Thursday, January 1, 2015

electronics products | Make in India

In order to give push to ‘Make in India’ campaign, recently the government asked all government departments to give preference to domestically manufactured electronics products in their procurement. Is this a right step? Critically examine.

To give the edge to it's ambitious "Make In India " program government recently asked the all departments to give their preference to the domestic manufactured electronic items in their procurement's. But it is essential to analyse the move in the lime light of both it's pros and cons.
They biggest advantage of this move that it will help in the development of indigenous market. Such procurement's also enhance the share of manufacturing in the economy, which give the competitive edge to the manufacturing sector. Furthermore giving emphasis to the indigenous manufacturer helps India to fix it's infrastructural bottleneck and it will also generate additional employment opportunity in nation. Here it should to be also noted that the government is investing large share of it's revenue in importation such electronic items and if the same amount will pump in the domestic market it will be admire both social and economical obligations of government.

The main concern in this regard is the lack of proper infrastructure. Despite of tremendous 6 % growth the manufacturing sector failed to give the competitive edge to the sector. This will hinder the domestic procurement's. Furthermore it has been also observe that the indigenous electronic items is not of so high quality and internationally they did not enjoy the eminent position as Chinese, Japanese or Korean enjoys. In this regard it is worth to mention that the such step to government also revoke their reformist zeal , as now the government is their buyer.Furthermore giving too much emphasis on the domestic market can create a unhealthy working environment for the foreign entities, which is not a good signal for any economy as a whole. Furthermore it also deteriorate the bargaining power and have great probability to create a monopolistic market. 
So while analysing all these arguments it is very clear that although the need of the hour is to promote indigenous market but it does not mean that eventually India should be turn in closed economy. Rather than a proper equilibrium between the indigenous and foreign players can adore the larger public interest.

A year of man-made health crises

Over the past year, several significant public health crises have unfolded in India and globally. As this year hurtles to an end, it becomes important to examine these events, if only momentarily, to understand the lessons they hold.
On closer examination, it becomes apparent that many of these crises were man-made — either because of continued neglect, a lack of focus on prevention and insufficient investment in health, or a focus on addressing diseases but not their root causes, i.e., the social determinants of health.
Early in the year, the war in Gaza and the blockade exacerbated a health crisis caused by continued international neglect of the people of Gaza. At the last count, the four-week conflict left 10,000 homes annihilated and displaced 4,50,000 people. The real public health crisis was the lack of electricity, clean drinking water and safe homes. Overcrowding and the lack of water and sanitation facilities led to a rise in the incidence of water-related diseases. As time passes, this destruction will expectedly result in multiple health crises that will affect the physical and mental well-being of hundreds of thousands of people.
Yet nothing made more news than the Ebola crisis in West Africa, where over 7,000 people have died. In the poorest and perhaps most politically unstable part of the continent where this crisis unfolded, the biggest areas of neglect were health systems, infrastructure, funding, trained human resources and little community education. Ebola has been endemic to the West Africa region for almost two decades. Yet, the ability of this region to address this disease, or any other, remains severely limited. Ebola wasn’t a global priority either, because it was centred in a poor region. International agencies bickered and took their time to respond while people died. When the first case emerged in the U.S., Ebola finally qualified as an important disease, and new experimental drugs, vaccines and preparedness soon followed. As always, it seemed too little, too late.
Health care in India
Let’s turn homeward. As India marched towards acche din , it also marched towards global leadership in many diseases. This year witnessed repetitive crises in malaria and dengue. Diabetes and heart disease continued to confound us. Earlier this year, we had a shocking stock-out of HIV testing kits and later of HIV drugs that, ironically, we produce and supply globally. Even as thousands were deprived of drugs in the public health sector, the government defended itself saying the situation was not “too bad.” India’s drug-resistant TB crisis too came out of the closet with over a 1,00,000 cases. We also finally admitted on national television that TB is the country’s time bomb.
However, the highlight was the sterilisation tragedy in Chhattisgarh. Over 10 of the 83 women who underwent sterilisation surgeries in the State died, while many others were hospitalised in a critical condition. The incident revealed the patriarchal mindset of successive governments who focus on female surgical sterilisation as a cornerstone of family planning. It also revealed the ongoing nexus between government officials and petty manufacturers, as the antibiotics given to patients were suspected of containing rat poison. Unfortunately, no politician or government official has been tried for culpable homicide. These deaths remain unpunished.
On a broader level, the quality of health services in urban and rural India, in both the public and private sectors, continued to be abysmal, as millions of patients travelled to access health services elsewhere. Over 60 per cent of all Indians continued to access healthcare in the private sector (many from quacks) at exorbitant costs and were often exploited with inappropriate tests and treatment. India’s epidemic of micro bacterial resistance also continued unabated as pharmacies sold antibiotics over the counter without sufficient control from the government. The biggest blow came at the end of the year as news leaked that the new government would cut health spending by around 20 per cent. For a country whose spending on health is among the lowest in the world, this was a terrible way to wrap up the year.
Lessons for the next year
What can we learn for 2015? Governments in India and elsewhere that promise development, growth and human well-being must recognise this: all this is not possible without investments in health and health systems. We need to invest in improving preventive and primary health care, sanitation, waste management and health education. Finally, if our long history of continuing disease and recent crises teach us anything, it is that the fundamentals of health remain critically important in disease control — sufficient nutrition, safe habitation, better air quality, sanitation, health-seeking behaviours, safety, and reduced conflict. All of these are deeply linked, not just to health but social and economic policy. Reducing spending on health will make things worse, not better, in India and elsewhere. Acche din will not arrive either next year or the decade after unless India integrates these lessons with its public policy.

‘Pro-farmer’ amendments: Modi

“Proposed amendments meet twin objectives of farmer welfare; along with expeditiously meeting strategic and developmental needs of the country,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted on Monday night on the ordinance to amend the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Act, 2013.
While the National Alliance of People's Movements, a network of social activists, described the step as “anti-poor” and pushing a corporate agenda, Mr Modi described the ordinance as including a “pro-farmer step” of bringing compensation and rehabilitation under 13 exempt central laws at par with the norms of LARR 2013. “Certain amendments have been made in the Act to further strengthen the provisions to protect the interests of the ‘affected families’,” he noted.
Under Section 105 of LARR Act, 13 central laws, including the National Highways Act 1956, the Railways Act 1989, Coal Bearing Areas Acquisition and Development Act 1957, are exempt from the provisions of the Land Act. The Land Act, however, required that within a year from the commencement of the Act the government may allow LARR’s provisions of rehabilitation to apply even in acquisition under the 13 laws that are currently exempt, subject to Parliament’s approval.
“The Act mandated that within a year, the notification including these 13 exempt laws be laid before Parliament while it is in session, for a total period of 30 days in one session or in two or more successive sessions, which was not possible this session. That is why the government found the ordinance route necessary,” said a senior Ministry of Rural Development. However, Jairam Ramesh, Minister of Rural Development with the UPA government said this was not true. “The one-year deadline for including the exempt laws already got over in September 2014.” Congress spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi said the government was taking to the ordinance route as it was afraid of public accountability. “Criticism of the opposition against the ordinance betrays its frustration, after failing to derail the government's reform agenda”, said Shrikant Sharma, BJP national secretary. The Confederation of Indian Industry welcomed the ordinance describing it as a sign of the government's “serious commitment to economic reforms.”



The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill (LARR Act) was enacted by UPA Government in 2013 which replaced decade old Land Acquisition Act of 1894. The enacted law brought many provision which was favorable to land holders such as increased compensation which would be four times and two times of the market value if the land is acquired in rural and urban areas respectively. Indeed, the law was laudable but there was having certain provisions which were contentious such as that there should be 80 percent consent of the family affected, if the land is acquired for PPP project.
Current regime has has brought certain amendment in the said bill through ordinance route to do away contentious part. Some of the amendments are-
-There should be no consent requirement and environmental impact assessment for the PPP projects. 
-Modification of the clause which stipulates the annulment of land acquisition if compensation is not paid within a time frame of 5 years, this time frame has been increased to 10 years
-Earlier compensation clause was not applicable to 13 Central Acts but now compensation requirement will be applicable for 12 central acts.
Removal of EIA decrease the time for the acquisition of land but this may compromise the environmental healthand removal of consent clause may affect families as they will have no say in the acquisition process.
The said amendment is necessary for the development as said by the current government but there should be some safeguards which may protect the interest of affected families. It would have been better if the amendments was to be brought after consulting with various stake holders rather in haste.

Healthcare in India

 “The quality of health services in urban and rural India, in both the public and private sectors, continues to be abysmal, as millions of patients travel to access health services elsewhere.” Critically comment.

Healthcare in India is a major issue as basic health is not reaching rural areas and villages and 60% of Indians are depend on private sector which is too costly for common man. The quality of health is an issue in India as rural areas are filled with jholachhap doctors, AYUSH doctors practising  allopathic medicines and in cities everyday we are receive several complains over mis-conducts of private hospitals.

Recently the deaths in Chhattisgarh, Multidrug resistance TB cases and shortage of AIDS test kits are few examples of failure quality of health services in country.

For the major deceases, there is few centres in the country and we are unable to provide facilities to every part. Even specialised private hospitals are limited.

Although medical tourism is increasing in the country and 100% FDI is lucrative, on ground level the quality of health services in urban and rural India, in both the public and private sectors, continues to be abysmal and we need better plans more efforts, awareness and dedicated people to improve the healthcare facilities in India.