In Lecture

Report on Lectures by Guest Speakers

18TH DECEMBER’ 2007

MR. MICHAEL NEWBILL  , Spoke on“Challenges and Prospects of the Indo-US Relations”

Mr. Michael Newbill, the chief of the Economic & Political Section, US Consulate, Mumbai, speaking at the MAEER’s MIT School of Government, touched on the challenges and prospects of the Indo-US relations.
Appreciating the initiative taken by MIT to start a School of Government out of social obligation, he said that diverse country like India need more institutes like this. Responding to a query if the US would support India to become permanent member of Security Council Mr. Newbill diplomatically challenged back that whether India was ready for new equations of new friends and new enemies if it has to be the permanent member of Security Council.  He touched upon various subjects like education, trade & investments, regional cooperation, democracy, International Security and environment. He spoke about the influx of the Indian students in the US. He praised the Trade & FDI happening in the sectors like telecom. According to him the prospective barriers of the Indo-US bilateral relations is the stout, proud, robust & stubborn bureaucracy of both the countries. He further said that in regional cooperation we need to focus on capacity building and sustainable development. Terrorism was the major threat to be combated jointly by both the countries. He stated 3700 official casualties of terrorism in India from 2004, which were more than combined figures of North America, South America & Eurasia. He emphasized that the world was looking up to India for ‘Cultural Influence’. He said that it is often quoted that India’s business strategies are often cited in US corporate boardrooms.
Mr. Newbill echoed Dr. Shrikant Paranjpe’s statement of how policy making has shifted from the capital New Delhi to regional centers of power and the role of regional media.
On being asked that if the Nuke Deal doesn’t go through how it would affect the bilateral relations, Mr. Newbill safely evaded by stating that most of the clauses of the agreement would continue. On being asked that if the new President of America could alter the clauses of Hyde Act, Mr. Newbill said not the US President but the US Congress was authorized to do so.
Concluding, the participants of MIT-SOG called for more US investments in social development arena.

17TH DECEMBER’ 2007

DR. RAGHUNATH MASHELKAR  , Spoke on“Civil Services and Society”

Padmbhushan Dr. Raghunath Mashelkar, while addressing the participants of MIT SOG said that ‘"Should we be talking about India at 60 or India at 16? And I will explain to you what is the meaning of that 16. It is 2001 minus 1991. Because in 1991 we got the so-called second freedom. I call 1947 as the first freedom – political freedom. But it was in 1991 when we got the second freedom – the freedom to compete. In a closed, controlled economy, an agrarian economy, it was really an undeveloped economy what could one do? Just make a contrast 1991 and today. We were left with one week worth of import of foreign exchange. Today we talk about 270 Billion Dollar plus. We are the fourth largest in the world in terms of foreign exchange. Can you imagine what a difference it has made? Just look at the section of the Indian talent, just sections, small sections. Just 600,000 software professionals. Do you know that they generate 35% of our exports today? And do you know what is their average age? Twenty-six and a half.’ Thus basically he stressed the importance f the liberalization policies adopted by India since 1991 and he expressed his firm belief in India’s resurgence.   That is why he is rightly called “A dangerous optimist’. 

13TH DECEMBER’ 2007

SHRI. S. LAXMINARAYANAN  , Spoke on “Current Challenges in the Indian Administrative System”

Mr. S. Lakshminarayanan, the former Secretary for Ministry of Home Affairs and the architect of Information & Technology Ministry of India served as an IAS for 38 long years. He shared his experience with the participants of MIT-SOG.
While addressing he said that the biggest challenge to Indian administrative system was to reduce the size of govt. After independence the number of Ministries had expanded from ten to eighty five, which substantially can be brought down to fifty. He put forth a challenge of rescuing the government from bureaucrats and politicians. He spoke about reducing the size of bureaucracy. There exists a Politico-Bureaucratic-business nexus among the politicians and the bureaucrats, which needs to be broken.
Mr. Lakshminarayanan categorized the bureaucrats as honest & positive, honest & negative, dishonest & positive and dishonest & negative according to their behavior. It was necessary to end the hegemony of bureaucrats and severely punish them for corruption. Democracy has become by the bureaucrats, for the bureaucrats and of the bureaucrats. They follow a principle of suck above and kick below. Today it is necessary to lower down the expenditure by reducing the pomp and show of bureaucrats and politicians and concentrate on genuine issues.

The British Business Group arranged an interactive section with Mr. Mark Tully, who was the chief of BBC for 22 years, at Deccan Rendezvous Hotel on 06th December 2007.  The student of MIT School of Government actively participated in this interactive session and had an opportunity to interview Mr. Mark Tully Who, is the author of the recently published book The Unending Journey and a great lover of India.

4TH DECEMBER’ 2007

SHRI. MADHAVRAO PATIL  , Spoke on“Life in UK and Functioning of Urban Self Government: A comparative Analysis”

Mr. Patil has given a wonderful insight about how the democracy started springing in western countries. Starting from King George through King Henry, it was a productive journey. He then shifted his attention to the politics in UK and in India. He said politicians in UK come in to politics for service not for personal gains. He emphasised the fact that people have high regard for politicians, there. He then started explaining about the structure and functioning of local bodies in UK. He also criticised the ‘Top to bottom’ approach of Indian model of local bodies. He then spoke about the necessity of women folk to participate in the local self-governance. He explained, even in UK, how difficult it is to implement this. He criticised the Indian model of dynastic politics. He finally said compulsory voting as in Australia should be implemented so that better local and other governments could be formed. The learning from Mr. Patil's session was nothing but to nurture the community feeling along with producing good politicians in the near future.

1ST DECEMBER’ 2007

SHRI. DIGVIJAY SINGH, Spoke on“Indo US Nuclear Deal”

Mr. Digvijay Singh, the Hon’ble Member of Parliament, the Ex- External Affairs minister of India during NDA government visited MIT-School of Government on 1 December on the eve of World AIDS Day. For the second time he addressed the MIT-SOG participants. It was in 2005, he had addressed the first batch of MPG. He had facilitated the felicitation of MIT-SOG at the hands of Mr. Bhairavsingh Shekhawat, the then vice president of India. He came up with his opinions on Indo-US Nuclear Deal in the following way.
          There is no change in the foreign policy to the date. India’s foreign policy advocates two things:

1. India would continue to support all the democratic governments of the world.
2. India would condemn and be against colonization; rather it will support the struggle against colonization.

India was the most powerful country of the world. It was the richest country. Indians has always groomed a humanitarian approach. It never attacked any country. However, Mahatma Gandhi’s struggle gave a message to the world that India would not subjugate to any external forces.

Shri Digvijay Singh ji criticized the UPA government’s current negotiations with US for civil nuclear cooperation. He criticized it on the counts that it will hamper India’s strategic autonomy and it would make India a subordinate alley of the US. He also questioned the basic ‘energy rationale’ behind the deal. He stated that nuclear energy is not a very viable, safe and affordable source of energy. Instead we must try to promote the available conventional and non-conventional energy sources. Thus he basically highlighted the concerns raised in India about the Indo-US nuclear deal.

29TH NOVEMBER’ 2007

SHRI. R. C. LAHOTI  , Spoke on “Indian Judiciary – Awaiting Massive Reforms”

• M· Shri. R.C. Lahoti for the first time in his life addressed students as faculty. He said that people in India have high expectation from judiciary because it is the last destination. He said - If you say what you do and do what you say then only your message has moral values. Speaking on the judiciary he said, the element of corruption has entered judiciary also because the members of the bar are also the members of our society.
• The strength of Supreme Court is of 26 judges out of which only 1 post is vacant
• The strength of High Court is of 792 judges out of which 256 positions are vacant.
• The strength of Subordinate Court is of 15400 judges out of which 3000 positions are vacant.
• There are about 1 million lawyers practicing in the country
• The Supreme Court of India decides 18,000 cases/Quarter as compared to 700/year of the US Supreme Court.
• There are 44,819 cases pending in Supreme Court of India
• There are 30 lacs civil cases and 7 lac criminal cases pending in various High Courts of India.
• Most Surprisingly there are 73 lacs civil cases and 1 crore criminal cases pending in Subordinate courts of India
• Indian judiciary is one of the largest in the world.
• Reforms in Indian Judiciary: Can be divided in two categories-
  1. Quantitative:
     • Presently we have 10.5 Judges/million people as compared to the need of 100.5 Judges/million people.
  2. Qualitative:
     • Judges should have qualities of initiative, intelligence, integrity and industry
     • Training programs for the judges of Supreme Court have already been started
     • India needs IT revolution in judiciary to get fast judgements
     • Alternate Dispute Resolution system should be introduced in Indian Judiciary system

28TH NOVEMBER’ 2007

SHRI. B.G. DESHMUKH  , Spoke on “Coalition Governments and Bureaucracy”

The Indian Electoral System and also with the growing power and influence of regional parties, India had witnessed Coalition Governments at the Center. As far as the Indian politics is concern, Coalition Politics and Governments are here to say. In India, instead of two parties, we see the emergence of two coalitions especially at the National level from the mid 1990s. The first coalition Government was formed in 1970s by the Janata Party and others. But coalition Governments at that time was not stable and did not last long. But the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) proved the political pandits wrong. The BJP- led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) Government of about 24 parties with Atal Bihari Vajpayee as Prime Minister lasted its full tenure during the late1990s. This had been proven again by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) that is at power at the Centre. These two Coalition Governments not only provided stability but also the rise of regional parties and leaders at the Centre and national stage.

Coalition Governments can be of two types:

1. Pre-Poll Alliance: Political alliance of different parties formed before the election, worked out a common election manifesto, common minimum programme and faces the electoral as one.
2. Post Poll Alliance: Political alliance of different parties formed after the election. They faced the electoral separately.

The election system in India seriously need some reform to meet our dynamic democracy.

Some electoral reforms:

• A candidate should have to secure 50%+ of the Vote.
• Some seats should be through Proportional Representation.
• Option of negative Vote (if there are more than 50% negative vote then the candidates in the list cannot contest again for that election).
• Right to Recall (But a no-confidence vote should also be accompanied by the confidence vote. So that the electorates know who is replacing whom- Eg. Recall of California Gov. Gray Davies and the replacement by Arnold Schwezneggar)

Bureaucrats normally prefer to work with single party Government rather than a coalition government of different parties. A single party government follows a set of program and agendas. The bureaucrats know exactly what they have to formulate for the implementation of the government’s program. But when it comes to coalition, they are confused lot. As the Minister concern may wish for a different thing and another Minister may want another thing.

Some reforms in the bureaucracy:

• There should be a code of conduct for the bureaucrats.
• The Cabinet Secretary at the Centre or the Chief Secretary at the State should have considerable influence with his/her colleagues and the Ministers.
• Fixed tenure of posting.
• Liberal policy for Voluntary retirement.
• Should have a United Kingdom like system where the Secretary can give their view freely in the Parliament.
• Bureaucrats who perform badly for two consecutive years should be removed.
• Every fifth year, performance should be judged and sent for necessary trainings.
• Career planning and in-service training every 10 years should be mandatory.
• Deputation to private sectors and vice versa to gain experience of both the sectors.