Devolution of Power to People

I relate another instance which makes a strong case for the devolution of power to people.  In the area I live, as elsewhere in the country except when you are lucky to have VIPs in your neighbourhood,  there are frequent power breaks.  They are so erratic that sometimes you are caught unawares for hours without essentials like drinking water.  Even the inverters break down when the cuts are beyond an hour or two.  If you inquire, that is if you can get through to the electricity company  at all, they have the common refrain: “maintenance work is going on”.  One wonders if so much maintenance work takes place, why is the supply so erratic?  But there is no answer to this question.  Anyway, we are the ultimate sufferers from the effects of the cuts in power supply.  The electricity companies are not affected.  That makes us the major stakeholders in the electricity supply chain.  Should we then not be kept informed about the schedule of maintenance and other activities of the companies, so that we can plan our own schedules to minimize disturbance?  In this age of information technology, it is quite possible for the consumers to be kept informed.  Telephone companies and banks do it routinely for their customers.  Electricity companies can also do so.  Moreover, why should we be not involved in planning and overseeing the maintenance and development work of the electricity companies in our areas?  The involvement can be through Residents Welfare Associations of the concerned areas.  Skeptics amongst us will say,” How is it possible?  It is the responsibility of the companies and their administrative authorities”.  But it is we who suffer and not the authorities.  So, we must push for the desired oversight role.  It is our democratic right, and duty, to do so.   We would simply ensure that the planned schedule is adhered to and do not seek to interfere in any of the other functions of these companies.  

Our Obsession with Poverty Line


In the debate on Poverty Line the point is often made that the we need Poverty Line as a measure of the progress made by the country over time and across regions.  But the Poverty Line as defined at present does not seem to be a good measure, because it is one-dimensional in that it measures only the nutritional needs of a person or a family to survive.  Much better measures are the Human Development Indices (HDI), because they measure progress on many fronts.  Take, for example, the rate of maternal mortality during childbirth.  It measures progress, or lack of it, not only in the area of nutrition, but in many other areas such as access to healthcare, education, clean drinking water and sanitation.  Similarly, infant mortality rate is an indicator of progress in a range of areas.  These indicators are multi-dimensional and measure the all round progress the nation makes.  A person needs not only adequate nutrition to survive, but also access to healthcare, education, sanitation, clean drinking water, housing, power, roads, etc., to live with a modicum of dignity.  In my view, the debate over Poverty Line simply diverts our attention from the pressing need of the all-round development that the country needs to measure.  I am not an economist, but knowing a little mathematics,  my suggestion would be to divide on the basis of parameters like nutrition and HDI, the whole population periodically (say, every ten years) in four quarters or five quintiles, and consider the people falling in the last quintile as requiring the nation’s focus on improving their condition.  The next time when such a survey is carried out, some would have moved out of the last quintile and some may have fallen from other quintiles into this quintile.  So, this would offer a dynamic ‘poverty line’.  It will also be an inclusive programme, targeting every body who is in the last quintile.  The focus would be on helping people attain a better quality of life. The development of the country would be indicated by HDI, Infrastructure development and other such indices.