Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 6

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

 (Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

How government works

Attitude constraints: In a democracy, government has to function by giving utmost attention to feeling the pulse of the people. To do this, government has to keep an open mind and obtain information and feed back by making full use of different sources available in the country such as MPs, MLAs, Panchayat Raj institutions, resident welfare organizations in urban areas, media, social activists, intelligentsia, groups of people who speak up about                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     their problems etc. But, government does not have a systematic proactive approach to make use of all these multiple agencies to feel the pulse of the people. What is worse, it is not inclined to set up an organization to do this.

Sad to say, whenever government’s actions are questioned or suggestions for improvement are made, the usual reaction is to reject these on the faulty premise that listening to these will be considered as a sign of weakness. This intolerant attitude is anti-democratic and shows a know-all dictatorial approach. It proves beyond doubt that government gives only lip service to democracy and do not at all care for democracy, while ironically boasting that it functions as a democratic government. It has not realized that the real strength of a democratic government lies in its ability to (1) listen to people, (2) accept useful ideas and (3) act on these with vision and commitment. This attitude and expertise are sadly lacking.

A democracy has also to ensure that public funds are used efficiently and for the intended purposes. For this purpose, the Constitution has set up an authority called Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG). Sad to say, the government has not acted to remove the large number of anomalies about misuse and enormous losses of public funds pointed out by CAG. This attitude of not acting on important information provided by even a constitutional authority is another instance of a dictatorial approach and is a serious blow to democracy.

Faced with other problems of faulty governance, a strategy of escapism and / or buying time is chosen by referring the matter to Commissions, Standing Committees of Parliament etc. The findings of these top expert bodies are more often put in cold storage than acted upon. Even worse, sometimes, actions contrary to their recommendations are taken. For instance, in 2005, Standing Committee on Energy of Parliament had urged government to reduce its reliance on petro-taxes. This was not only ignored but also revenue from petro-taxes was repeatedly increased, showing scant respect for Parliament. The fact that government has scant respect for Parliament is further confirmed by repeatedly breaking promises given during replies to questions in Parliament or discussions on bills and motions. During the last 10 years this immoral action was repeated 1,024 times, as reported by the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs (DNA dated 16-09-13)!! Over a longer time period many more instances of disrespect could have happened. This speaks volumes about (1) government’s gross lack of respect for Parliament and (2) the latter spinelessly tolerating disrespect thousands of times, without the dignity expected from the august supreme body of democracy.

Another attitude towards listening to people is also lamentable. Who says is more important than what is said. As a result, many useful and innovative ideas had no chance of being heard, because important people or known persons or sycophants had not said these.

Considering listening to people, expert groups set up by government and even constitutional authorities as a weakness instead of strength is the ninth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, an organization has to be set up to (1) encourage people to freely express their views (particularly innovative ideas), (2) analyze these and (3) sort out and accept important / useful ones for implementation with commitment. If any suggestion of expert groups or constitutional authorities is rejected by government, Parliament / Assembly should take the initiative immediately to either disallow the rejection or ratify it if there are valid reasons for rejection.

Lopsided mindset: Government is obsessed with GDP growth rate and revenue collection. It becomes upset if GDP growth rate falls but is not bothered if people continue to suffer. Sad to say, the fact that high GDP has only resulted in widening the gap between the rich and the poor is not its concern. Even the obsession with money seems to be selective because government has not taken any tangible action against the multiple scams which have resulted in enormous losses of public money which, otherwise, could have been used for welfare of the people.

Another problem is questionable use of public funds with a lopsided mindset. For example, a scheme named Sonia Gandhi Go Shiksha Yojana has been running for over eight years and almost Rs. 8,000 crores of tax payers’ money “has been spent in the name of teaching traffic rules to cows”!! (DNA dated 6-10-12).

Almost every year audit reports caution about large scale wastages and surrendering of budgeted amounts because of lack of commitment.  But, these reports gather dust and hardly result in suitable action. All these and some more undisclosed wastages of tax payers’ money still continue without even a semblance of efforts at least to reduce these let alone stopping these. To cover up the increase in deficit due to these inefficiencies, additional taxation has been resorted to.

Serious thinking for devising clever methods of collecting more revenue is laudable if these funds are used for welfare of people. But, realities are discomforting. Late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had stated many years back that 85% of money spent on rural projects do not reach the beneficiaries. This colossal wastage is still continuing and depicts not only inefficiency but also a callous mind.

Because shortage of power is a serious problem, low priority and insufficient funds for alternate sources of power are maters for serious concern. Moreover, inefficient utilization of even the meagre funds allotted for various modes of power generation is another mater for even more serious concern. For example, capacity addition target for power generation was missed by 47% in 8^th Plan, 54% in 9^th Plan, 49% in 10^th Plan and 30% in 11^th Plan. Lack of commitment leading to the large number of instances of nonutilisation and misutilisation of public funds ought to be disconcerting but not so for government.

All these show that government is happy with its lopsided priorities and inefficiencies. A recent example of lopsided priority is the provision of Rs. 200 crores in the current budget for a statue of Sardar Patel and only Rs.100 crores for women’s safety, ignoring that the whole nation is crying hoarse for the latter. Besides being a lopsided priority, this is another example of ignoring peoples’ voice!!

The more efficient officers specially allotted to Finance Ministry have been super active to collect more revenues which are, sad to say, allowed to be wasted or misuilised by all ministries. To reduce fiscal deficit, emphasis has been on taxing more. The more healthy options of reducing fiscal deficit by preventing wastages and postponing projects with less priority hardly get attention.

The above aspects depict the tenth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

This obstacle can be overcome only with a change in mindset to avoid lopsided priorities and inefficient implementation. Welfare of people (not GDP growth rate) should be the main guiding factor.

Illogical positioning: Successful governance requires qualified professionals to be completely in charge of various activities which can be properly handled by them only. But most of the technical departments are headed by IAS officers. This illogical positioning allows professionals to be supervised by non-professionals and thereby hinders progress as well as accountability.  In stead of facilitating performance of professional activities for welfare of people, this illogical positioning resulted in withholding required funds and other necessities and controlling professional persons and thereby hindering them in performing these activities. The emphasis is on administration of the professional department and not on facilitating effective performance of activities required for welfare of people.  One reason given is that professionals have no training in administration. This flimsy reasoning attaches more importance to administration of the department than to the activities to be performed for welfare of people!! Moreover, the obvious solution to improve efficiency of professional services to the people is to arrange for management training for professionals and to depute administrators to assist them only in administration of the department, in stead of smothering their work by illogical supervision and control of resources by administrators as is being done. 

This illogical positioning is the eleventh and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle, highest priority should be given to various professional activities which are essential for welfare of people and not to administration of the departments. All departments carrying out professional services to the people should be headed by professionals who should be given training in management to organize effective professional services. In addition, they should be assisted by qualified administrators for tackling problems in administration within the department.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome these very serious obstacles are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 5

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Government formation

Selection of Prime Minister (PM) / Chief Minister of a state (CM) is often influenced not by capacity for governance but by extent of hero worship of a leader on the one hand and fear psychosis created by vested interests on the other. A popular “hero” cannot be a “master” in every aspect of governance and can even be a “zero” in some aspects.  PM /CM should have the capacity to (1) manage even a heterogeneous team without curbing their enthusiasm like a dictator, and (2) resist pressures from vested interests. Popularity should only be an additional quality.

Moreover, the method of selection does not have even a semblance of democracy. A coterie of most influential leaders of the party (or parties) which form government makes the selection and a farcical election is conducted to give pretence of democracy. As a result, the PM/CM is not able to function effectively because of lack of firm majority support and domination by other power centre(s). PM /CM has to support ministers who are corrupt, inefficient or acting against national / state interest, instead of taking action against them. Non-government members of the coterie exercise powers without accountability. PM /CM has to suffer such distortions and also becomes answerable for the consequences.

PM / CM and the coterie of influential leaders then select ministers and allot portfolios to them. Experience and efficiency in carrying out required functions are supposed to play a part. But, in reality, there are number of extraneous considerations and power play which are not conducive to running an efficient government in a democratic manner.

All these actually result in a type of subtle and concealed dictatorship rather than a democracy.

These aspects depict the seventh and serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome this obstacle and enable the PM / CM to be able to function effectively with support of peoples’ representatives and without interference from other power centres, they should be directly elected by Parliament / Assembly, preferably through secret ballot. PM / CM can then select the team of ministers from the MPs / MLAs. The efficiency assessments suggested in Articles 3 and 4 will immensely help to objectively elect an efficient member as PM / CM and for them to select efficient ministers.

Another aspect is that a government can function only for a maximum period of five years even if its performance has immensely benefited the country. Why should the country gamble by spending enormous amounts of public money to replace such a desirable government with a new government every five years when there is no surety that a new government will be better than this efficient government? Moreover, lack of continuity leads to avoidable distractions and distortions in functioning of government. Will a corporate body or private enterprise change an efficient CEO merely to have a change at regular intervals? Why are we not applying such thoughts to have continuity of good governance? Is it because public “business” is nobody’s business and lacks in a sense of commitment?

This undesirable convention of unnecessarily changing even efficient governments is due to linking government formation with Parliament / Assembly formation. Why dismiss an efficient government just because a new Parliament / Assembly has to be constituted? All that is necessary is that the government should continue to be efficient and answerable to the new Parliament / Assembly.

On the other hand, a five year period can allow inefficiency and / or lack of transparency to continue for five years and ruin the country. In such a situation, why should we not immediately change that undesirable government without wasting lot of time to dissolve Parliament / Assembly, wait for completion of election processes, form a new Parliament / Assembly and then form a new government, unless these institutions are also at fault? Keeping in view the importance of having an efficient and accountable government, the Parliament / Assembly (not the coterie of influential leaders) ought to seriously consider selection of another set of members to form government.  Any obstacles to this should be removed in order to ensure dismissal of an inefficient or corrupt government without wasting time and incurring massive expenses for re-election of Parliament / Assembly.

In either situation mentioned above, interests of the concerned political parties may come in the way of peoples’ representatives taking suitable action with independence to (1) have an efficient and accountable government and (2) avoid spending enormous amounts of public money to form a new Parliament / Assembly when not required. It seems that the only tangible reason for regular change of Parliament / Assembly and government even when these are working efficiently is felt need or ambitions of politicians. If there are no other major reasons for the rigid 5-year change, is it appropriate to have a governance system tutored to the needs and ambitions of politicians?

Need for change of government should be based only on a regular system of assessment of efficiency of governance and follow up actions suggested in Article 3.  Providing the option to either continue or change government based on efficiency assessment will also increase the sense of accountability in the government system.

Should we not think seriously about removing the linkages mentioned above which come in the way of continuity of efficient and accountable governance or dismissal of an inefficient or corrupt government?

                                                                     

These aspects depict the eighth and serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

Overcoming this obstacle requires flexibility in choosing periodicity of elections (as suggested in Article 3) and de-linking Parliament / Assembly formation and political party system from government formation. These will help in two ways: (1) either continue an efficient government even after five years or dismiss an inefficient government whenever required and (2) save huge election expenses. What is urgently required is to start a regular system of assessment of efficiency of governance to decide on periodicity of government formation. This ought to be organized and conducted by a statutory body like the Election Commission as suggested in Article 4.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and suggestions to overcome these obstacles are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save our sinking democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through personal group discussions, newspaper articles, e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

  Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 4

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Election Commission: Under the Constitution, it is the duty of the Election Commission (EC) to carry out free and fair elections to pick up true representatives of the people as members of various legislative bodies in the country. Preceding Articles 1 to 3 has shown that the main aim of electing true representatives of the people has not been achieved because, on an average, the vast majority of the electorate (estimated as more than 65% in Article 2) did not support the elected persons resulting in low levels of representation. For example, 78% of MPs elected in 2009 had the approval of only less than half of the electorate (Times of India dated 23-03-14). In addition, even these low levels of representation were of dubious nature because many had blindly voted in droves due to caste or other considerations or sold their votes. (Refer to earlier articles for details and research findings.) Moreover, the candidates for election and the political parties who sponsored them were eager to spend enormous amounts on election (often even secretly exceeding the limits fixed by EC) mainly because of two reasons: (1) money is one of the “sure-fire qualifications to ensure a victory in the elections” (DNA dated 30-07-13 quoting study by Association of Democratic Rights – refer Article 2); “being treated to a party at a dhaba or getting Rs.200 or a Rs.500 note influences voting.” (The Hindu dated 18-03-14 quoting Anna Hazare – Article 1) and  (2) the system gives elected persons unfair opportunities to amass wealth. These reasons attracted criminal mafia also to get elected, or get their stooges elected, by using money power and / or intimidation. Thus, the election system not only failed to elect representatives having support of majority of people, despite wasting huge amounts of public money, but also is the root cause of unlimited corruption and control by mafia. Conducting election in two stages as suggested in Article 2 could have removed one of these anomalies by ensuring that the elected representatives had majority support.

Article 3 had also shown that election is a costly gamble using huge amounts of public money and emphasized the need to seriously think out of the box for a better method for giving voice to the people, not just once in five years as an ineffective ritual (as at present), but more frequently and effectively.  

Elections are to be conducted according to the constitutional provisions, supplemented by laws made by Parliament. Election laws are to be based on the basic values of constitutional democracy. In order to protect these values from legislative and executive influence, the Constitution had incorporated these values as constitutional provisions. The Supreme Court (SC) has held that where the enacted laws are silent or make insufficient provision to deal with a given situation in the conduct of elections, EC has the residuary powers under the Constitution to act in an appropriate manner. SC has further clarified that the jurisdiction of EC is wide enough to include all powers necessary for smooth conduct of elections.

According to the spirit of the Constitution, the sole purpose of election was to give voice to the people.  Sad to say, even when the election system repeatedly failed to give voice to majority of people, EC overlooked the fact that the present election system cannot achieve this purpose.  The main reason seems to be hesitation or omission on the part of EC to think out of the box  to exercise the powers vested on it by the Constitution to give voice to the people,  even though  EC had the residuary powers to act in an appropriate manner, which is insulated from political pressure and executive influence.

This failure to think out of the box is probably because EC became too complacent after receiving kudos for conducting the herculean task of organizing elections on a massive scale. It is also possible that the Election Commissioners felt a soft corner or obligation to the government for appointing them to this coveted post without undergoing a rigorous system of selection.

All these show that EC has not applied its mind to develop an apt system to ensure democracy by giving effective voice to majority of the people at minimum cost.

This is the fourth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

The functions of EC also include looking after all the problems connected with elections besides conducting elections. This function has not been satisfactorily executed as shown by the following examples:

1. As pointed out earlier in this Article and in Articles 1 to 3 in more detail, the election system has failed miserably to elect true representatives of people with majority support. But EC continued to focus on this faulty system and did not apply its mind to develop a better method for giving voice to the people, in accordance with the spirit of the Constitution, that too not just once in five years as an ineffective ritual as at present, but more frequently and effectively. EC had also not applied its mind to the fact that it is empowered to adopt any better method which fully supports the spirit of the Constitution for giving voice to people, despite a SC judgment stating that where the enacted laws are silent or make insufficient provision to deal with a given situation, EC has the residuary powers under the Constitution to act in an appropriate manner.

2. When violations of the mode of conduct occurred, EC did not give any serious punishment to the violators and violations continued unabated because of this soft approach of barking but not biting.

3. Only after repeated criticism, EC expressed concern about criminalization of politics (in stead of acting to prevent it by using its constitutional powers). For example, as the statutory custodian of democracy (not for conducting elections alone), it could have forcefully demanded suitable amendments to the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951. It is not clear what had prevented EC from being more assertive in taking suitable actions against criminalization of politics by exercising its wide powers in stead of expressing concern or making recommendations.

4. EC had recommended (not ordered using its powers) the inclusion of “none of the above” (NOTA) as an option for voters. SC has recently allowed NOTA but has not agreed to carry out fresh elections even if those using NOTA form the largest group. If the largest number of voters have rejected all candidates it is a clear indication that fresh election is the will of the people. EC has been silent about this and did not appeal against this anti-people decision by SC. EC has also not protested against SC interfering with its powers as the Statutory Authority for conducting elections.

5. EC had proposed to the government that its administration should be a “charge” on the Consolidated Fund of India like for other constitutional authorities. A bill for this purpose which was introduced in 1994 is still pending. EC did not forcefully demand restoration of this need as for other constitutional authorities (not as a special case) but only meekly reiterated this need from time to time, for the last 20 years!!

6. The government has been sitting for more than 9 years on poll reforms suggested by EC. There may also be more administrative and financial bottlenecks which EC had to face. This step motherly attitude of a democratic government towards EC, which is the statutory body set up to ensure democracy, is against the Constitution and deserves to be condemned outright. But EC is silent about these, in stead of  using its residuary powers under the constitution to act in an appropriate manner.

All these show that EC has been acting like a modest advisor to the government instead of a statutory authority with wide powers, despite the strong support from SC judgments!! Whereas SC (another statutory authority) has been passing strictures against government whenever called for, EC has closed its eyes when government put spokes in its functioning as a statutory body, which is essential for democracy,

These aspects depict the fifth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

The manner of functioning of Parliament and Assemblies has clearly shown that the political party system may be more a hindrance than help to democracy. It is surprising that EC, the statutory custodian of democracy (not for conducting elections alone), had closed its eyes to the fact that the political parties had repeatedly stalled democratic functioning of governance or distorted it  to serve their interests. It has not cared to apply its mind to retrieve the situation e.g., by warning the political parties about disqualifying them for undemocratic and undisciplined behavior. Sad to say, it did not even react against such undemocratic and undisciplined acts by political parties. Neither has it insisted that political parties should have effective internal democracy which is essential for true democracy.

This is the sixth and very serious obstacle which resulted in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

To overcome all these serious drawbacks, it is essential to have an EC which thinks out of the box whenever necessary and constantly applies its mind and powers to ensure a truly vibrant democracy and passes necessary orders for the sustenance and growth of democracy, which are binding on the government and political parties, similar to orders passed by SC.

As pointed out earlier, EC has been acting like a modest advisor instead of a statutory authority with wide powers, despite the strong support from some SC judgments. To safeguard against its recurrence, suitable qualifications and experience (including demonstrated capacity for innovation and taking strong decisions when needed) should be prescribed for Election Commissioners, and the field should be thrown open and not effectively restricted to civil service officers alone. Appointments should be made directly by the President of India on the recommendation of a committee consisting of Lok Sabha Speaker, Minister of parliamentary affairs, Chief Justice of India, Chairpersons of Human Rights Commission and UPSC, two eminent social activists and representatives of two outstanding NGOs providing welfare services to the people.

An independent reviewing body has to be set up immediately to ascertain the reasons for EC not functioning as a constitutional authority but as a modest advisor (as at present) and to recommend directly to the President steps which are essential to ensure that EC exercises the powers vested on it by the Constitution.

Meanwhile, EC ought to do the following immediately, keeping in mind that (1) the functions of EC include looking after all the problems connected with elections besides conducting elections and (2) according to a SC judgment, where the enacted laws are silent or make insufficient provision to deal with a given situation, EC has the residuary powers under the Constitution to act in an appropriate manner.

1.  Instruct all political parties to carry out elections using secret ballot to restore internal democracy at various levels within a fixed period (may be about three months), failing which their registration should be cancelled.

2.  Develop a system for assessment of the functioning of MPs and MLAs and conduct such annual assessments, starting with immediate effect, followed by further actions as suggested in Article 3 to reduce frequency of elections.

3.  Prescribe qualifications and experience required for MPs and MLAs to be enforced after a prescribed gap for acquiring these.

Lastly, no amount of praise is adequate to acknowledge the tremendous efforts of EC in conducting such large scale elections without any serious anomalies. However, sad to say, because of the faulty system of election these laudable efforts could not produce the desired results. In the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the party which won majority of seats did not have the support of the vast majority (69%) of the electorate and questions its representativeness. Moreover, among the elected MPs as many as 53 had criminal cases against them. This unhappy situation may be comparable to an active  shopping spree in which a clever and enthusiastic man  bought lot of things  at bargain prices but when he reached home he was told that these were not the items which were really needed and included many defective and unsuitable items.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and other suggestions to overcome these very serious obstacles are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

 Let us think and Act with an open mind to

Develop a Vibrant Democracy – Article 3

SRB

Introduction: I have identified thirty obstacles which cause a distorted and ineffective democracy and possible solutions for these. Because very few people have time / inclination to read long articles, these are presented in separate brief articles for pointed attention and easier assimilation. I hope this will lead to spreading of awareness and facilitating point by point debate on each of these for saving our sinking democracy.

(Please keep these articles within easy reach for referring back till the series is completed.)

Frequency of elections: The aim of elections is to have a Parliament, and state assemblies which can represent the people truly and effectively and help to manage governance with efficiency and accountability. With regard to the first aim of selecting true representatives of people the election system has failed miserably as clearly pointed out in Article 2. With regard to the second aim of an efficient system of governance also this system has failed because the mode and frequency of elections unnecessarily obstructs continuity of good governance as explained below.

When elections are carried out once in five years (or sometimes even earlier), number of efficient representatives who are fulfilling the above aims admirably are unnecessarily weeded out along with the inefficient and the tainted ones, unlike the management machinery which has continuity because it is not broken up completely and reassembled. This lack of continuity in top levels of governance leads to avoidable distortions and distractions in functioning of democratic and other institutions. On the other hand, if these are functioning efficiently, why should we not continue these beyond five years and save huge amounts of tax payers’ money spent on present system of elections? There is no guarantee that the new set of representatives will be better. They can even be worse as has happened quite often in the past, even making it difficult to form a cohesive government.

Obviously, election is a costly gamble using huge amounts of public money. Why should we not seriously think of a better method for giving voice to the people, not just once in five years as an ineffective ritual as at present, but more frequently and effectively?  

The present system of elections also diverts attention of government from govrernance to re-election and results in lack of efficiency and sincerity in governance, particularly  during pre-election periods. Further, the need for large amounts of money for participating in election leads to undesirable and illegal activities and generation of black money. All these harm the economy, besides distorting governance to satisfy fund providers. If elections are held after longer intervals, these two dismal situations can be mitigated, besides saving enormous public funds.

A fixed five year period may allow inefficiency and lack of transparency to continue for five years. When this is happening only, we should replace the undesirable democratic institutions which have been incurring expenditure on a set of representatives who have not justified the faith placed on them by people. Unfortunately, the possibility of the new set of representatives being equally bad or even worse cannot be ruled out. This will sound the death knell of democracy unless innovative corrective measures are taken immediately instead of waiting for five years and then again failing to get more cohesive and efficient institutions as shown by the history of elections.

To avoid distortions and distractions in functioning of Parliament, Assemblies and machinery of governance, it is better to have a flexible election system guided solely by the need for improvement in governance. This will reduce the enormous amounts spent on elections, part of which can be used for the two stage voting suggested in Article 2, to avoid grossly inadequate and perverted representation of people.

Another definite advantage of the flexible system of elections is that the machinery of governance, which has adjusted to a political power system, will not have to waste time and energy to readjust to another political power system once in five years or even less.

Neglecting these aspects is the third obstacle which results in a distorted and ineffective democracy.

These problems can be solved by having flexible durations for democratic institutions and leaders based on an efficiency driven approach for making desirable changes.  The present governing system has efficiency assessments for all officials of the management machinery except legislators who occupy the most crucial positions.  To remove this serious anomaly, at the end of each year, efficiency of all elected representatives in democratic institutions should be objectively ascertained and those not performing efficiently should be given a warning to improve. Those who do not show improvement after one year should be disqualified and their seats filled up by new election. Others should be allowed to continue till they happen to become inefficient in later yearly evaluations or cross a prefixed age limit or voluntarily retire. This will ensure continuity of governance and inject a sense of responsibility and accountability among the representatives which, sad to say, is not being ascertained now because there is no system of evaluation for this most important wing of governance!! An appropriate election system should avoid discarding efficient representatives along with inefficient and tainted ones, particularly because the former are rarer to find.

This new system of flexible elections based on yearly assessment will, besides ensuring continuity of all efficient democratic institutions, reduce expenditure on elections to a much smaller number of seats every year.  A small part of the enormous amount thus saved can be used to have two stage elections (refer Article 2) to ensure that the fewer persons elected as per the new system of elections represent majority of people.

Comments (especially those which point out errors or deficiencies, if any, in this article and thereby help to improve it) and other suggestions to overcome this obstacle are welcome. Please send these to StartRemovingBlocks@gmail.com. I shall make use of all befitting suggestions to prepare the last two articles of this series – Articled 23 will spell out the basic principles which will guide formulation of the revised system of democracy and Article 24 will outline the revised system of democracy, for public debate to arrive at a consensus.

You can help to save democracy by making as many people as possible aware of these obstacles and possible solutions, through e-mail and social media like face book and twitter so that we can have healthy debates and arrive at some innovative ideas to save our sinking democracy.

Need to rethink and act urgently on fuel prices SRB Prices of petrol and diesel were increased number of times within a year, that too often steeply. LPG prices were also increased though less often. According to newspaper reports, the central and some state governments claim that they have no role in the price hikes. This is one of the blatant examples of deceiving people. In fact, Governments are heartlessly earning more and more revenue by taxation at the expense of aam admi. From the price of each litre sold, a shameless exorbitant profit (about 50% in some states) is made. Since these hikes in taxation form a percentage of the price, the profit increases each time fuel prices are hiked. Thus, governments have not only a role in increasing prices but could have developed a vested interest in increasing fuel prices. Another basic defect of these taxes is that they burden both rich and poor alike, both directly and indirectly by the spiraling cost of everything including essential things needed by the poor. Lack of an ethics of care for aam admi is crystal clear on the part of governments which go on merrily making profits from sale of fuels while aam admi, have been forced repeatedly to increasingly struggle against inflation and badly hurting food inflation, that too continuously for a long time. There are millions of intelligent people in India. Yet this has been going on unquestioned for many years. Central and state governments are conveniently closing their eyes to the fact that such taxes are increasingly burdening lower and middle class two wheeler users (whose number is about five times higher than four wheeler users) and large number of users of three wheelers (the vehicle for poor and middle class). On the other hand, rich car owners, corporate bodies and government departments are not seriously bothered and continue to waste and misuse petrol and diesel despite high prices. Sad to say, an attitude of hardened apathy continues to prevail while hypocritically giving lip sympathy to aam admi and bluffing that governments have no role in fuel price hike, while making profits at their expense. They forget that they are servants of the people and continue to dictate like masters after creating conditions which make most people spinelss. In an article in Deccan Chronicle, Bangalore (30-06-11), Prasenjit Bose has given detailed calculations of earnings of central and state governments from taxing fuels and concluded that earnings from petroleum sector is Rs.80,000 crores for central government and Rs.70,000 crores for state governments, which add up to Rs.1,50,000 crores. These huge amounts are extorted mostly from unwilling but helpless aam admi. According to an article in DNA, Bangalore (25-06-11), the Central government has eliminated 5% customs duty on import of crude oil. Government feels that it is being magnanimous. But this reduction of 5% of their profit is mockingly miserly and callously forgoes a chance to help aam admi suffering from general and food inflation, after the strain of inequitable development. On the other hand, governments could have some justification if these huge funds were utilized wisely with a long term vision to speedily and adequately develop alternate energies such as solar and wind power as well as alternate biological fuels on a large scale on a war footing, instead of nibbling at these without any surge in emergency. The reasons given for this heartless taxation are the need to control budget deficit and increase in international price of crude oil. The burden of subsidy is another justification. With regard to controlling budget deficit, there are better and more human ways of reducing deficit which have not received proper attention. Reducing enormous misuse and wastage of funds which occur in most departments has not received adequate attention. For example, it is well recognised that only about 15% of huge funds for projects meant to help rural people reached intended beneficiaries, year after year. Yet nothing is done to stop the 85% drain in public money. This is an example of many such landmarks for inefficiency, grave irregularities and corruption. Another important need is to postpone projects of low priority to better times. For example, sending Indians to the moon at the cost of increasing sufferings of aam admi ought to get low priority till the situation improves. Emoluments of elected representatives have been increased substantially even though an objective analysis would have shown their lack of attention to properly carrying out their legislative functions (often because of sacrificing national interests to party interests).While aam admi are made to suffer by drastically increasing fuel prices, budget for the often misused MP Local Area Development Scheme has been steeply increased from 2 crores to 5 crores for each MP. Many more examples of misuse, wastage and distorted priority can be found if only governments care to look for these to reduce budget deficit, with a sense of urgency for helping suffering people. Lack of ethics for care of aam admi and innovative thinking and action are all conspicuous by their absence. Sad to say, lack of political and administrative will to give time and attention to such desirable people-friendly actions is evident and regrettable. Callousness has manifested itself even in allocation of work and monitoring. The more efficient political leaders and bureaucrats are entrusted only with “gainful” departments dealing with economic matters or power over people, for obvious reasons. Even worse, while these efficient persons eagerly apply their mind to multiply collection of funds, they hardly pay any attention to prevention of misuse and wastage of public money. They merrily continue to do so. Surprisingly, even the Public Accounts Commirttee of Parliament has not adequately questioned this serious inactivity leading to huge losses in public money continuing for many years.. On the other hand, the least efficient and unwilling are tagged on to tackle social welfare sectors. Even worse, they are often more interested in manipulating for a change to “gainful” departments. With regard to increase in international price of crude oil, there are unanswered questions. An editorial in Deccan Chronicle, Bangalore (26-06-11) points out that we buy petrol at Rs.70 per litre as against approximately Rs.45 per litre by people in USA and asks whether we are paying more for crude oil even though we are closer to Saudi Arabia. It also asks whether there is a standard cost for conversion of crude into petroleum products. A white paper covering all aspects of buying petroleum products and fixing fuel prices is badly needed to clear all issues. The article by Prasenjit Bose also supports this urgent need for a white paper, while stating that even at the prevailing international price of crude oil, “the domestic price of oil would be less than Rs.30 per litre”. Hence, putting the blame on international price of oil is diversionary and not justified. With regard to subsidy, Prasenjit Bose states as follows while comparing with Rs.1,50,000 crores revenue from fuel tax: “In contrast, total petroleum subsidy in 2010-11 was around Rs.38,000 crores (as per the Union Budget). This is to further come down to around Rs.23,000 crores this year. Clearly, the government is earning much more in taxes than spending on subsidies in this sector.” In all fairness, government should not tax to earn a profit at the expense of fuel users but restrict the tax to cover subsidy only. Or, allow oil companies to fix fuel price to include the subsidy. Either way, fuel prices will come down drastically and help the suffering people. Apart from sheer callousness for the plight of aam admi, another possible reason may be that government probably feels that increase in price of petrol and diesel will check increase in their consumption. But this has not happened. The fact is that these fuels are a necessity for development and reasonably good quality of life. Neither are these luxury items for the bulk of people and those engaged in industry, transport, agriculture, health care, education and other development activities. Wastage and misuse are mostly confined to vehicles used by officials of government and corporate bodies and rich people who want to show off their wealth. Increases in prices have not been deterrents for such people. The Deccan Chronicle editorial (26-06-11) states “despite the government raising fuel prices there are no signs of a fall in offtake from the fuel pumps, which shows that there is enough money with certain class to ignore any hike.” It is possible that the latest increase was timed to weaken the demands for a strong Lokpal bill. Besides serving as a distraction, organizing protests will become more costly and reduce the number of aam admi who can afford to protest. If so, such cunning should be defeated by recognizing that the two are connected. Increase in cost of living results in higher bribes also. Reluctance to introduce a strong Lokpal bill and reduce fuel prices are both instances of taking people for a ride for years together and should be fought together with renewed vigour. DNA SUNDAY, Bangalore (26-06-11) stated that on front page: “This steep hike will pinch household budgets already pummelled by soaring prices of food items and essentials.” In addition, increase in prices also result in reduced accessibility to health care and education. Though governments must be aware of these, they have been ignoring these because of lack an ethics of care for the people. In 2005, Standing Committee on Energy of Parliament had urged government to reduce its reliance on petro-taxes. Ignoring this, revenue from petro-taxes were increased, showing scant respect for Parliament which is repeatedly stated as supreme (whenever it suits!). Collection of taxes on fuels should be stopped immediately to drastically reduce fuel prices to control both general and food inflation and thereby relieve burden on aam admi. This will enable them to eat well, maintain good health, educate their children better and use transports necessary for their daily use, besides achieving speedier development of the country. Let us develop an ethics of care for the suffering millions and rethink and act with a sense of urgency to help them