I HAVE BEEN following with the closest interest this important debate on the Panchayati Raj and Nagarpalika Bills. These Constitutional Amendments, which I had the honour to introduce at the last session, are of truly historic and revolutionary significance. It is, therefore, not surprising that the debate should have been sometimes stormy, sometimes incisive, sometimes reflective, but at all times lively. I wish to than all members on both sides of the House for the important contributions they have made to this debate which is bound to adorn textbooks on Constitutional history for many years to come.

By andlarge, it appears to me, there is general acceptance of the need for maximum democracy and maximum devolution. What is disputed are matters of Constitutional jurisdiction, political propriety, electoral motivation and legislative detail. Allow me to deal with each of these apprehensions in turn. It has now been well - established in both Houses that there can be no doubt about the Union Government's competence to introduce these Constitutional Amendments. We have displayed the utmost rectitude in not impinging upon the essential Constitutional relationship established between the Union and the States. Our basic aim is to secure Constitutional sanctity for democracy in the Panchayats and Nagarpalikas and devolution to them of adequate power and finances to ensure the people's participation in the development process.

First, we have left Entry Five of the State List exactly as it is and where it is. The competence of State legislatures to deal with all municipal legislation relying to rural and urban local bodies has not been tampered with in any way.

Second, care has been taken to so draft the Constitutional Amendments as to leave it entirely to State Governments to formulate and pass the necessary orders to realise the objectives of these Constitutional Amendments. The only point I would wish to stress is that all municipal law has to conform to the provisions of the Constitution. These two Amendments, when passed, will set the Constitutional stage on the basis of which State Legislatures will undertake detailed legislation.

Top

Third, it is erroneous and misleading to say, as some members opposite have alleged, that what we have attempted to do is to draft detailed municipal legislation by the backdoor of detailed Constitutional Amendments. We have restricted ourselves to essential features such as regularity in elections and the forestalling of arbitrary and prolonged suspensions.

We have been asked why we have prescribed in such detail a common structure of Panchayats at village, intermediate and district levels, as also a common structure of Nagarpalikas for different sizes of population. The answer is simple.

A uniform structure means a uniform pattern and degrees of democratic representation in the local bodies. Why should the pattern and degree of democracy differ from one part of the country to the other? We are, after all, one country. Another major objective we have in mind is to reduce the vast gap that now separates the voter from his representative. In a vast country like ours, there are at present no more than about five thousand five hundred persons - five thousand in the State Legislatures and around five hundred in Parliament - to directly represent 800 million people. The number of voters seeking the assistance of the elected representative is so large that there is no way the representative can really give his personal attention to his electorate as a whole. Also, it means the people have to approach their MLA, or even MP, to get grassroots problems attended to. The Panchayati Raj and Nagarpalika Bills will generate so many lakhs of elected grassroots representatives that the distance between the voter and his representative would be drastically reduced, the power - brokers would be driven from their perches, and grassroots problems would receive grassroots attention. There is no reason why these benefits should not reach the people in a more or less uniform manner throughout the country. That objective can only be secured by uniformity in the structure of local bodies.

The third point is, perhaps, of the greatest significance. We are determined to ensure just representation for the weaker sections of society through reservations in all our local bodies. The only way of ensuring uniformity in reservations is by ensuring a uniform structure of local government.

Let me give you an example to illustrate the complications that would have arisen if we had tried to secure a uniform system or reservations without having a uniform structure of local government. At present, in some States, including Congress - run Maharashtra and non - Congress - run West Bengal, the Panchayat Samiti is a body directly elected by the people at large.

Top

In some other States, however, the Panchayat Samiti is not a directly elected body but a committee of the Chairmen of Village Panchayats. In a directly elected Panchayat Samiti it is entirely feasible to reserve seats for Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes in proportion to their population, as also to reserve 30 percent of the seats for women, If, however, the Panchayat Samiti is not a directly elected body but only a committee of the Chairmen of the Village Panchayats, how is one to secure proportionate representation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes or 30 percents reservation for women?

In prescribing a uniform structure of local government for the country as a whole, our aim is not to arbitrarily impose a uniform structure on a diverse country. It is only to ensure that there is uniformity of reservations throughout the country for the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and women, We are second to none in recognising the diversity of our country. We are second to none in celebrating the variegated cultures of our country. We are second to none in being the most passionate advocates of our unity in diversity, in recognising and affirming that, in a country like India, the only unity that is possible is by a large - hearted acceptance of diversity. Respect for diversity means recognishing that palm tress grow in some parts of the country and the chinar grows elsewhere. But what has this to do with the oppression of Harijans or Advisees or discriminations against women? Surely, the ladies of Kerala deserve equal treatment in the Panchayats as the ladies of Kashmir, even as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes everywhere are entitled to equal representation. Diversity means respect for a Carnation Kriti in Thanjavur, a baul in Bengal, a dhrupad in Gwalior and a manganiar lok - geet in Rajasthan. But does this mean reservations in Tamil Nadu should be different to reservations in Bengal?

That the Advises of Rajasthan should be treated differently to the Advises of Madhya Pradesh? That Scheduled Castes in one part of the country should get reservations in proportion to their population but be denied the same privilege in other parts of the country? To do this would be to make a farce of the noble precept of unity in diversity.

We celebrate the intellectual, spiritual and cultural diversity of our country. But, as I said a minute ago, we are one country. When it comes to oppression and discrimination, the people of India are united in demanding a uniform end to all oppression, all suppression, all social tyranny, all obsolete social mores. I repeat that it is to secure a uniform system of reservations that we were obliged to prescribe a uniform structure of local government.

Top

I now turn to questions of political propriety which appear to have agitated the feelings of our friends Opposite. We have been asked: how dare the Prime Minister interact directly with District Magistrates? I answer: what call has the Prime Minister of a country like India to remain as Prime Minister unless he feels at home in the humblest hut of the remotest village of our vast and varied country? I toured hundreds of villages. I spoke to countless people. There, in their hearths and homes, I experienced the cruelty of an unresponsive administration, the oppression of an administration without a heart, the callous lack of compassion that most of our people find at the hands of much of our administration. I then looked at the administrators themselves - most of them dedicated young men and women, of extraordinarily high intelligence, deeply concerned about the people placed in their charge and yet, apparently, incapable of converting their enthusiasm and personal compassion into a responsive administration. I sought an answer to this riddle, a solution to this conundrum. That is how I decided to pose the question to the District Magistrates themselves. How could this possibly be wrong?

In any case, there was nothing clandestine about my encounters with District Magistrates. The first one was held at Bhopal. I invited Chief Minister Vora to join us - he accepted. The second one was held at Hyderabad. I invited Chief Minister N.T.Rama Rao to accompany me to the encounter, For reasons best known to him, he haughtily declined. I asked him once again at Hyderabad airport. He once again refused to come with me. How can the Opposition now turn around and say I went behind the backs of Chief Minister to talk to District Magistrates?

When it came to meetings with village pradhans and sarpanches, Panchayat Samiti Chairmen and Presidents of Zila Parishads, we took care to seek the co - operation of at least two Opposition - run State Governments in holding these Sammelans. Chief Minister Jyoti Basu kindly greed to co - operate and we held a most informative and useful Sammelan in Calcutta, in full view, I might add, of the representatives of that State's non - Congress Government. We were making arrangements with an Opposition - run Government for the South Zone Sammelan in Bangalore when that Government crumbled under the weight of its own inconsistencies. If the Janata Dal Government failed to host the South Zone Sammelan that was not on account of any failings on our part but only because of their own inability to hold out until the Panchayat representatives arrived.

We have consulted openly, frankly and freely with every echelon concerned; beginning with the common folk of our villages to whom I spoke, them the bureaucracy, including District Magistrates, Chief Secretaries and Secretaries to the Government of India; and then the Panchayat and Local Self - Government Ministers and Chief Ministers of States. It was never we who shied away from meeting them. Regrettably, however, some Opposition - run State Governments refused to send officials and even elected representatives to these encounters and then, in a shameful act of abnegation of governmental responsibility, failed to participate in the Conference of Chief Ministers which I called in early July.

Top

We have come to his House, at the culmination of a process of open, transparent consultation without precedent in the history of independent India. The Amendments we present are the distilled essence of the views of thousands of elected local body representatives, hundreds of District Magistrates, scores of senior Government servants, and dozens of Ministers and Chief Ministers. There is no impropriety on our part. The only impropriety has lain in the discourtesy with which a well - intentioned invitation was turned down.

Much play has been made by the Opposition of the proximity of the forthcoming general elections to the important legislation which this House will shortly be voting upon. I do not quite understand the point at issue here. Is it not a fact that we were elected to govern and legislate only because elections are in the offing? It is the people who have given us this responsibility. It is to the people - and the people alone - that we are responsible. We reject this artful misinterpretation of Parliamentary practice that would require us to desist from legislation because of the proximity of the polls.

In any case, it was at the very beginning of our present term of office, in the first broadcast I made to the nation in January 1985, that I outlined the plan we had in mind to make our administration responsive to the people's needs. I raised these issues in my speech at the Congress Centenary in Bombay in December 1985. In August, 1986, this intention of Government was enshrined as the Twentieth Point of the 20 - Point Program under the rubric "Responsive Administration".

At that time, I must confess, we were in quest of managerial solutions to unresponsive administration. We were looking to a simplification of procedures, grievance redressal machinery, single - window clearances, computerisation and courtesy as the answers to the problem. As we went along, we discovered that managerial solution would not do, What was needed was a systemic solution.

The Panchayati Raj and Nagarpalika Bills constitute the most significant systemic transformation in the governance of the Indian polity since the Constitution entered into force just under forty years ago. We learnt that a paternalistic administration cannot be a responsive administration. We learnt that a grassroots administration without political authority was like a meal without salt. We learnt that however well - intentioned our district bureaucracy might be, without effective elected authority the gap between the people and the bureaucracy could not be closed. We learnt that the Vacuum created by the absence of local level political authority had spawned the power - brokers who occupy the gap between the people and their representatives in distant Vidhan Sabhas and the even more remote Parliament. We learnt that corruption could only be ended by giving power to the Panchayats and making Panchayats responsible to the people. We learnt that inefficiency could only be ended by entrusting the people at the grassroots with the responsibility for their own development. We learnt that callousness could be ended by empowering the people to send their own representatives to institutions of local self - government, by empowering the people to reject those who betray their mandate.

Top

The Panchayati Raj and Nagarpalika Bill are not only instruments for bringing democracy and devolution to every chaupal, every chabutra, to angan and dalan. They are also a charter for ending bureaucratic oppression, technocratic tyranny, crass inefficiency, bribery, re - tapism, nepotism, corruption and the million other malfeasance's that afflict the poor of our villages, towns and cities. The Bills are the warrant for ending the reign of the power - brokers, of the intermediaries whom Shakespeare called "the caterpillars of the common - wealth".

These Bills fill a yawning gap in the country's polity. They are the result of a process that was started in the immediate aftermath of our great electoral victory and has been carried forward in carefully considered stages till it has repined for consideration by our august Houses of Parliament. There is nothing sudden or surprising about the timing of these Bills.

There is another point I would wish to stess. Elections come and go. The consequences of these Constitutional Amendments will far outlast the outcome of the forthcoming general elections. These Amendments will become a sacred obligation on all Governments, whether at the Centre or in the States, whether run by the Congress or any Opposition Party. There is nothing gimmicky about our intentions. We are making democracy at the grassroots a solemn and ineluctable Constitutional obligation. Equally, we are making the devolution of administrative and financial powers to the local bodies an inescapable responsibility of all governments, now and in the future, here at the Center and there in the States, a responsibility as much of Congress - run governments as of governments run by others. An election gimmick is a trick of the trade. A Constitutional Amendment is a solemn, long - term pledge. Ours is a pledge to the people. Those who thwart the people do so at grave risk to themselves. When the voter stands in the seclusion of the voting booth his hand will go down on the hand which clasps his as a friend.

I would now like to deal with some of the matters in detail touched upon by participants in this debate.

It has been alleged that Schedules Eleven and Twelve infringe in some manner upon the legislative sovereignty of the State Legislatures and the freedom of action State Governments in regard to responsibilities assigned to them by the Constitution.

Top

The confusion appears to arise out of confounding the legislative lists of the Seventh Schedule and the lists incorporated in the Proposed Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules. The Union, Sate and Concurrent lists detailed in the Seventh Schedule deal with the respective legislative competence of the Union, the States, and the Union and States together. The Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules, on the other hand, constitute an illustrative listing of subjects in respect of which development programs might be implemented by Panchayats and Nagarpalikas respectively. These are subjects regarding which understanding at the local level is likely to be much more profound than in some distant State Capital and where implementation by local elected bodies is likely to be much more responsive to articulated public need than the cold ministrations of official agencies. The Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules do not confer any legislative competence upon the local bodies. Nothing is taken away from the legislative competence of State Legislatures. All that is indicated by the Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules is the path along which effective devolution might be pursued to render the Panchayats and Nagarpalikas into vibrant, dynamic, meaningful institutions of local self - government.

It is explicitly stated in the Constitutional Amendments now before the House that it would be for State Legislatures to lay down the legislative parameters of devolution and for State - Governments to give practical effect to those parameters. We recognise that the precise pattern of devotion might vary from State to State. We leave it to the good sense of our people to endorse or reject through their vote the degree and nature of devolution conferred upon the Panchayats and Nagarpalikas by different State Legislatures and Sate Governments. Those State Governments that live up to the expectations of the people will receive the endorsement of the people. Those who fail the people will receive the rejection they deserve. Our sanction is the people's vote. The only threat we hold out to State Governments is the threat of their being rejected at the polls by the people whose Constitutional rights they transgress, by the people who feel deprived of the opportunities opened to them by these Constitutional Amendments.

Surprisingly little has been said in this debate about heart of the Amendments, which is the provision for planning and implementation.

It is undeniable that our planning has become increasingly removed from the perceptions and aspirations of our people at the grassroots. Such district planning as is taking place is largely formalistic in nature, a putting together by bureaucrats and technocrats of what they perceive to be in the interests of the people. The people themselves are not consulted at all, or are consulted but perfunctorily. Through these Amendments, the primary responsibility for planning would devolve upon the Panchayats at every level and each tier of the Nagarpalikas. Each local community, whether in a small village covered by a Village Panchayat, or in a village tureing into a town governed by a Nagar Panchayat, or in a town governed by a Municipal Council, or in a city governed by a Corporation, would prepare its own plan for its own development.

Top

I would particularly draw the attention of the House to the wording of the relevant provision. It provides, in effect, for any plan for economic development to incorporate its social justice component. As it is, provision for reservations ensures that the Panchayat or Nagarpalika undertaking the planning exercise will be adequately weighted with the weaker sections of society. That in itself will contribute to a heightened social consciousness in the preparation of plans. But these constitutional provisions go even further. They make the completion of any plan prepared by a Panchayat or Nagarpalika contingent upon the incorporation in the plan of its social justice component. In other words, whereas up till now even in so progressive a State as Gujrat, which has pioneered the Social Justice Committees in Panchayats, social justice has been an adjunct to the planning process, these Constitutional Amendments make social justice an integral element of the planning process.

Plans prepared by Panchayats, Panchayat Samitis and Nagarpalikas will then be filtered upwards to the Zila Parishad for harmonising and consolidation by a Committee elected by members of the Zila Parishad and the Nagarpalikas. This Committee for district planning incorporates members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in proportion to their population in the district and reserve 30 percent of the seats for women; Thus, the very composition of the District Planning Committee is such as to ensure the integration of social justice with economic planning in district plans. This holds true equally of the elected body being established for metropolitan planning.

These Constitutional Amendments presage an entirely new era in planning, not only in terms of detailed consultations with the grassroots, but also in terms of ensuring social justice as an integral component of the development process.

As regards implementation, there has been a half - hearted attempt by some members of the Opposition to raise a laugh by pointing to one lacuna or the other in the Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules. These digs would have a purpose if there had been any attempt to make Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules either comprehensive or obligatory. We have made it amply clear that these two Schedules are illustrative in nature, aimed at indicating practical ways in which the implementation of programs and projects might be entrusted toelected local bodies instead of being carried out, as present, by cold, remote official agencies. It is by being held responsible for the implementation of programs that local bodies will become truly responsible to the people. It is when representatives is combined with responsibility that responsive administration follows.

Top

Moreover, the location of the District Planning Committee in the Zila Parishad, and indeed its very creation, provide the first - ever platform of rural - urban interaction on development issues. This in itself will contribute of a higher awareness of various problems of social injustice and the remedial measures required to rectify them. Trough the proposed Metropolitan Planning Authority, India becomes one of the first developing countries in the world to provide a platform for interaction between the State and the Central authorities and the elected representatives of urban and adjacent rural local bodies, thus integrating the demands of the social justice with the imperatives of economic growth.

We have left it to State legislatures and State Governments to determine the precise contours of the responsibilities that will develop on local bodies for the implementation of programs. Some States will go further than others. Some variation in the degree and pattern of devolution would be justified and acceptable. But any State government which transgresses and the spirit of these Amendments will have to face the wrath of the people.

We, at the Centre, have made a beginning in trusting the local bodies to implement their own programs. The Jawahar Rozgar Yojana and the Nehru Rozgar Yojana are the earnest of our commitment to placing responsibility for development administration squarely in the hands of the elected representatives of the people at the grassroots. No longer will the people have to run form one bureaucratic closed door to another, from one indifferent official to another, No longer will they have to bribe and cajole their way to securing their legitimate rights. We are bringing to an end the Kafkaesque nightmare through which the people at the grassroots have lived. Their problems will now be solved at their doorstep. Accountability would be nailed to the Panchayat Ghar and the Nagarpalika. Truth will not be hidden in ever - more voluminous files and cupboards bursting at the seams, but will be revealed on the floor of the Panchayat Ghar and at the Village hustings, on the floor of the Town Hall and the hustings in every mohalla.

As regards the sound finances of the Panchayats and Nagarpalikas, we propose entrusting this responsibility to the Finance Commissions envisaged in the Constitutional Amendments. Here again, some of the comments made by members Opposite would appear to indicate that while they have glimpsed some of the parallel features between the Finance Commission established under Article 280 of the Constitution and the Finance Commissions proposed in the present Amendments, they have not comprehended the essential differences between the two. Whereas the Finance Commission established under Article 280 effects the actual allocation of resources between the Centre and the States, the Finance Commissions referred to in these Amendments would limit themselves to the principles on the basis of which allocations might be made between the States and the local bodies. The actual allocations will be made by the State Governments in the light of State legislation on the subject and the principles recommended by the Finance Commissions.

Top

We, at the Center, are undertaking an exercise to review Nagarpalika and Panchayat finances with a view to seeing what steps might be taken to augment the availability of financial resources for local self - government. We would hope State Governments, both those run by our party and those run by Opposition Parties undertake a similar exercise in self - enlightenment.

The Constitutional Amendments entrust to the Comptroller and Auditor General the responsibility for causing the accounts of the local bodies to be prepared and audited in such manner as he deems fit. Members Opposite appear to have jumped to the conclusion that this means dismantling the existing State machinery for the examination and auditing of local bodies accounts, In our view, unless the CAG, in his wisdom, deems otherwise, there would be no need to dismantle existing State machinery nor undertake any substantial augmentation of the staff in the CAG's office. What the CAG is being mandated to do is to examine exiting procedures in different States for the preparation and audit of local bodies accounts and prescribe methods by which such accounts and auditing might be made stricter and less prone to abuse. There is no question of requiring the CAG to himself take over the direct responsibility for accounting and auditing. The State local fund auditing bodies would continue to exercise their functions, but under the overall guidance and direction of the Comptroller and Auditor General.

I now turn to the dust being raised by the Opposition over the role of the Election Commission. Here again, it is a total misreading of the Constitutional amendments of suggest that the existing machinery for the conduct of elections to local bodies would have to be dismantled. The Election Commission will conduct the elections through State Electoral Officers and their staff. Also as elections are going to be regular, and arbitrary, prolonged suspensions are to be outlawed, it would be essential to further strengthen the existing machinery. The important change we are effecting is not in centralizing the conduct of elections but in bringing the process of election to local bodies under the purview of the Election Commission.

In recent months, the burden of responsibility on the Election Commission has been considerably increased. Legislative amendments undertaken in respect of the Representation of the People Act and other legislation have greatly added to the workload of the Commission. The responsibilities envisaged for then under the Panchayati Raj and Nagarpalika Bills will further increase the Chief Election Commissioner's responsibilities.

Top

We seek no confrontation on these Bills. In preparing these Bills, we have drawn upon the experience of all, of Congress States as much as of non - Congress States. We have freely and repeatedly acknowledged our debt to Opposition Governments, like those in West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh, and the earlier Janata Government in Karnataka, who have made innovative contributions to the improvement of Panchayati Raj in our country. Equally do we owe a debt of gratitude to the pioneering Congress stalwarts in Gujarat and Maharashtra who have the longest unbroken and unblemished record of Panchayati Raj in the country. There are negative lessons also to be learnt, as we have freely and fully admitted, from inadequate or insufficient Panchayati Raj and Nagarpalika administration in some non - Congress States as well as in some Congress States. There in no partisan politics in this. Our only interest is the national interest, the interests of development, the interests of the poor, the interests of the weak.

We admit also that the objectives we seek to achieve are objectives which, at various times in the past, have been espoused by Opposition Parties, ranging all across the spectrum from the Bharatiya Janata Party (and its forbears) to the two Communist Parties (and their forbears).

We invite all the Parties in the House to join hands with us in passing these Bills. The Bills are for the people. The Bills are for their welfare, their benefit. The Bills are to give power in the hands of the people. The Bills are to end the reign of the power - brokers. The Bills are to entrust responsibility to the grassroots. The Bills are to give representative administration. The Bills are to involve the people's participation in planning and implementation in development and social justice. The Bills are designed to entrench democracy in the very foundations of our polity so that the superstructure of democracy in State capitals and the national capital might be stable, sound and well - founded. The Bills represent the realisation of Mahatma Gandhi's vision. The Bills represent the fulfillment of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's dream. The Bills are the outgrowth of Indiraji's endeavors.

I invite the House to pass these Bills unanimously. Those who support these Bills will earn the people's gratitude. Those who oppose these Bills will fail the people and live to rue their lapse.

Top

1.Power to the People
2.Towards a Responsive and Representative Municipal Administration

Source: http://www.congresssandesh.com/publications/nagarpalikas.html