Aadhaar for the rich

          The longer you stay on in bureaucracy, you are convinced that no matter how well meaning your actions or thoughts, you are always under a cloud of suspicion. 5 years back the Chief of my organization was arrested for bribery and corruption. In the intervening years, I have seen ordinary, earnest Babus being implicated for taking perfectly legitimate decisions under given circumstances. The Coal sector had become the cynosure of attention. My friends in the bureaucracy swear by the integrity of some of the Officers who were implicated in the Coal affair. It has become fashionable to point fingers at everyone without an iota of proof. Mainstream media and social networks have compartmentalized public perceptions on governance and public administration into black and white boxes. You are either good or bad. There is no earnest attempt to plug loopholes in our traditional processes of public management.

      But what happens when perfectly sensible people clamour against the implementation of one of the greatest administrative reforms ? I hold no brief to any political party. Having seen how Delhi functions from very close quarters, I am sure that the substitution of one political party with another can't make any great difference.

   The Aadhaar project was rolled out for the poor. When the project was launched , this blogger was excited at the promises it held for transformation of our management of public programs. As a public servant who doesn't normally come across the Aam Admi on a daily basis, I believe that many administrative reforms do not make an impact to daily life. Let me talk of the problems we face. Occasionally one is involved in the process of large scale induction of manpower. We get to see a large number of educated youngsters queuing up for jobs. The latest scam goes like this. Specialists from certain parts of the country will come and write exams on your behalf. For Group C posts in the Government, there are no interviews. So selections are based on written exams. Once the exams are cleared, the real candidate comes to take up the job. Money changes hands for appearing for exams. Nowadays we insist on producing identity proof in the exam hall. But there are ingenious methods of overcoming this problem with smart editing of documents and photographs. If the identity of the person taking the exam could be vetted through Aadhaar, then this fraud could be easily curbed. (Believe me it is a serious problem- there are people in this country who would do anything for government jobs).  

                      Even the financial inclusion project could have been linked to Aadhaar so as to ensure that the figures that are being touted are genuine. Bankers are known for their sense of caution and prudence when it comes to opening bank accounts to low income customers. (Kingfisher Airlines could have faced less rigorous scrutiny). It is quite possible that a large number of bank accounts were opened in the names of individuals who already have a Bank account. A mechanism for incorporating or seeding Aadhaar No:s into all existing PAN No:s, Passports and Bank accounts could de-duplicate the whole process. In a populous country such as India, identifying true beneficiaries and weeding out ghost beneficiaries is a big challenge.  The academicians and Civil liberties activists can never understand these challenges. When Aadhaar was linked to Gas subsidies in one state, the demand came down drastically.What if public distribution system is linked to Aadhaar so that the PDS rice or kerosene doesn't find its' way to the black market ? Instead of routing fertilizer subsidies to inefficient firms who gold plate their accounts, we could probably spend a portion of it by granting it directly to the farmer with Aadhaar.
            If credit cards can be vetted online by a ubiquitous small machine, what prevents us from inventing/ rolling out a machine which can read a thumbprint/ scan iris and confirm that the person is who he claims to be ? This instrument could then be made available in large numbers at immigration check points, Banks, ration shops, registration Offices, treasury and Post Offices. If we can incorporate sufficient safeguards to prevent misuse, why can't we roll it out for effective management of subsidies, entitlements (including rural Job guarantee schemes), pensions, scholarships etc ?

                   Unfortunately, politics often takes precedence over perfectly legitimate decisions. The Parliamentary committee that studied the Aadhaar project has given it a damning report. The ex-Chief Minister of Kerala has attacked the project as a conspiracy of global multinationals to sell their wares in India. (When it is headed by a person figuring in the Fortune's richest list- what is he going to do with bribes from MNCs when he has made enough for three generations and also contributes a lot to charity?) Strangely enough, the clamour grows louder from privacy advocates, academicians and  liberals etc. They claim that the identity project could lead to a gruesome weapon in the hands of the government, which in turn can use it for electoral alchemy, telemarketing, snooping and myriad other sins. (only those working in the government know the extent of our incompetence to carry out any of the aforesaid crimes)  And the government wrings its hands with  contradictions in parliament over questions on cooking gas subsidy. Luckily the new Government has endorsed the Aadhaar project (after promising to close it down during the campaign stage)

               Nilekani's book outlines the need for identity for the poor. But why are we ignoring the elephant in the room? What if Aadhaar is linked to property holdings and securities transactions. While we talk of the benefits it can bring to the poor, why are we ignoring the potential to curb the frauds perpetrated by the rich ? Benami holding of property, fraudulent property/ shares transactions, skimming of benefits meant for the poor, under-declared income everything could be managed more effectively. What if property can be registered or sold in the country only if it is linked to Aadhaar number of the buyer/seller ? If the scheme is rolled out with earnestness, it can become the greatest administrative reform of the century. Just like the Electronic Voting Machine is unique which has caught the fancy of the world. By infusing a good dose of technology into the process, we can not only do away with the need for large number of public servants to manage the country, but also manage it more effectively.

 

 

CSAT or not- a case for abolishing the CSE

Finally the agitation that was brewing for banning the CSAT (Civil Service Aptitude Test)  as part of the Civil Services Examinations (CSE) exam has died down. The street protestors say that CSAT is loaded in favour of the English speaking urban class and it spoils the chances of the rural folk who have not had the privilege of a convent education. While the Government tried many tactics- some of them were (a) announcing that the marks of CSAT will not be counted for merit; it will be only be qualifying in nature (b) the test will be administered in Hindi also. And finally, the Government bowed down to all interested parties and decided to conduct the test in all 22 languages in Schedule 8 of the Constitution of India.

 Now just imagine what a nightmare it could be for UPSC which administers the test ! It would be difficult to maintain secrecy and integrity of the exam process if a question paper has to be translated into 22 languages. Large number of translators/printers etc could be privy to the questions and might constitute a potential source of leakage of questions. Secondly it is not clear how many of the Civil Services aspirants will be utilizing the translated papers. That is democracy for you in the Indian republic. We have no choice but to implement an illogical, mass-driven solution. Many ex-bureaucrats have criticized the Government's decision to marginalize English. They believe that English is the language of the future and we could be driving ourselves into a corner if we choose bureaucrats who do not possess communication capabilities in English. One could argue that these critics were all benefited by the St Stephens/IIT brand of education and are being elitist. Others argue that European countries have bureaucrats who are ignorant in English- aren't they proud of their language and heritage ? Aren't they running their countries well? Some others argue that the Chinese are on a mission mode to make their large population learn English. Aren't they the next super power ?

I complete 24 years in the Government. The first few years were traumatic. I always felt I didn't bargain for this and I certainly deserved more. That had to do with my job (which hardly counts as part of the bureaucracy)- it is not like any other regular government job. However I got lucky as far as the kind of assignments I handled. Two long term courses,(one abroad), several difficult tasks, foreign trips, a stint in the Ministry etc; for someone who didn't go to St Stephens or IIT, I think I got more than what I deserved.  I still can't help feeling that the Indian Civil Service is the most poorly organized and shabbily planned administrative mechanism one could think of.

 The Civil Service as it exists today is probably one of the original legacies of the British which we chose not to tinker with because it suited the goals of the elite in it. The steel frame of bureaucracy is a cosy club of the elite of Civil Service, who manage to corner top posts in every conceivable Ministry and finally retire to become Governors and Information Commissioners. Some time back there was an interesting debate on television on civil service reforms.There were academicians, journalists, Officers from the Armed Forces and IPS and some IAS Officers. Some eminent panelists pointed out that the Indian Civil service as it exists today is not equipped to deal with the highly complex public policy aspects of governance. In the 1940s, a generalist might have been able to run Telecom, Railway, Defence or Power Ministry. Today's challenges are diverse, complex and requires experience and domain knowledge. Almost immediately a young IAS Officer piped up to object. He said Alan Mulally moved from Boeing to Ford and turned around the company. He said that emphasis on domain knowledge and specialization would often result in tunnel vision. He said that he could use the advice of the specialists but a wide range of administrative experience of a generalist service like the IAS is required to run Central Ministries.

    However running Ford can hardly be compared to running a diverse country like India. The bureaucracy in every developed nation have moved far from its' colonial/imperialist strait jacket and have started placing a lot of emphasis on lateral entry, short term contracts for public policy tasks, domain knowledge and skills that one brings to the job. None of the above seem to apply to Indian Bureaucracy.

       

    An umbrella exam for all sorts of services appear to be the most illogical thing in a multidimensional public policy domain. While a technocrat migrating from Aircraft manufacturing to cars might strike us as logical, the same is not true of a migration from Food and Civil Supplies to Telecom. There are Police, revenue, diplomatic and Accounts services which are inducted from the same examination and allotted ranks according to their merit cum choice. Each of these services require different skill sets and domain knowledge. Depending on the public perception of these services, promotion prospects and power one wields, each service is pegged into an uneven hierarchical slot. However since all aspirants are recruited from a common exam, we have Computer Engineers metamorphosing into Finance and Accounts experts, doctors working as Police Officers and veterinary doctors as diplomats. While all these categories can indeed work as IAS (for which what skills are required stumps me even now, considering the wide range of jobs they are allotted to during their service)

          Anyway while the debate rages on as to how to induct Civil Servants, this blogger has an alternate point of view. Has anyone thought why are we recruiting Officers into 28 plus different services through one common examination ? Why are Finance, Personnel, diplomatic services staffed through a single examination ?  Isn't it better to have different staffing pattern for various services.   What is probably required is to breakup the Civil Services into several examinations instead of one. The Police and para military forces can have a two stage recruitment process wherein physical fitness is an important element. They could then be allotted to State Police Services and Para-military organizations with a proviso that they specialize in one function and move to other areas for a limited period to acquire perspective. Presently almost every para military organization is headed by IPS Officers on deputation  from State Governments, which largely serves to spoil the chances of internal Officers who have grown with the organization. This leaves a largely disgruntled force with very little stakes in the Organization. Except for a handful of services which allot Secretary level posts to specialized services, almost all Departments are headed by Generalists from the All India Services. This has spawned the culture of elitism of the All India services in cornering posts outside their domain.
        The diplomats may take an examination with emphasis on International relations. To get into the Finance, Accounts or Revenue services, a CA or ICWA may be prescribed as a minimum requirement. Limited mobility across different domains may be permitted so as to prevent tunnel vision. What about the IAS ? This service may be reinvented to manage Districts in States and Development Ministries in the Centre.  The IAS alone may be recruited through the present Civil Service examination. Streamlining of revenue and land records, town planning, public distribution, garbage treatment etc are important skills that need to be imparted to these bureaucrats. Their postings into Central Ministries may be restricted to Development Ministries at the Centre and not Ministries like Defence, Home, Finance and Telecom, which require specialized knowledge and skill sets.  More importantly, at least 25% posts in all Central Ministries may be reserved for lateral entrants to be recruited by UPSC purely on domain specialization. This lateral entry can be open to Academicians, Journalists, Private sector technocrats and such like. Anyway this theory might not find a resonance with the Brahmins of Indian Civil Service since it demolishes their citadel. The cadre system is such a rigid exclusive club into which promotees, lateral entrants etc are not welcome. It is important to break the elitism of these services to generate emphasis on tasks and not individuals. The system as it exists adds value to generalist Officers by exposing them to different domains, while we need specialist Officers with some multidimensional exposure to add value to the system.

     And the next theory of reform might strike my handful of readers as apostasy. In these days of vigilante justice and corruption allegations against prominent Babus, probably what is required is more autonomy and not too many oversight agencies. Every oversight agency inter alia creates an elite which specializes in asking questions without really knowing anything about the subject. Every oversight agency is the resting place of the lazy bureaucrat who raises objections/ observations on government time. This humble Babu holds the view that incompetence and not corruption is what plagues the bureaucracy. And incompetence stems primarily from a lack of experience for specialised tasks and in turn spawns corruption. If building permits are issued without specific zoning of areas, if garbage is handled unscientifically, if clean drinking water is still a rare commodity and if environment is brutally plundered to build SEZs, somewhere behind lurks deep incompetence of the generalist Babus fed by the colour of money flashed by unscrupulous businessmen. Indians are unique in the belief that more policing is the answer to the ills of corruption. Hence the cries for death penalty, hanging without trial and the creation of strong institutions with powers to police and punish swiftly. The right to Information Act has acted as a more effective barrier to misuse of power than any amount of policing.

       Lastly, the utilization of technology. To manage a country of gargantuan proportions, it would either take too many Babus or the aggressive use of technology. It is nobody's case to appoint too many Babus since it can always lead to corruption and other ills. Seeding existing processes with technology would be the most revolutionary change waiting to happen.These changes cannot happen with the existing bureaucracy which has a vested interest in maintaining status quo. Well that would be the subject of another blog...

PS: I didn't go to the foundation course at National Police academy in 1989 since my employer (A nationalized Bank) refused to relieve me at short notice. I never bonded with probationer civil servants from other services. Although I married a batch mate from the Railways, I hardly feel any sense of belonging to the Civil services. Recently reunion of 1988 and 1989 batches in NPA/ NADT etc were held. When I saw photographs of such reunions I thought -may be I missed something. But then I realize that I never belonged here. Now I have even stopped claiming that I am from the Civil Services examination !!

  

A 1962 Primer

          Probably I shouldn't be cold starting my blog during election season. The occupational hazards of the job include being branded as a secret follower of a family firm, an enthusiastic keyboard warrior for a demagogue or for an eccentric maverick who protests too much. But the uninformed journalism which has erupted following the leak of the Henderson Brooks report prompts me to write this. Frankly, the report is no secret since Neville Maxwell has been writing and speaking on the subject for many years.  
Let me start off by asking simple questions and presenting a complex perspective briefly. I do not wish to present facts here since they are available in abundance elsewhere. Since yours truly is a serving official in the Government I shall refrain from commenting on individuals and focus on the big picture
1. Was Nehru taken for a ride by the Chinese ?
Yes and no. He had a series of talks with Zhou En Lai in the environment of a new emerging post colonial world. Arun Shourie's latest Book on the subject concluded that Nehru showed his naivete. That would be an oversimplification if one considers the military adventurism that both China (in the western sector) and India (forward policy in retaliation and political one upmanship) indulged in. Well, the fact that the Dalai Lama chose India as a safe abode and India readily gave refuge made things worse. However the democrat in Nehru played a huge role in shaping public opinion, steering informed parliamentary debates and giving media a free hand.  India found itself in the middle of a situation caused by the confluence of these factors.
2. Was the war of India's making?
Well, the Chinese saw the forward policy as grave provocation. The seeds for it were certainly laid by the Chinese by building a road across Aksai chin linking Tibet with Xin Jian territory in China through dry land which was unpatrolled- but land, nevertheless was claimed by the British as part of their Indian empire. This is one of the issues where Neville Maxwell loses the plot- He justifies the actions by the Chinese solely on the ground that the British (and post colonial Indian) claim on Johnson line was wrong. He forgets that the least India could do as a free nation was to cling on to the land they had inherited. However, the Indians too blundered on several counts- for a very late discovery of Chinese road construction in the borders, for not communicating our concerns immediately, etc etc. On the eastern sector, Gen Umrao Singh, commander of the XXIII Corps gave his objections to the forward policy in writing. He was shunted out. The Army Chief Thapar's own reservations on military feasibility of proposed actions were disregarded. Indians embarked on a disastrous plan to aggressively patrol areas which could at best be described as cartographic grey areas; And that too without establishing proper supply bases. One needed to appreciate the Himalayan territory to understand how difficult is the exercise of delineating a border. Many Officers warned of lack of military preparedness. A new IV Corps was set up with a willing Napolean Bonaparte in the form of B M Kaul at the helm. What followed could at best be described as a war fought more with bluster and less with men, equipment, planning, training and acclimatization.
At one stage during the run up to war the Chinese  were willing to accept Mc Mahon line in return for India accepting their gains in Aksai Chin. Somehow the noises in the media and Parliament would not permit Indian Government to even think on those lines. But it is I guess, something which India would like to extract now- Unfortunately times have changed and the Chinese are superciliously laying claim to Arunachal Pradesh now. Also, the China Border is intricately linked to the Pakistan question. Subsequently Bhutto graciously handed over a part of the disputed state of J&K to China on a platter- a fact that  many Indian strategic thinkers tend to forget. And we wouldn't be able to turn around and say that we do not accept the annexation of Tibet by Chinese after 64 years.
3. What are good books to read on the subject ?
Neville Maxwell's India's China war (once banned; but freely available now) would be a good starting point. The book is objective but the author's virulently anti- India utterances in subsequent years renders his credentials suspect. There are several juicy bits of shenanigans of Politicos/Bureaucrats/ Army Officers in Maxwell's book. You could try reading War on the High Himalayas by D K Palit, an Army Officer who worked in Directorate General of Military Operations during the critical period, to get a balanced picture. If you want to read a heart breaking story of a soldier on the line of fire, then The Himalayan Blunder by Brig J P Dalvi would be a great starting point. The Officer was held by the Chinese as prisoner of war and the book was also once banned, I understand. The above three books should give you enough insights on the war. Shri K N Raghavan (Another civil servant) has written 'Dividing Lines- Contours of India- China conflict', a concise book recently. If you are hard pressed for time, that would be the ideal start. I modestly claim to have read most of the books on the subject, and own several of them. If any one has a copy of the untold story by B M Kaul, autobiography of the Lt General who spearheaded the disastrous war, please send me a scanned copy. The book is out of print. I haven't read Dorothy Woodman's Himalayan Frontiers either. Neville Maxwell's book is probably the most well written. It re-creates the atmosphere well and is a scathing critique of India's role. But unfortunately  the old man has become venomous in old age and has become an unabashed apologist for the middle kingdom. I heard him speak in the Australian National University during my stint there in 2009. Here is the link to the recording. http://splashurl.com/pxz37u9. It is extremely provocative. Maxwell had also imperiously claimed that the 1966 elections would be the last and India as the country we know of would be finished. He is today a Sinophile and an apologist for the Chinese.
4. Whom would you blame for the whole fiasco?
Too many actors. In hindsight, one could be more forgiving  if one could try to live in the times. At the risk of sounding like a an apologist of Indian politicians, I must say that we had a very articulate leadership which communicated its' concerns and priorities continually, in an age where there was no internet, Facebook or twitter. A far cry from our times when MPs rush to the well and hold Parliament to ransom. The whole run up to the war and the environment prevailing then couldn't have prevented the catastrophe. Also a humanist/democrat was leading India.  Nehru was no match for Mao, the warlord who wrested a large country against  all odds. While Indians were playing around with words in media and Parliament, the Chinese were quietly preparing for war. The situation isn't very different today. Our leaders like sound bytes. Our media is raucous. The Chinese are waiting and watching. As one General remarked during the war, we ought to have consolidated our gains and spent time preparing instead of launching the forward policy with an ill equipped force. One must understand that the politicians of those days were also deeply suspicious of the Army which was dangerously tilted towards western values- Polished brass, shiny shoes, quaint accent etc. Also in neighbouring Pakistan the Army had already taken over a country. So Indian politicians liked Generals who said what they liked to hear. B M Kaul, a Supply Corps Officer, with no battle experience, flaunted his Kashmiri connections and was willing to spearhead the campaign. The politicians readily fell for it.
5. Henderson Brooks Report ?
I worked in the Ministry of Defence for 5 years. I haven't seen a copy and it would have been improper to access it without reason. I was curious but thought it highly improper since my job didn't require a reading of that. A colleague of mine was issuing letters to prominent journalists and correspondents citing lame reasons for denying access to public under the Right to Information Act. But MoD being an assorted bunch of non specialists in a highly specialized domain, I suspect that the decision to deny publication was taken without much consideration and thought. Maybe we should reconsider. (I am treading on thin ground here as a serving Government Official). I got a copy downloaded from abroad, without the annexure. I shall not name my partner in crime here.
6. Military failure or Political disaster ?
Difficult to put a finger on that. Each fed on the other. I am not truly a military man to comment on the various skirmishes and the planning that went into the forward policy. But military experts are unequivocal that the forward policy was an ill advised move.  Nehru articulated our stance on several occasions and opposition was unsparing in calling for accountability from the government. Maxwell acknowledges the help he received from the open society that is India.
One learns lot more from failures in life, than from the heady successes of the past. We ought to modestly reflect and ruminate over our debacle in high Himalayas.