veni vidi vici: Sid Harth
cogitoergosum
04/06/2010 by navanavonmilita
veni vidi vici
veni vidi vici: Sid Harth
veni, vidi, vici: I came, I saw, I conquered. (The laconic despatch in
which Julius Ceasar announced to the Senate his victory over
Pharnaces.)
What is the correct pronunciation of ‘Veni vidi vici’?
In: English Spelling and Pronunciation, Latin to English [Edit
categories]
Answer
“VAYNEE, VEEDEE, VEECHEE”
Better Answer
The above answer reflects the ecclesiastical pronunciation. The
individual probably learned his Latin through the Catholic church. The
true classical pronunciation, which Caesar would have used, was
somewhat different. The Latin V was pronounced like the English W, the
Latin C was pronounced like the English K, the Latin E was most likely
pronounced like an English short E (as in “pet”) when short or like
long A (as in “pate”, but as a pure vowel, not a diphthong) when long,
the Latin I was pronounced like an English short I (“pit”) when short
or long E (“peat”) when long. In this sentence all the vowels are
long; thus the correct pronunciation is “WAYNEE, WEEDEE, WEEKEE.”
Another Answer
The correct pronunciation is: ˈweːniː ˈwiːdiː ˈwiːkiː
Forwarded Message —-
From: Krishnamurthy K
Sent: Fri, June 4, 2010 9:29:28 PM
Subject: Indians Abroad – Vs – Indians in India
Indians Abroad Vs Indians in India
I would like to sum up our performance in the 20th century in one
sentence. Indians have succeeded in countries ruled by whites, but
failed in their own.
This outcome would have astonished leaders of our independence
movement. They declared Indians were kept down by white rule and could
flourish only under self-rule. This seemed self-evident The harsh
reality today is that Indians are succeeding brilliantly in countries
ruled by whites, but failing in India . They are flourishing in the
USA and Britain
But those that stay in India are pulled down by an outrageous system
that fails to reward merit or talent. Fails to allow people and
businesses to grow, and keeps real power with netas, babus, and
assorted manipulators. Once Indians go to white-ruled countries, they
soar and conquer summits once occupied only by whites.
Rono Dutta has become head of United Airlines, the biggest airline in
the world. Had he stayed in India , he would have no chance in Indian
Airlines. Even if the top job there was given to him by some
godfather, a myriad netas, babus and trade unionists would have
ensured that he could never run it like United Airlines.
Rana Talwar has become head of Standard Chartered Bank, one of the
biggest multinational banks in Britain , while still in his 40s. Had
he been in India , he would perhaps be a local manager in the State
Bank, taking orders from babus to give loans to politically favoured
clients.
Rajat Gupta is head of Mckinsey, the biggest management consultancy
firm in the world. He now advises the biggest multinationals on how to
run their business. Had he remained in India he would probably be
taking orders from some sethji with no qualification save that of
being born in a rich family.
Lakhsmi Mittal has become the biggest steel baron in the world, with
steel plants in the US , Kazakhstan , Germany , Mexico , Trinidad and
Indonesia . India ‘s socialist policies reserved the domestic steel
industry for the public sector. So Lakhsmi Mittal went to Indonesia to
run his family’s first steel plant there. Once freed from the shackles
of India , he conquered the world.
Subhash Chandra of Zee TV has become a global media king, one of the
few to beat Rupert Murdoch. He could never have risen had he been
limited to India , which decreed a TV monopoly for Doordarshan. But
technology came to his aid: satellite TV made it possible for him to
target India from Hong Kong . Once he escaped Indian rules and soil,
he soared.
You may not have heard of 48-year old Gururaj Deshpande. His
communications company, Sycamore, is currently valued by the US stock
market at over $ 30 billion, making him perhaps one of the richest
Indians in the world. Had he remained in India , he would probably be
a babu in the Department of Telecommunications.
Arun Netravali has become president of Bell Labs, one of the biggest
research and development centres in the world with 30,000 inventions
and several Nobel Prizes to its credit. Had he been in India , he
would probably be struggling in the middle cadre of Indian Telephone
Industries. Silicon Valley alone contains over one lac Indian
millionaires.
Sabeer Bhatia invented Hotmail and sold it to Microsoft for $ 400
million. Victor Menezes is number two in Citibank. Shailesh Mehta is
CEO of Providian, a top US financial services company. Also at or near
the top are Rakesh Gangwal of US Air, Jamshd Wadia of Arthur Andersen,
and Aman Mehta of Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corp.
In Washington DC , the Indian CEO High Tech Council has no less than
200 members, all high tech-chiefs. While Indians have soared, India
has stagnated. At independence India was the most advanced of all
colonies, with the best prospects.
Today with a GNP per head of $370, it occupies a lowly 177th position
among 209 countries of the world. But poverty is by no means the only
or main problem. India ranks near the bottom in the UNDP’s Human
Development Index, but high up in Transparency International’s
Corruption Index.
The neta-babu raj brought in by socialist policies is only one reason
for India ‘s failure. The more sordid reason is the rule-based society
we inherited from the British Raj is today in tatters. Instead money,
muscle and influence matter most.
At independence we were justly proud of our politicians. Today we
regard them as scoundrels and criminals. They have created a jungle of
laws in the holy name of socialism, and used these to line their
pockets and create patronage networks. No influential crook suffers.
The Mafia flourish unhindered because they have political links.
The sons of police officers believe they have a licence to rape and
kill (ask the Mattoo family). Talent cannot take you far amidst such
rank misgovernance. We are reverting to our ancient feudal system
where no rules applied to the powerful. The British Raj brought in
abstract concepts of justice for all, equality before the law. These
were maintained in the early years of independence. But sixty years
later, citizens wail that India is a lawless land where no rules are
obeyed.
I have heard of an IAS probationer at the Mussorie training academy
pointing out that in India before the British came, making money and
distributing favours to relatives was not considered a perversion of
power, it was the very rationale of power. A feudal official had a
duty to enrich his family and caste. Then the British came and imposed
a new ethical code on officials. But, he asked, why should we continue
to choose British customs over desi ones now that we are independent?
The lack of transparent rules, properly enforced, is a major reason
why talented Indians cannot rise in India . A second reason is the
neta-babu raj, which remains intact despite supposed liberalisation.
But once talented Indians go to rule-based societies in the west, they
take off. In those societies all people play by the same rules, all
have freedom to innovate without being strangled by regulations.
This, then, is why Indians succeed in countries ruled by whites, and
fail in their own. It is the saddest story of the century.
KK.
…and I am Sid Harth
cogitoergosum
04/06/2010 by navanavonmilita
A brain graft for the ruling alliance
3 Jun 2010, 0639 hrs IST,T K Arun,ET Bureau
Topics:Sonia Gandhi Congress Rahul Gandhi UPA United Progressive
Alliance nac National Advisory Council
Why does the ruling coalition need the services of a National Advisory
Council? Because politics obsesses about power to the exclusion of
everything
else, including to what end that power. The ruling coalition needs an
advisory body to tell it what to do. The NAC as an institution is
standing testimony to the bankruptcy of our political parties (not
just those who belong to the ruling United Progressive Alliance), to
the distance they have acquired from the common people and to their
abdication of the responsibility to find new solutions to new
challenges in India's fast-changing economic landscape.
This might seem completely uncharitable, considering the identity of
the members of the NAC and the contribution the body made to
formulating policy in the UPA's previous stint. There is no gainsaying
that the NAC members are all extremely decent people, most of whom
have made sterling contributions to improving Indian society,
contributions far more robust than any newspaper columnist who
presumes to sit in judgement over them can hope to make. And there is
no gainsaying that the ideas that came out of the NAC in its earlier
avatar were sound in theory and practice. The problem is not with the
NAC or its members. The problem, rather, is that our political parties
should outsource their core activity to any agency, howsoever
meritorious.
What is the purpose of politics? In the desperate scramble for power,
in the midst of Machiavellian moves to form and break coalitions, to
buy a party nomination for an electoral contest, to cut a rival down
to size and induce a wavering independent to defect, while staring in
awe at the fortune some successful politician has amassed, while
gloating over the queue of businessmen and their lobbyists bearing
blandishments , politicians have forgotten why they are where they are
in the first place.
Their job is to pursue the commonweal, to act as the link between the
people and the state, to mediate power to solve the citizen's
problems. This does not mean just representations and petitions. It
could well mean mobilising the people to enforce their rights before a
reluctant administration . It could mean making the people aware of
their rights in the first place. It could mean imagining new solutions
to age-old problems, creating new institutions and laws to tackle the
new challenges of unprecedented growth and the wrenching social change
associated with it.
If a political party served as a live link between the people and the
state, it would know what to do, it would attract the intellectual
resources to forge appropriate strategies and would not have to
outsource policymaking to any third party.
Unfortunately, a dearth of politics imagined as mediating power for
the welfare of the people has left our political parties bereft of
ideas and ideals, of talent and reforming zeal. In that situation, a
body like the NAC is most welcome, indeed.
But is such outsourcing of political imagination to non-political
bodies inevitable ? Interestingly, there are two trends, albeit weak,
which show
promise.
One trend is represented by the Naxalites , distinct from the Maoists.
The Maoists are nihilists bent on overthrowing the Indian state and
believe nothing useful can be done till such violent overthrow is
achieved. The Maoists are enemies of democracy and have to be
vanquished.
Even as the mainstream Left has moved away from the people and now see
the people moving away from them (and how!) , sections of the
Naxalites have given up their armed struggle and now focus on finding
solutions to concrete problems within the framework of democracy.
These Naxalites are attacked by Maoists, as also by the police. In the
climate of hostility to left wing politics created by the Maoists,
security forces have been clamping down on Naxalite trade union
leaders and activists . Such suppression of grassroots political
mobilisation hurts democracy and makes our politics authoritarian.
The other redeeming trend is within the Congress, represented by its
first family. Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi display certain
characteristics alien to the average Congressman, such as an ability
to stay aloof from office. While Ms Gandhi's own political convictions
seem limited to the need to keep India secular and the Congress ,
together, Rahul Gandhi displays a desire to understand Indian reality
by experiencing it, rather than merely through data analysis. His
visits to Dalit homes and commitment to inner-party elections hold out
more than public relations. If he cannot so much bring Congressmen
close to the people as create Congressmen out of the people who need
political mobilisation the most, there is still hope for politics.
Till then, we might as well make the most of the talent available in
the NAC. Outsourcing, after all, is increasingly a hallmark of Indian
existence.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/6005699.cms
Sonia Gandhi appointed National Advisory Council chairperson
PTI
Monday, March 29, 2010 19:48 IST
Congress president Sonia Gandhi was today appointed chairperson of the
National Advisory Council (NAC), four years after she quit the post in
the wake of the office of profit controversy.
Sonia Gandhi
Gandhi, who is also the chairperson of the ruling UPA, will enjoy the
rank of cabinet minister and her appointment has been made with
immediate effect, an official spokesman said.
Her tenure would be co-terminus with that of the NAC.
Gandhi would nominate other members of the council and their tenure
would be for one year from the date of their appointment and it could
be extended.
Under the special provisions, an MP being appointed as a member of the
NAC, he or she cannot draw any perk, allowance
or remuneration from the council, the spokesperson said.
The council has been the brainchild of the Congress president and it
was first set up after UPA-I came to power in 2004. The NAC was set up
as an interface with civil society with regard to the implementation
of Government's National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP).
While Gandhi resigned from the first NAC on March 23, 2006 as well as
her Lok Sabha seat in the wake of the office of profit controversy,
she was re-elected to Lok Sabha from her Rae Bareli constituency in
Uttar Pradesh on May 15 the same year.
The term of the first NAC ended on March 31, 2008. Gandhi had quit the
NAC in 2006 after the opposition alleged that she had violated the
'office of profit' principle by taking up the post and the benefits
that go with it.
The opposition had cited the case of film star-turned-politician Jaya
Bachchan who lost her Rajya Sabha seat on the ground that she had
breached the rule requiring MPs not to hold offices of profit during
their tenure.
Subsequently, Parliament passed the Office of Profit Bill that
exempted 56 posts, including the chairperson of NAC, from being
considered office of profit.
The council has been revived at a time when the issues of Food
Security Bill, Communal Violence Bill and the proposed national law on
health and water are engaging the attention of the government.
The Congress leadership has begun shortlisting names for Gandhi's new
team in the Council.
The first NAC had played a role in the enactment of the Right to
Information Act, National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme — a pro-
rural poor measure — and the Forest Rights Act to give land titles to
traditional forestdwellers.
The first NAC comprised distinguished professionals drawn from diverse
fields of development activity who serve in their individual
capacities.
Through the NAC, the government has access not only to their expertise
and experience but also to a larger network of research organisations,
NGOs and social action and advocacy groups.
The Council has earlier made detailed recommendations to the
government in the areas of priority identified in the NCMP
and to provide independent feedback on the impact of action initiated
in various sectors.
Today's announcement said the salary, allowances and other terms and
conditions of the Chairperson and members shall be such as the
government may by order specify from time to time.
The chairperson of the NAC shall be entitled to the same salary, pay,
allowances and other facilities to which a member of the Union council
of ministers is entitled.
Members shall draw such salary and allowances and the Central
government may by order determine from time to time.
35-member National Advisory Council under Sonia okayed
Anil Anand / DNAFriday, May 14, 2010 1:10 IST
New Delhi: The ball has been set rolling for the National Advisory
Council (NAC) to come into existence with the Union cabinet granting
sanction for the creation of 35 officials and other staff members for
the organisation.
Sonia Gandhi flags off 19 new train services in Uttar Pradesh
NAC, headed by UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi, was reborn on March 29
last with her appointment as its chairperson for the second time.
NAC would have a post each of secretary, additional secretary and
joint secretary in addition to other middle and lower-rung officials.
The selection of officers would be made in consultation with the
chairperson, information and broadcasting minister Ambika Soni said.
Although, the cabinet decision would result in the NAC secretariat
coming into being, it would actually become functional after the
appointment of its members.
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_35-member-national-advisory-council-under-sonia-okayed_1382866
Names cleared for National Advisory Council
June 01, 2010 02:00 IST
Tags: National Advisory Council, National Rural Employment Guarantees
Programme, IAS, Congress, AK Shiva Kumar
The National Advisory Council (NAC) is likely to be reconstituted with
some new members. While four members of the previous NAC--Aruna Roy,
Jean Dreze, NC Saxena and AK Shiva Kumar--will remain in the panel,
six new faces will be inducted.
Agriculture scientist MS Swaminathan, technocrat V Krishnamurthy,
Planning Commission member and economist Narendra Jadhav, coordinator
of social security at NGO SEWA, Mirai Chatterjee, Muslim civil rights
activist Farah Naqvi and former IAS officer and social activist, Harsh
Mander will be the new members.
Congressman Jairam Ramesh [ Images ], an important element in the
previous council, is absent from the list. Whether any Congress
members will be included in the list is yet to be decided.
The advisory body--for the flagship National Rural Employment
Guarantees Programme (NREGP)--for the ministry of rural development
that was packed with Congress leaders, had evoked criticism from the
civil society.
BS Reporter in New Delhi Source: Business Standard
http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/jun/01/new-nac-members-named.htm
Rita Sharma named Secretary, National Advisory Council
Submitted by admin2 on Mon, 05/31/2010 - 20:08 in People
NetIndian News Network
New Delhi, May 31, 2010
Ms Rita Sharma, a 1974 batch officer of the Indian Administrative
Service (Uttar Pradesh cadre), has been appointed as the Secretary of
the National Advisory Council (NAC) headed by ruling United
Progressive Alliance (UPA) Chairperson Sonia Gandhi.
An official press release said Ms Sharma would have the rank and pay
of Secretary to the Government of India. Her appointment, on contract
basis, will be until further orders, it added.
On March 29, Ms Gandhi was named as the Chairperson of the new NAC
that the Government constituted. She had served as Chairperson of the
NAC in the first term of the UPA Government before resigning in 2006
in the wake of the "office of profit" controversy.
The NAC was set up to advise the Government on policy matters and had
an important role in the enactment of the Right to Information Act and
the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act.
Ms Gandhi decided to quit when the Opposition used the Office of
Profit law to attack her and her position as head of the NAC.
It was widely expected that the UPA would constitute the NAC again in
its second term. This time around, it is expected to play a crucial
role in such programmes as the Food Security Act.
http://netindian.in/news/2010/05/31/0006696/rita-sharma-named-secretary-national-advisory-council
National Advisory Council hirings signal socialist agenda
Mon May 31, 2010 8:59pm IST
Business
NEW DELHI (Reuters) - The government has appointed several socialist
intellectuals and activists to a powerful policy advisory body,
officials said on Monday, signalling the possibility of higher
spending on costly social programmes.
The National Advisory Council (NAC) is headed by Sonia Gandhi,
powerful chief of the ruling Congress party who is seen as more
inclined toward favouring the predominantly rural poor to help boost
the party ahead of some key state elections.
While higher spending may be cushioned by windfall gains from a recent
auction of telecom spectrum, the risk is it could fuel rural demand,
feeding inflation, already high, and increasing the pressure on the
central bank to raise rates aggressively.
The NAC, formed in 2004, initiated social programmes credited with
helping return the Congress party to power last year. The council has
cleared 11 names, including a left leaning economist, social and human
rights activists and former civil servants.
"They will try to advocate left-liberal policies. The appointments
show that the Congress is still in favour of a socialist policy as
opposed to a capitalist line," said political analyst Amulya Ganguli.
Those appointed, officials said, include economist Jean Dreze, former
Planning Commission official N.C. Saxena, rights activist Farah Naqvi,
former civil servant Harsh Mander and agricultural scientist M.S.
Swaminathan.
MOST APPOINTEES HELPED GOVT PROGRAMMES
Most of the appointees have, in some capacity, helped the government
give shape to programmes such as the rural job schemes and food
security that won the Congress Party votes in the last election.
Gandhi is credit with creating some of the flagship schemes, including
the rural jobs programme that already costs about 1 percent of GDP.
She has overruled ministers to widen a food subsidy bill and is
pushing a women's rights bill in parliament.
On issues of economic reforms, Indian media often report differences
between her and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, an economist credited
with opening up India's heavily socialist economy in the 1990s.
Some analysts say the appointments signal a government willingness for
a stronger oversight of its current social programmes rather than a
push for fresh social investments.
Most central schemes still continue to elude millions of poor people.
Experts say badly run programmes may add to deficit spending and
hinder India from following rival China by broadening an economic boom
to hoist millions from poverty to become well-fed middle class
consumers.
"These are people with impeccable credentials and it signals the
seriousness with which the government want to pursue inclusive
economic growth and meet social commitments," said Siddharth
Varadarajan of The Hindu newspaper.
The NAC will also likely influence domestic security policy in a
country fighting a worsening Maoist insurgency.
The chair of the NAC holds the rank of a cabinet minister, allowing
Gandhi to call for and work with government officials and documents.
(Editing by Krittivas Mukherjee and Ron Popeski)
Business
http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-48944120100531
Reuters sucks. Editors of above piece are either deaf, mute or dumb.
Their conclusions are ridiculous to say the least. Outsourcing the
government policy decisions is not new.
United States government heavily depends upon such advice from the
experts in the field. here are some of the US examples:
national infrastructure advisory council
http://www.dhs.gov/files/committees/editorial_0353.shtm
national advisory committee immunization
http://www.dhs.gov/files/committees/biography_0082.shtm
national care advisory service
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=national+care+advisory+service&revid=125043048&sa=X&ei=CksKTLS3F4H-8AbHytyIBw&ved=0CEMQ1QIoAg&fp=2c4ab6ab2671a0d4
national bioethics advisory commission
national cancer advisory board
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=national+cancer+advisory+board&revid=125043048&sa=X&ei=CksKTLS3F4H-8AbHytyIBw&ved=0CEUQ1QIoBA&fp=2c4ab6ab2671a0d4
national teaching advisory service
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=national+teaching+advisory+service&revid=125043048&sa=X&ei=CksKTLS3F4H-8AbHytyIBw&ved=0CEYQ1QIoBQ&fp=2c4ab6ab2671a0d4
national benefit advisory association
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=national+benefit+advisory+association&revid=125043048&sa=X&ei=CksKTLS3F4H-8AbHytyIBw&ved=0CEcQ1QIoBg&fp=2c4ab6ab2671a0d4
national vaccine advisory committee
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=national+vaccine+advisory+committee&revid=125043048&sa=X&ei=CksKTLS3F4H-8AbHytyIBw&ved=0CEgQ1QIoBw&fp=2c4ab6ab2671a0d4
India seen as too protective of Sonia Gandhi's image
Wed Jun 2, 2010 5:01pm IST
Congress Party chief Sonia Gandhi smiles as she addresses the media in
New Delhi in this May 16, 2009 file photo. Authorities have tried to
crack down on portrayals of Gandhi in movies, books and cartoons,
triggering criticism the world's largest democracy is too reverent
towards its most powerful politician.
Credit: Reuters/Adnan Abidi/Files
By Rina Chandran
Top News
MUMBAI (Reuters) - Authorities have tried to crack down on portrayals
of Sonia Gandhi in movies, books and cartoons, triggering criticism
that the world's largest democracy is too reverent towards its most
powerful politician.
Gandhi is a member of a family of Congress leaders that has dominated
Indian politics since independence in 1947. As head of the ruling
Congress party, she is widely seen as the power behind-the-scenes in
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's government.
An upcoming Bollywood film "Raajneeti", a political saga featuring a
woman politician said to resemble Sonia Gandhi, has had trouble with
the censor.
Filmmaker Prakash Jha denies his lead actor in "Raajneeti" -- seen in
promotional material draped in a saree like Sonia Gandhi -- is modeled
after her.
Jha said he had difficulty getting his film classified "U/
A" (universal) after first receiving an adult certification that would
have drawn smaller audiences. A new controversy threatens to
overshadow the movie's premiere on Friday.
A Spanish novel "El Sari Rojo" (The Red Sari), purporting to dramatise
the "tale of the Nehru-Gandhi family told through the story of Sonia
Gandhi", has recently come under fire from the powerful Congress party
There have been moves to block the English publication of the novel,
which in some editions has pictures of Sonia Gandhi on the cover with
folded hands.
Congress party spokesman Abhishek Singhvi was cited in the Indian
Express daily as saying the work was "completely unauthorised,
defamatory and salacious".
Congress has been blamed for shutting down the office of an Urdu-
language newspaper in Kashmir over a caption under a picture of Sonia
Gandhi deemed derogatory by local officials.
The Bharatiya Janata Party says such censorship moves are a throwback
to the Emergency in the 1970s when then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi
banned books, movies and newspapers seen as anti-government.
Political observers say the Italian-born Sonia Gandhi is not quite the
autocrat her mother-in-law was reputed to be and that the new
censorship is a result of the Congress party's protective nature over
the Gandhi family.
"It is the culture of sycophancy in the party that is to blame," said
Suhel Seth, managing partner of marketing consultancy Counselage
India. "The eager beavers in the party take it upon themselves to be
custodians of what they perceive to be Brand Sonia to curry favour."
Sonia Gandhi has recently stepped up to a more public role after years
of running the Congress party from the wings, with a cabinet-ranked
post that gives her greater clout.
(Editing by Alistair Scrutton)
National Advisory Council
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The National Advisory Council of India is an advisory body set up to
monitor the implementation of the UPA government's manifesto, the
Common Minimum Programme(CMP). It was set up on 4 June 2004 by Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh. It is a brainchild of Congress party
president, Sonia Gandhi. During UPA-I, the NAC was set up to implement
the common minimum programme. Now, its role is to foster the social
agenda of UPA-II.
Organisation
The leader of the Congress party, Sonia Gandhi is the chairperson of
NAC, holding the status of a cabinet minister. The other members of
this council are nominated by the prime minister in consultation with
the chairperson. The funds for the functioning of this council are
provided from the budgetary allocation for the Prime Minister's
Office.
The NAC has been criticised by some as not in keeping with India's
constitution, and that it would emerge as an alternative, unelected
cabinet, particularly given Mrs. Gandhi's political standing .
On 23 March 2006 Sonia gandhi had resigned from the post of
chairmanship of the NAC. On 29 March 2010 Sonia gandhi was back as the
chairperson of NAC.
Members (2010 - present)
M.S. Swaminathan - Agricultural scientist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.S._Swaminathan
Aruna Roy - Social activist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aruna_Roy
Jean Dreze - Development economist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Dreze
Harsh Mander - Social activist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harsh_Mander
Anu Aga - Businesswoman and Philanthropist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anu_Aga
Deep Joshi - Social activist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Joshi
Madhav Gadgil - Social activist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhav_Gadgil
Farah Naqvi - Social activist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farah_Naqvi
Dr. N. C. Saxena - former bureaucrat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._N._C._Saxena
Narendra Jadhav - former bureaucrat & Member, Planning Commission
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narendra_Jadhav
A. K. Shiva Kumar - Economist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._K._Shiva_Kumar
Members (2004 - 2008)
M.S. Swaminathan - Agricultural scientist
C.H. Hanumantha Rao - politician
Aruna Roy - Social activist
Jairam Ramesh - Politician
Jayaprakash Narayan (Lok Satta) - Politician and former bureaucrat
V Krishnamurthy
N.C. Saxena - former bureaucrat
Madhav Chavan
A. K. Shiva Kumar - Economist
Mrinal Miri
Sehba Hussain
During this tenure, the council was instrumental in enacting NREGA and
RTI acts.
External links
National Advisory Council
Editorial in the Times of India on NAC.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/907061.cms
statement by George Fernandez, leader of the opposition on the
formatio of NAC.
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040703/nation.htm#4
Categories: Government of India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Government_of_India
This page was last modified on 1 June 2010 at 07:34.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Advisory_Council
National Advisory Council undermines Constitution: George
Bangalore, July 2
Attacking the UPA government’s decision to constitute a National
Advisory Council headed by Congress President Sonia Gandhi as one that
“undermines” the Constitution, NDA convener George Fernandes today
said the issue would be raised in the Budget session beginning on July
5.
Mr Fernandes told reporters here after an executive committee meeting
of the JD-U’s Karnataka unit that the government’s move amounted to
“undermining” the Constitution and “overriding” the Department of
Policy and Programme Implementation.
“The government is undermining the Constitution. It has created an
authority and provided it state funds and government staff. The
authority is supposed to be an advisory body which reports to the
Prime Minister. It’s overriding the Department of Policy and Programme
Implementation,” he said.
Asked if this issue would be raised in the Budget session, the former
Defence Minister replied: “Naturally”.
On the performance and longevity of the UPA government, Mr Fernandes
said “indications are not good.”
He said there was information that External Affairs Minister Natwar
Singh was not briefing and interacting with Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh. “If it is so, it’s dangerous,” he said, adding that once he
returned to Delhi tomorrow, he would check the veracity of the
information.
On “attempts to sideline Atal Bihari Vajpayee in the BJP,” Mr
Fernandes said he did not think the former Prime Minister had been
sidelined. He also said that he did not think that the former Prime
Minister could be sidelined.
On the NDA’s view on “the BJP trying to raise the Hindutva” agenda, he
said if one went though the resolutions of the BJP at the recent
national executive meeting in Mumbai, it did not suggest anything of
that sort.
Asked if the NDA will boycott the Union Budget, Mr Fernandes said the
decision to boycott was taken in regard to the Railway budget. “A
final decision will be taken at the NDA Parliamentary Party meeting on
the morning of July 5.”
Earlier, addressing the JD-U meeting, Mr Fernandes said going in for
early elections to the Lok Sabha was a mistake but added that it was
the majority view of the NDA then.
He said in the present circumstances, one had to accept the fact that
small parties should join forces either with the Congress or the BJP.
The party meeting decided to go it alone in the coming local bodies
elections in Karnataka, state unit president B. Somashekar said. In
the recent Assembly elections, the JD-U had aligned with the BJP while
continuing to be in the NDA at the national level.
He said (because of the alliance), the JD-U’s base had shifted to
“other parties”, adding that the focus was now on strengthening the
party base.
Supporting the state unit’s view on the matter, Mr Fernandes said
there was nothing in the NDA policy to suggest that all partners would
face all elections together. — PTI
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040703/nation.htm#4
LEADER ARTICLE
Three is a Crowd: Power Centres in Government Bode Ill for Democracy
Kripa Sridharan, Nov 2, 2004, 12.00am IST
It is nearly six months since Manmohan Singh became prime minister. It
is still not clear, however, if he is the master in his own house.
Managing a motley coalition is a challenge even under the best of
circumstances. But when extra hurdles are thrown in, the task becomes
infinitely worse. These hurdles have appeared in the form of parallel
power centres like the National Advisory Council (NAC) and the Left
parties supporting the government from outside.
The NAC has been sending off letters to the prime minister, signed by
Sonia Gandhi. Given the power equations, he would have to treat the
suggestions seriously even if many of them are not implementable. The
NAC was set up to monitor the implementation of the common minimum
programme and as its chairperson, Mrs Gandhi enjoys the rank and
status of a cabinet minister. She and the council have access to all
the cabinet papers and files. This is a departure from the conventions
governing a cabinet system.
The NAC has also been criticised as a 'super cabinet'. Its influence
on the day-to-day functioning of the government, it is feared, can be
quite significant. It is the government's business to translate
electoral pledges into policies. But there is a danger in pushing this
to its extreme limit and sculpting a 'conviction government' from
outside as the NAC is attempting to do.
In effect, this parallels the situation within a hybrid or semi-
presidential system like that of France. Instead of the pure models of
the parliamentary or presidential executive, the hybrid model is a
dual system. It creates a division of authority within the executive
but rather unequally. The president holds the upper hand by keeping
the prime minister on a short leash. Our parliamentary government,
which is differently designed for a good reason, should not be made to
resemble a semi-presidential system in its practice of reducing the
autonomy of the prime minister — that too by his own party chief.
The point is simple: Hybrid systems are constitutionally designed that
way, but parliamentary cabinet systems are not. Ours is the latter and
this difference should not be blurred. Otherwise, the prime minister
ends up spending time not only managing the coalition partners but
also the power centre(s) located outside the governmental machinery
but which formally supports the government. This is a piece of
nonsense that was never intended by the Constitution.
The danger is that parallel power centres can complicate the decision-
making process in terms of assigning priority to various issues. The
NAC missives belie the initial optimism that there would be no
contradiction between the dual power centres. It was assumed by some
that Mrs Gandhi would busy herself with party and organisational
matters and the prime minister would be in control of policies and
governance. Such neat division of labour is not apparent at the
moment.
No less problematic is the interference from the Left parties who
insist on their pound of flesh. They get miffed at policy proposals
which go against their political interests. But since their support is
crucial for the survival of the government they have to be humoured.
In the last four months the Left has said no to several policy
initiatives as well. No sooner the Budget was presented the Left
raised objections to the proposed hike in the FDI caps in aviation,
insurance and telecom sectors.
The latest episode when the Left flexed its muscle was over the
inclusion of foreign experts in the Planning Commission's consultative
committees. L K Advani's facetious remark about the governmental
landscape characterised by the presence of a 'PM, S(uper)PM and CPM'
seems quite apt. One is now beginning to see the last two in action
and these are just early times. The top is getting a bit too crowded
for comfort.
Interference from constitutionally mandated entities, as in some
countries, is part of the legitimate process of governance. There can
be no objection to that. 'Veto players', as George Tsebelis called
them, have a legitimate constitutional role. The different parties
constituting a coalition are considered to be legitimate veto
players.
But what about parties that lend support from the outside? These
clearly act as extra-constitutional veto players. In the present
Indian context both the NAC and the Left parties are performing this
role. Non-institutionalised veto players often grab this privilege.
But this is not healthy. The policy stability of any political system
is dependent on the number and nature of the veto players. Those
formally mandated to play the role are not that disruptive to the
system as those who appropriate such a role. The lesser the legitimacy
of the veto player more the volatility within the policy environment.
Despite what conventional wisdom says about democratic politics, too
much dispersal of power is as bad as too much concentration. As Andrew
MacIntyre observes in his book The Power of Institutions, one causes
policy paralysis or rigidity because no decision can be made given the
large number of veto players, and the other causes policy volatility
because when there are very few veto players decisions can be made
swiftly, but frequent U-turns are just as likely.
In terms of policy process India is strangely beginning to display
both rigidity and volatility as seen in some recent decisions. This
bodes ill.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/907061.cms
The present government of India, led by Congress party in an alliance
of like minded others, "United Progressive Alliance-UPA" is being
attacked by stubborn forces. Opposition leaders, such as BJP is
gunning UPA for all real and imaginary faults of Congress.
They are joined by media. When the Times of India group publications
get rattled, they tell tattle tales. Lot of noise and no substance.
Outsourcing has become a magic mantra for Indians. The industry has
grown geometrically, if not exponentially in the last
ten-15 years. The rise is due to the fact that Indian IT professionals
are capable of performing miracles. They are technically equal, if not
superior to any other such persons.agencies. If they are succeeding
against all odds and oppositions, why not let
government appointed advisory councils/bodies do the same service?
Indian bureaucracy stinks. The National Advisory Council may end up in
a garbage dump. The only salvation for such outcome is to make them
autonomous and accountable for their work.