 "Debroy for no more than 30 depts in large states")
“Unless departments are pruned, schemes and laws, orders and regulations can’t be pruned, either. When departments proliferate and expand their turf, so do the last two. There is often inverse correlation between size of government and quality of governance. Maximum governance does require minimum government, in this case interpreted as a reduction in number of departments,” Debroy said in a blog published on the website of NITI Aayog on Wednesday.
He said his suggestion did not mean the Aayog was recommending reducing the number of departments. It was for state governments and their commissions and administrative reforms committees to decide on this.
Also Read
“But, for the sake of improving governance, states should indeed undertake ZBB (zero-based budgeting) scrutiny of their existing departments. This isn’t because of cost-saving and fiscal reasons. That’s minor. It is more because of efficiency considerations,” said Debroy.
The departments he feels should be retained, based on the seventh schedule of the Constitution, are agriculture, animal husbandry & fisheries, cooperation, commercial taxes, education, energy, finance; food, civil supplies and consumer affairs; forests and environment; general administration, health and family welfare, home, housing; industries, investments and commerce; information technology, infrastructure, labour and employment, land and other natural resources, law, planning; panchayati raj institutions and rural development; public enterprises, revenue, science and technology, social justice, transport; urban local bodies and urban development; water resources, watershed development and irrigation.
“Sure, individual States differ in their needs and circumstances. And, these 26 Departments represent the core of governance. But, even if you add the non-core, there is no logical reason why the number should be significantly more than 30,” said Debroy.