One of the most significant changes was ushered in by the 74th Constitution amendment in 1992 which, for the first time, gave constitutional status to our urban local bodies. Also, like the central finance commissions, setting up of the state finance commissions became mandatory. These two measures were expected to bring about a regime change in urban governance. It is another matter that much was left to the states in taking this agenda forward and a lot of action is still expected from them in order to strengthen the third level of governance.
Formation of the Delhi Metro as a joint venture between the central government and the government of Delhi was the next significant change in the way city transport was managed. Something like this had never existed earlier; the fact that there are seven such separate ventures for different cities, and close to 20 cities are in the process of building metro rail systems shows how radical this measure was. The poor experience of setting up the country's first city MRTS in the form of the Kolkata Metro did not inspire more such initiatives until the Delhi Metro showed that it was possible to have this much-needed alternative to ease city traffic. Central support in the form of funding and further facilitation made a big difference in prompting states and cities to opt for this public transport option.
The launch of the urban renewal mission in 2005, which was unique in the sense that cities could get project funding only if they and the states together committed to undertake reforms, was a milestone in bringing about reforms. New beginnings like the credit rating of cities, opting for 24x7 water supply, introduction of bus rapid transit systems in more than 10 cities, and having a deliberative level below the municipal body in the form of area sabhas all happened because of this new initiative.
The Centre taking the initiative to fashion a National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP) and then a National Urban Sanitation Policy (NUSP) in 2006 and 2008 respectively, put the focus on the changes needed in these two key urban segments. The NUTP prompted the states to think in terms of reviewing city transport systems and two significant initiatives in this regard came from Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. Their governments legislated the Unified Metropolitan Transport Authorities exclusively for the mega cities of Hyderabad and Chennai in 2008 and 2010 respectively - a measure which, if seriously taken forward, could bring orderliness in the way congestion is managed and public transport is promoted. Some other states also followed suit, not with legislative backing but through executive orders.
City transport scenarios also started changing because the Centre found funds to part-support the buying of some 15,000 modern, new buses in the first lot and 10,000 more in the second tranche. The funds for buses were conditional on states and cities undertaking long-overdue urban transport reforms. Also, urban bus specifications came into existence, thereby yielding a system of minimum standards that city buses must have.
The NUSP set the pace for moving towards today's Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. Each city was asked to take stock of its shortcomings in terms of the required toilets and waste management mechanisms, etc. This measure prompted many cities to prepare city sanitation plans and, at least, think in terms of what needed to be done to become an open-defecation free city. There was then no clear funding source; a fund linkage and a clear target-oriented approach is making all the difference today.
Introducing service-level benchmarking for water supply, waste management, drainage, sewage, urban transport and e-governance came about next. This measure got a big boost when the 13th Finance Commission made the release of funds conditional on the states setting benchmarks for their cities. However, the required institutionalisation of this measure is yet to take place, and in its absence, cities are not working hard enough to improve their service levels.
Various states took the initiative to set aside 33 per cent, and some even 50 per cent, reservation for women representatives in their elected urban bodies, ensuring a significant say for women in the way cities are governed. Yet another reform was a mayoral term of five years in the interests of stability in the city governance system. Though many states have opted for this, some still have arrangements whereby mayors have either a two-and-a-half year term or even a one-year term. Yet, empowered city mayors, who are fully in command, is still a distant dream.
The present government's initiatives call for various reforms in the way cities are managed. The Swachh Bharat Abhiyan has definite targets to be achieved by 2019. Housing for all by 2022 requires the provisioning of houses for all the homeless. Amrut requires each city to aim at water and sewage connectivity for each household by the time the mission is completed. Also, there are 11 reforms which cities and states together have to complete. The Smart Cities mission will be another game changer in urban governance.
During the past 25 years there have been a host of reforms in our city governance. But much more remains to be done to make life and living better for our urban residents. The earlier these issues are addressed, the better managed our cities will become.
The author is a former secretary for urban development