A K Bhattacharya seems to have tied himself in unnecessary knots while imagining the implications of Narendra Modi's comment at the New Delhi economic conclave that as prime minister, he would involve state chief ministers in running the country ("Mr Modi's governance pain", New Delhi Diary, March 5). The author says not only will a body of 30 people be unwieldy but will add another layer to federal governance on top of the two existing structures, the Planning Commission and the Inter-State Council. What Modi meant is that since implementation is done at the state level and often at their costs, the Centre should not unilaterally decide things. Development, he insisted, was a partnership involving the people, the state and the private sector. I recall his speech at the National Development Council at which he said that the Centre had legislated the Right to Education Act, which had huge financial implications for the states. But the Centre did not provide for these implications by way of additional assistance. And while the author's fear that a body of 30 people is large is understandable, he later mentions that the Union council of ministers rarely comprises less than 70 members. What I took away from these speeches is simply that governance must be collegial, and state chief ministers must be more closely involved. When the specific interests of any state are involved, they should be represented by the appropriate central body. There is no case of adding one more bureaucratic level. A separate case can be made for redesigning the Planning Commission to minimise its prescriptive role in finalising state plans, and become more of a think tank working with states and the Centre to obtain better development outcomes.
Shakti Sinha New Delhi
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
