessary to ensure that the Ministers and bureaucrats do not avoid implementing their policies in fear of being questioned later.


Political parties weakening executive wing of government- India

10/08/2015

The hunger for power, the irresistible desire to be in the news etc. make political parties to level allegations against each other of indulging in corruption, inefficiency etc. When the allegations are made, common people without any hesitation tend to believe the same and form an opinion that governments of all parties are corrupt. The news about the accused leaders being acquitted does not go into the heads of the people.The result is that when other wings of the government interfere with the functions of the executive, people accept it and the political parties do not make it an issue. This is not good for democracy.

It is common knowledge,that the Prime Minister of India and the Ministers and bureacrats in 1950s had more powers, more discretion etc than their successors in 1990s , 2000s and 2010s.

It is therefore important that the political parties do not make unfounded allegations against other parties. The then opposition parties made serious allegations of corruption against the then ruling party and now,the latter,who are now in opposition are making serious allegations of corruption etc against the current ruling party leaders. It is time, the political parties deeply deliberate on this issue


BRICS

15/04/2012

There is need for a wide and intense public debate on India’s membership of various regional and other forums like BRICS. Some of the points to be debated are:

1.Whether BRICS will push up Russia and China to more prominent roles on par with that of United States in world affairs

2.Mmbership of fora like BRICS diverts attention from bing focussed on other imprtant and urgent issues

3.There is not much comonality of interests between India and some other BRICS members. Increasing gold prices benefit Soth Africa,Russia and China who are major prodcers while it badly affects India, which is a large importer.

4. Increae in oil prices is against India’s interests, but to be on the other side of US,Russia and China often take positions fabourable to oil exporting Arab countries.

5.Rupee trade agreements were in practice decades ago between India and countries like East European contries, Egypt. India does not have to be member of BRICS to practic it again and with any country to increase trade

6. Extending more credit in Indian Rupees to developing contries will lead to increase in India’s exorts.

7.. To increase exports and also imports, India should become a trading nation like Singapore, UAE,Hong Kong etc.to emerge as one of the top 5 importers/exprters. Indian Missions in BRICS countries can play a larger role to forge closer relations even without the existence of BRICS forum

8.India’s inerests and concerns appear to correspond to those of US in matters like fight
against terrorism, nuclear programme of new countries, democracy, individual’s freedom, fundamental rights etc.

9.The common futures which exist between these countries may not continue in future also.


Nuclear Power Plant- issue to be left to referendum

13/10/2011

In the context of the agitations for stopping the work of Koodankulam Nuclear power plant in Tamilnadu and phasing out of other
nuclear power plants and the views of experts on the safety of these plants, one has to carefully consider the pros and cons.

1. India’s demand for power is increasing and the present supply is grossly inadequate.

2.Inida does not have sufficient coal reserves to meet requirements of existing and new thermal plants

3. The scope for new hydro-electric plants is limited

4. Nuclear power production does not pollute the atmosphere as thermal plants.

5. There are adequate safedguard to prevent any leakage of radio activity. The Japan power plants are about 40 years old and those did not have safeguards as the new ones.

6. Nuclear technology development cannot take place if we give up building nuclear power plants.

The points against the nuclear energy are:

1.If a developed safety conscious country like Japan coud not ensure safety to the people from nuclear power plant, how will India do it

2.The alternatives to nuclear energy viz wind power, solar power, biogas/biomass power have not been fully utilised and exhausted. Solar and biomass energy alone can meet the exising and emerging need for energy

3. Sea waves have not been exploited for generating elecricity and the potential is said to be immense

4. Solar and biomass energy also do not contribute to pollution

5. Unlike nuclear energy, solar, wind and biomass energy plants can be dispersed across the country which would mean less transmission losses.

Both points of view are convincing.But a decision can be taken not only on the merits of the case, but also based on the aspirations and fears of the people, particularly in a democratic country like India. Though the government has been elected democratically, it may not be correct to say that it has the authority in such cases to take a decision without reference to the people. Thus it seems that the government should hold a referendum among the people within a radious of certain distance who could be the immediate victims if anything happens. It referendum should be confined to such people. This is because, people living near nuclear plants shold not be made to take wha they call “risk” to their life as well as the life of the future generation, for the betterment of themselves and the other people of India