Arjun Singh’s quota bluff
Rajiv Desai Tuesday, May 16, 2006 22:08 IST
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1029662&CatID=19
In the 1980s, when Sam Pitroda was pushing to take India’s telecom digital from its analog antiquity, Arjun Singh was the telecom minister in the Rajiv Gandhi government. As a person who was intimately involved with Rajiv’s thrust to modernisation, I know that Singh tried to put a spoke in Pitroda’s plans. I can remember a meeting at the Akbar Hotel in Chanakyapuri, where Singh sat in attendance with Pitroda and his team. He said nothing at all then but went off and spoke to various journalists, questioning the whole exercise.
I first set eyes on Arjun Singh in November 1981 at Rajiv Gandhi’s office on Akbar Road. He was sitting in the outer office along with his fellow Thakur, VP Singh or Weepy, my friend Jug Suraiya’s name for him. Well, Weepy, who eventually slimed his way to the prime minister’s office, was then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh while Arjun Singh was chief minister of Madhya Pradesh. Like Weepy, who set the nation aflame by championing the recommendations of the Mandal Commission, Arjun Singh has touched off civil violence by championing quotas for other backward castes. I did not know either of them until Rajiv told me who they were. He also made observations about the two Thakurs that are best left unquoted; suffice it to say Rajiv did not think that either of them took after Mahatma Gandhi.
Weepy is pretty much irrelevant today but his fellow feudal Arjun Singh is playing the slime game in the hope that Sonia Gandhi will dismiss Manmohan Singh and name him prime minister. Singh’s grandiose fantasy has as much chance of coming to fruition as a snowball has of surviving in Hell. But the feudal lord bashes on regardless.
There is violence spreading across major cities and towns in the country, and health services are paralysed. But Arjun Singh remains unfazed. He has done precious little to make his human resource development ministry useful; done nothing to stem the corruption and sloth within it. But on the OBC issue, he has come alive. His intemperate attacks on Pitroda and the knowledge commission; his wily attempt to provoke a backward caste backlash against the protesters and his Machiavellian reference to the 104th amendment…all smack of low cunning masquerading as political savvy.
Consider the 104th Amendment. It was passed in December last year with huge majorities in the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha. That to Arjun Singh’s feudal mind is representative of the people’s will; but we all know that the 104th amendment like the 23rd, 45th, 62nd and 79th Amendments before it, represent a failure of political will. Our founding fathers included quotas in educational institutions under Article 334 with a view to “righting a historical wrong”. The provision was to remain in force for 20 years after which such quotas were to be abolished. However, politicians resorted to rank populism and extended the quota regime to hide their ineptitude and perpetuate their feudal hold over narrow constituencies.
In persisting with the quota regime, the political class admitted to its failure to address the issues of poverty and prejudice. Today, when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his team have pushed economic growth to a level that the world holds in awe, feudal lords like Arjun Singh and Natwar Singh have banded together with Leftists and Luddites in a futile bid to depose the prime minister. They keep muttering about the need for equitable distribution. But poverty and prejudice are not new in India; what is new is the economic resurgence. Feudal politics is on notice. When Article 334 comes up for review in 2010, the feudal overlords will not have the clout to extend the quota regime.
In harping on 104th Amendment, Arjun Singh made some gratuitous remarks about Sam Pitroda. He should have known better. Sam is one of the pioneers of India’s opening to the world. He comes from a tribal area in Orissa and made his career by the sheer dint of effort and integrity, values that obviously Singh does not understand. Sam knows more about poverty and prejudice than the HRD minister; he succeeded in the highly competitive global arena where Singh has failed even in his narrow world of cunning politics. Mr HRD minister, Sam Pitroda is a friend of mine and let me tell you, he is a man of ideas. His efforts from the 1980s onwards have made a significant dent in India’s poverty. All you have managed to do is to divide our country along caste lines.
Email: rdesai@comma.in
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Monday, May 15, 2006
The price of reservation
The price of reservation
P. V. Indiresan
For every transaction, there has to be entries on both sides of the ledger. A price has to be paid for the gains made by reservation. What is the price the beneficiaries of reservation pay? One price they have paid is lowered quality of education in state-run schools, inferior opportunities to learn; in consequence, endemic poverty too. Is that price worth paying, wonders P. V. INDIRESAN.
Usually, media memory is short. Most stories are forgotten at the end of the day; few last a week. Unusually, interest in the reservation controversy has not died down even after two months. Evidently, this controversy touches a raw nerve; people cannot get over their hurt easily.
Considering the degree of interest in the topic, there is surprisingly few hard facts known about the issue. IITs have had reservation for students belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes for over 30 years. There is no public information of how the beneficiaries have fared, or how well they have performed in the profession compared to regular students, or compared to SC/ST students from other less prestigious colleges.
Tamil Nadu experience
Tamil Nadu has the longest experience with reservation. With almost 80 per cent admissions and posts reserved, it has the most extensive application of that device. The Tamil Nadu experience can be described both as a success and as a failure. It is a success because backward castes have wrested the leadership — both in the academic and administrative spheres — apart from acquiring total command of the political space. Not only have the backward castes taken command, they have also made Tamil Nadu one of the most successful States.
Reservation in Tamil Nadu can also be declared as a failure on two counts: Even after three-quarters of a century, the backward castes are unwilling to compete openly. There are third, even fourth generation beneficiaries of reservation who are unable to get over their dependence on the handicaps reservation provides for them. It appears, reservation is a crutch, not a remedy.
The success of backward castes in Tamil Nadu appears to be partly due to emigration of upper castes: There are few Brahmins, Mudaliars, Naidus, Pillais or Chettiars to contend with; quite a few have migrated out of the State. There is no analysis how far the loss of so much human capital has hurt (or helped) the State.
Yet, it would be incorrect to conclude that backward castes can never stand up to competition. Once again, we have no hard data to rely on. However, anecdotal evidence points to the view that competent persons among the backward castes never flaunt their caste badge; they want to be known and respected for what they achieve — they stand tall. On the other hand, weaker but ambitious persons make their caste a fetish. They make noise louder and frequently; they get noticed more often.
Consider the visibility of capable students in the job market. They know what they want. They get selected promptly and vanish from the scene after no more than one or two job interviews. The least competitive ones are unsure of where they can succeed. They try again and again only to be rejected. They are noticeable everywhere. Particularly when they wear the caste badge, they will be shortlisted even when not well qualified.
Fooled by noise
With competent students appearing but few times, the less competent ones appearing frequently, the latter appear to be far larger in numbers than they actually are. Logically, the proportion of competent backward castes must be several times higher than what they appear to be in selection committees. That is like the case of a farmer who ruefully remarked after promising to supply a thousand frogs "the noise sure fooled me!"
There is yet another reason why backward students under-perform. As a natural corollary of the Reservation Principle, teaching posts have been reserved on caste basis. That is a cardinal error. What poor students need most are the best teachers available, not the least qualified. Dr Sowell, a distinguished professor from Stanford, was once asked on his visit to Madras (as it was then) whether he would prefer Black teachers to teach Black students (Prof Sowell is Black.) His answer was, "I do not care whether the teacher is White, Black or Blue; I want the best!"
Quality teaching, the key
Unfortunately, this basic principle has been discarded by our policymakers, who have grossly under-estimated the importance of teaching quality. In the process, they have run down state-run schools. In the past fifty years, the population of Chennai has increased almost ten times. Yet, many schools run by the City Corporation have been closed for "want of students". In truth, it cannot be that the students, but the quality of teachers selected that was found wanting.
It is a recorded fact that discipline among school teachers has come down. Across the country, half the time teachers are not attending to class work at all. It is a fact that most students in Delhi's Corporation schools cannot do simple arithmetic — multiply two-digit numbers — even after five years of education. Yet, as one NIIT experiment has shown, given a chance, they can pick up computer skills on their own.
In the prevailing ethos of reservation, a person can get the benefits of reservation without making any payment in return. That contravenes a natural law that is colloquially described as "there is no free lunch". In engineering, such systems are known as "perpetual-motion" machines, machines that run forever without any input. For every transaction, there has to be entries on both sides of the ledger. A price has to be paid for the gains made by reservation. There is no escape from that law. Then, what is the price the beneficiaries of reservation pay for the benefit they get? One price they have paid is lowered quality of education in state-run schools, inferior opportunities to learn; in consequence, endemic poverty too. Is that price worth paying?
As one correspondent has pointed out, reservation is like declaring a boundary scored in a cricket game as a six if hit by a backward caste player. Such artificial boost appears beneficial. It may not be. As one SC student remarked: "I won a degree in the IIT but lost my self-image." How many students would have done better with their lives if they had been exposed to what they can master, instead of being subjected to a difficult drill for which they were not trained, we do not know.
How far has the Reservation Policy has helped the poor, has reduced the rich-poor gap? The average family income of SC students in IIM Ahmedabad is twice that of the others. Is that an exception, or is it true of other institutions too? That is the problem: We have no data on which to base reasoned decisions. Our political masters are unwilling to generate much needed information on this issue, nor or they willing to consider any alternative. At the same time, they have acquired the power to declare as constitutionally illegal any institution that operates on a caste-free basis.
Friend or foe?
Is everyone who promotes reservation a friend of the backward castes? Is everyone who questions reservation at university level an enemy of backward castes?
Who hurts backward castes more: Those who deny good school education or those who want well-run schools?
A proposal to identify and give special education to talented backward caste students has been before the government for over 25 years, and still finds no support. Strange are the ways of our democracy, of government of some people, by some people for themselves.
(The author is a former Director of IIT Madras. Response may be sent to: indiresan@gmail.com)
P. V. Indiresan
For every transaction, there has to be entries on both sides of the ledger. A price has to be paid for the gains made by reservation. What is the price the beneficiaries of reservation pay? One price they have paid is lowered quality of education in state-run schools, inferior opportunities to learn; in consequence, endemic poverty too. Is that price worth paying, wonders P. V. INDIRESAN.
Usually, media memory is short. Most stories are forgotten at the end of the day; few last a week. Unusually, interest in the reservation controversy has not died down even after two months. Evidently, this controversy touches a raw nerve; people cannot get over their hurt easily.
Considering the degree of interest in the topic, there is surprisingly few hard facts known about the issue. IITs have had reservation for students belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Tribes for over 30 years. There is no public information of how the beneficiaries have fared, or how well they have performed in the profession compared to regular students, or compared to SC/ST students from other less prestigious colleges.
Tamil Nadu experience
Tamil Nadu has the longest experience with reservation. With almost 80 per cent admissions and posts reserved, it has the most extensive application of that device. The Tamil Nadu experience can be described both as a success and as a failure. It is a success because backward castes have wrested the leadership — both in the academic and administrative spheres — apart from acquiring total command of the political space. Not only have the backward castes taken command, they have also made Tamil Nadu one of the most successful States.
Reservation in Tamil Nadu can also be declared as a failure on two counts: Even after three-quarters of a century, the backward castes are unwilling to compete openly. There are third, even fourth generation beneficiaries of reservation who are unable to get over their dependence on the handicaps reservation provides for them. It appears, reservation is a crutch, not a remedy.
The success of backward castes in Tamil Nadu appears to be partly due to emigration of upper castes: There are few Brahmins, Mudaliars, Naidus, Pillais or Chettiars to contend with; quite a few have migrated out of the State. There is no analysis how far the loss of so much human capital has hurt (or helped) the State.
Yet, it would be incorrect to conclude that backward castes can never stand up to competition. Once again, we have no hard data to rely on. However, anecdotal evidence points to the view that competent persons among the backward castes never flaunt their caste badge; they want to be known and respected for what they achieve — they stand tall. On the other hand, weaker but ambitious persons make their caste a fetish. They make noise louder and frequently; they get noticed more often.
Consider the visibility of capable students in the job market. They know what they want. They get selected promptly and vanish from the scene after no more than one or two job interviews. The least competitive ones are unsure of where they can succeed. They try again and again only to be rejected. They are noticeable everywhere. Particularly when they wear the caste badge, they will be shortlisted even when not well qualified.
Fooled by noise
With competent students appearing but few times, the less competent ones appearing frequently, the latter appear to be far larger in numbers than they actually are. Logically, the proportion of competent backward castes must be several times higher than what they appear to be in selection committees. That is like the case of a farmer who ruefully remarked after promising to supply a thousand frogs "the noise sure fooled me!"
There is yet another reason why backward students under-perform. As a natural corollary of the Reservation Principle, teaching posts have been reserved on caste basis. That is a cardinal error. What poor students need most are the best teachers available, not the least qualified. Dr Sowell, a distinguished professor from Stanford, was once asked on his visit to Madras (as it was then) whether he would prefer Black teachers to teach Black students (Prof Sowell is Black.) His answer was, "I do not care whether the teacher is White, Black or Blue; I want the best!"
Quality teaching, the key
Unfortunately, this basic principle has been discarded by our policymakers, who have grossly under-estimated the importance of teaching quality. In the process, they have run down state-run schools. In the past fifty years, the population of Chennai has increased almost ten times. Yet, many schools run by the City Corporation have been closed for "want of students". In truth, it cannot be that the students, but the quality of teachers selected that was found wanting.
It is a recorded fact that discipline among school teachers has come down. Across the country, half the time teachers are not attending to class work at all. It is a fact that most students in Delhi's Corporation schools cannot do simple arithmetic — multiply two-digit numbers — even after five years of education. Yet, as one NIIT experiment has shown, given a chance, they can pick up computer skills on their own.
In the prevailing ethos of reservation, a person can get the benefits of reservation without making any payment in return. That contravenes a natural law that is colloquially described as "there is no free lunch". In engineering, such systems are known as "perpetual-motion" machines, machines that run forever without any input. For every transaction, there has to be entries on both sides of the ledger. A price has to be paid for the gains made by reservation. There is no escape from that law. Then, what is the price the beneficiaries of reservation pay for the benefit they get? One price they have paid is lowered quality of education in state-run schools, inferior opportunities to learn; in consequence, endemic poverty too. Is that price worth paying?
As one correspondent has pointed out, reservation is like declaring a boundary scored in a cricket game as a six if hit by a backward caste player. Such artificial boost appears beneficial. It may not be. As one SC student remarked: "I won a degree in the IIT but lost my self-image." How many students would have done better with their lives if they had been exposed to what they can master, instead of being subjected to a difficult drill for which they were not trained, we do not know.
How far has the Reservation Policy has helped the poor, has reduced the rich-poor gap? The average family income of SC students in IIM Ahmedabad is twice that of the others. Is that an exception, or is it true of other institutions too? That is the problem: We have no data on which to base reasoned decisions. Our political masters are unwilling to generate much needed information on this issue, nor or they willing to consider any alternative. At the same time, they have acquired the power to declare as constitutionally illegal any institution that operates on a caste-free basis.
Friend or foe?
Is everyone who promotes reservation a friend of the backward castes? Is everyone who questions reservation at university level an enemy of backward castes?
Who hurts backward castes more: Those who deny good school education or those who want well-run schools?
A proposal to identify and give special education to talented backward caste students has been before the government for over 25 years, and still finds no support. Strange are the ways of our democracy, of government of some people, by some people for themselves.
(The author is a former Director of IIT Madras. Response may be sent to: indiresan@gmail.com)
Friday, May 05, 2006
http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=EDITS&file_name=edit1%2Etxt&counter_img=1
Put him down
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Arjun Singh must be tamed, now ---- Union Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh has an innate ability to unleash furious storms and he is invariably in the eye of each one of them. Indeed, that is how he keeps himself in the news; in his twisted wisdom, he believes this also fetches him importance both within the Congress and in the Government. His previous innings in Congress Governments at the Centre have been as controversy-ridden as his current assignment in the UPA Government.
Immediately on taking charge as HRD Minister, he set about undoing every initiative of his predecessor, BJP's Murli Manohar Joshi. He described it as his "detoxification campaign" in the cause of 'secularism'; in reality, it was nothing more than a contemptible effort to indulge in crude vote-bank politics of the variety that, in the first place, propelled politicians like him into prominence. Mr Singh, for all his pretentious pronouncements, is totally out of sync with today's India and is entirely clueless about the aspirations of its youth.
It's a monumental tragedy that someone so unsuitable like him should occupy an important portfolio like Human Resource Development Minister - the country's human resource deserves far better. Surely Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi are aware of this simple, incontrovertible fact. Yet, that he has so far had his way - beginning with 'detoxification' of syllabus and textbooks, followed by questionable appointments to equally questionable forums floated by the HRD Ministry under his tutelage, and ending with his hare-brained scheme to unilaterally introduce caste based quotas in institutions of excellence, including medical, engineering and management colleges - speaks volumes about his survival instincts as well as the inability of Congress's leaders to bring him to heel.
Wallowing in self-importance, Mr Singh sees himself as a Minister who is not answerable to the Cabinet and as a politician who is not bound by his party's collective decision-making process. He believes in neither consultation nor consensus. It is not surprising that his latest endeavour to demolish the reputation of internationally acclaimed institutions of higher learning in India has ruffled feathers in the Congress; that it has also left students and parents across the country angry and fuming is of no consequence to a man so steeped in arrogance and self-righteousness.
It would be unfair to expect Mr Manmohan Singh to tame his HRD Minister and force him to give up his antediluvian politics that have no place in a modern nation aspiring for a global profile in the 21st century. The Prime Minister may not believe in crippling engineering, medical and management institutions by imposing caste based quotas on them, but he lacks the courage of conviction to rein in wayward Ministers like Mr Singh. That places the onus on Ms Gandhi: She should step in to stop the eruption of mass social disquiet. Not to do so could have catastrophic consequences.
It is believed that many senior Ministers and Congress functionaries are upset with Mr Singh's agenda of fomenting conflict in the guise of 'progressive policies'. They have reason to be worried and alarmed. Mr Singh is not only imperilling India's future, but also theirs.
Put him down
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Arjun Singh must be tamed, now ---- Union Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh has an innate ability to unleash furious storms and he is invariably in the eye of each one of them. Indeed, that is how he keeps himself in the news; in his twisted wisdom, he believes this also fetches him importance both within the Congress and in the Government. His previous innings in Congress Governments at the Centre have been as controversy-ridden as his current assignment in the UPA Government.
Immediately on taking charge as HRD Minister, he set about undoing every initiative of his predecessor, BJP's Murli Manohar Joshi. He described it as his "detoxification campaign" in the cause of 'secularism'; in reality, it was nothing more than a contemptible effort to indulge in crude vote-bank politics of the variety that, in the first place, propelled politicians like him into prominence. Mr Singh, for all his pretentious pronouncements, is totally out of sync with today's India and is entirely clueless about the aspirations of its youth.
It's a monumental tragedy that someone so unsuitable like him should occupy an important portfolio like Human Resource Development Minister - the country's human resource deserves far better. Surely Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi are aware of this simple, incontrovertible fact. Yet, that he has so far had his way - beginning with 'detoxification' of syllabus and textbooks, followed by questionable appointments to equally questionable forums floated by the HRD Ministry under his tutelage, and ending with his hare-brained scheme to unilaterally introduce caste based quotas in institutions of excellence, including medical, engineering and management colleges - speaks volumes about his survival instincts as well as the inability of Congress's leaders to bring him to heel.
Wallowing in self-importance, Mr Singh sees himself as a Minister who is not answerable to the Cabinet and as a politician who is not bound by his party's collective decision-making process. He believes in neither consultation nor consensus. It is not surprising that his latest endeavour to demolish the reputation of internationally acclaimed institutions of higher learning in India has ruffled feathers in the Congress; that it has also left students and parents across the country angry and fuming is of no consequence to a man so steeped in arrogance and self-righteousness.
It would be unfair to expect Mr Manmohan Singh to tame his HRD Minister and force him to give up his antediluvian politics that have no place in a modern nation aspiring for a global profile in the 21st century. The Prime Minister may not believe in crippling engineering, medical and management institutions by imposing caste based quotas on them, but he lacks the courage of conviction to rein in wayward Ministers like Mr Singh. That places the onus on Ms Gandhi: She should step in to stop the eruption of mass social disquiet. Not to do so could have catastrophic consequences.
It is believed that many senior Ministers and Congress functionaries are upset with Mr Singh's agenda of fomenting conflict in the guise of 'progressive policies'. They have reason to be worried and alarmed. Mr Singh is not only imperilling India's future, but also theirs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)