95.47 crores released as 1st year grant to 9 States under Skill India’s Sankalp scheme 11.7 crores cumulatively released to 117 Aspirational Districts (10 lakh each district)

Dr. Mahendra Nath Pandey, Hon'ble Minister of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship today reviewed the Ministry’s World Bank loan assisted “Skills Acquisition and Knowledge Awareness for Livelihood Promotion (SANKALP)” programme at the first Program Governance Board Meeting, which is the apex body for governance of the scheme. Hon'ble Minister of State for Skill Development & Entrepreneurship, Shri Raj Kumar Singh, also graced the meeting with his presence. The meeting was attended by senior officials of MSDE and six other Ministries.

It was informed that all 36 States/ UTs across country have submitted their consent for participation in SANKALP and a total of first year grants released by Ministry to 9 States (namely Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Gujarat, Jammu & Kashmir, Maharashtra, Manipur, Punjab and Uttar Pradesh). In addition to these State grants of Rs 10 lakh each also released to 117 aspirational districts under Aspirational Skilling Abhiyaan. A robust IT system namely “Skill India Portal” has also been developed under SANKALP to capture and converge skill data.

Hon’ble Minister mentioned that efforts need to be taken for strengthening the District Skilling ecosystem. He mentioned that the perception of youth towards skilling needs to be improved and suggested that District Skill Committee (DSC) should play a pivotal role in counselling youth in their districts. He also suggested that MPs can be involved to review the performance of the District Skill Committee (DSC) and the different skilling efforts in their districts. He mentioned that the training of the trainers is a key component of the ecosystem and same needs to be strengthened.

Hon'ble MoS, Shri Raj Kumar Singh, carrying forward the suggestions made by Dr. Pandey, mentioned that the skill training centres should have quality infrastructure and the certificate issued to the candidate should be valued. He further mentioned that SANKALP can assist in converging the skilling efforts across different schemes of the Ministries. He mentioned that the demand mapping of the skilling requirements across sectors and geographies needs to be ascertained.

SANKALP is an outcome-oriented centrally sponsored programme of Ministry of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship (MSDE) with a special focus on decentralised planning and quality improvement. It focuses on the overall skilling ecosystem covering both Central & State agencies. SANKALP aims to implement the mandate of the National Skill Development Mission (NSDM).Under SANKALP four key result areas have been identified viz: (i) Institutional Strengthening (at National, State & District level); (ii) Quality Assurance Quality Assurance of skill development programs; (iii) Inclusion of marginalised population in skill development; and (iv) Expanding Skills through Public Private Partnerships (PPPs).

Further, it was also informed that the Ministry has launched an award to promote skill planning at the district level, namely “District Skill Development Plan (DSDP) Awards”. Under this, 225 districts across the country participated by submitting their DSDPs. Of these, 25 districts were invited to Delhi for presenting their DSDP. The final evaluation is underway and the best DSDPs would be awarded accordingly.

A robust lawmaking process requires thorough scrutiny by Parliament. Such scrutiny should not be impacted by either the strength of numbers in Parliament or political agreement on issues.

Earlier this week, the Rajya Sabha was witness to acrimonious scenes during the discussion on the RTI Amendment Bill, which amends the RTI Act of 2005. It provides that the term of office and remuneration of information commissioners (both at the Centre and states) will be prescribed by the central government. The original law specified both of these in the law rather than delegating the power to the central government. Opposition parties were demanding that the Bill be referred to a committee of the House for detailed scrutiny before being passed. The treasury benches and a few other parties were of the opinion that the Bill should be passed after debating it on the floor of the House. Ultimately, the House passed the RTI Amendment after voting down the demand for sending it to a committee. So far, none of the 13 bills passed by Parliament in this session have been referred to a parliamentary committee.

Our Parliament broadly has two forums for discussion. One is on the floor of the House where the debate is televised and MPs take positions based on their parties’ stand on a subject. The other is the closed-door forum of parliamentary committees. These committees are made up of MPs either from one or both Houses. Their meetings are not televised and the record of the meetings does not reflect the position taken by an individual MP. Both these forums have their own advantages and disadvantages. A debate on the floor of the House allows for the cut and thrust of political debate and can be wrapped up in a few hours. Debates in committees are more technical but the deliberations require time and stretch for a few months.

The idea behind the establishment of the committee system in Parliament was to provide a specialised forum for deliberation on national policy issues, which was not constrained by the limited number of sitting days (less than three months a year) of Parliament. In 1993, when this modern subject committee system took shape, the then the Vice President of India summed up the objectives of parliamentary committees: “…the main purpose, of course, is to ensure the accountability of Government to Parliament through more detailed consideration of measures in these committees. The purpose is not to weaken or criticise the administration but to strengthen it by investing it with more meaningful parliamentary support.” The committee, over the years, has worked well in strengthening our legislative process.

The scrutiny of a bill by a committee usually takes a few months. If a bill is referred to a committee, its legislative journey slows down as it can only be debated after the committee has submitted its report. This slow down of legislation has been been a source of continued tension between the ruling party and Opposition over the last five years. A bill can usually be referred to a parliamentary committee in three ways. First, the minister piloting the bill can seek the permission of the House to refer the Bill to a committee. Second, the Chairman/Speaker has the discretion in referring the bill to a committee. When ministers are trying to build political consensus on a bill, they welcome its referring to a committee. However, when they are in a hurry to get their legislative proposals approved by Parliament, they impress upon the Chairman/ Speaker not to refer the bill to a committee. This is when the third mechanism kicks in. When a bill reaches a House where the government does not have a majority, the MPs of the House can marshall the numbers to move a motion to refer the bill to a committee. This leads to the government blaming the Opposition for the slowdown, which counters by accusing the government of trying to bulldoze legislation through Parliament. However, there is an additional dimension to the scrutiny of bills by committees. Whenever the government and Opposition see eye to eye on a subject, bills are not referred to a committee.

A robust lawmaking process requires thorough scrutiny by Parliament. Such scrutiny should not be impacted by either the strength of numbers in Parliament or political agreement on issues. This robustness can be ensured by requiring that all Bills be referred to Parliamentary committees. Exceptions to this rule should be strictly defined and the exceptions explained to Parliament. In addition, the committees should be strengthened to scrutinise and present their reports in a timely fashion. These mechanisms will ensure that all bills passed by Parliament, irrespective of the party in power, go through a well laid-out process of debate.

This article first appeared in the print edition on July 27, 2019 under the title ‘A matter of deliberation’. The writer is head of outreach, PRS Legislative Research.

The Rajya Sabha was recently disrupted over referring the Right to Information (Amendment) Bill to a Select Committee. The decision to refer it was defeated by vote and the Bill was passed. In light of this, this article looks at why parliamentary committees are important and how they strengthen the law-making process.

In the last decade, Parliament has passed over 250 Bills on a range of subjects. These legislations have a wide-ranging impact on the lives of every citizen. This impact only multiplies when you take into account the laws that have been cleared by Parliament since Independence. When Parliament debates on the merits of a legislation, it has to take into account factors such as the drafting, possible implementation challenges, the unintended consequences of enacting certain provisions, among others.

In Parliament, every business transacted on the floor of the House has a designated time allocated. As a result, it is difficult for all members to be involved in the deliberation process and ensure that each Bill is scrutinised in detail.

In order to ensure that Parliament discharges its law-making responsibilities effectively, the concept of Department-related Standing Committees was introduced in March 1993. The committees were meant to scrutinise legislations pertaining to specific ministries, their budgets and also deliberate on any other subject of importance to particular sectors.

But the 16th Lok Sabha witnessed a bypassing of parliamentary committees. During the term of the 16th Lok Sabha, the treasury benches had a majority in the Lok Sabha but not in the Rajya Sabha. This led to the government facing resistance in its legislative agenda in Rajya Sabha.

An early indication of this resistance was the government’s inability to get the Land Acquisition Bill passed through the Rajya Sabha. A graceful exit for the Bill was achieved, by referring it to a joint committee of Parliament which, till the end of the 16th Lok Sabha, did not submit a report on it.

The lack of majority led to the treasury benches changing its parliamentary strategy related to the passing of Bills. A minister piloting a Bill has the prerogative to introduce it in either House of Parliament. The only exception is money Bills, which can only be introduced in the directly elected House. During the 16th Lok Sabha, a majority of Bills were introduced in the Lok Sabha. There is a two-fold explanation for this approach. First, any member of Parliament (MP) can oppose the introduction of a Bill in a House.

The failure to introduce a Bill on the floor of the House is an embarrassment for the ruling government. Since the treasury benches did not have a majority in the Rajya Sabha, they introduced most of their Bills in the Lok Sabha.

Introducing the Bills in a House in which the government has a majority has another advantage. After a Bill is introduced in the House, the member piloting it has the option to move a motion to refer it to a committee of Parliament. If such a motion is not made, the presiding officer of the House has the option to refer it to a committee. If the presiding officer does not send the Bill to a committee, then the House can schedule a time to consider and pass it. After the Bill is passed by one House it goes to the other House, in which any MP can move a motion to refer it to a Select Committee made up of MPs from that House.

The Opposition, which had the numerical advantage in the Rajya Sabha, was able to do this on multiple occasions. The current chairman of the Rajya Sabha also referred 80% of the Bills introduced during his tenure to a committee of Parliament.

However, committees were not envisaged as a political tool. The three ideas behind parliamentary committees were (1) to strengthen Parliament by increasing its scrutiny of government, whose functioning was becoming more technical, (2) to invite subject matter experts and public feedback to be able to contribute to the deliberations in Parliament and (3) to provide a year-round forum for debate and deliberation, not limited by the 65 to 75 average sitting days of Parliament.

Over the years, parliamentary committees have made important recommendations that have helped improve the law-making process. In the last Lok Sabha, the government had introduced the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Bill. This 252-clause Bill overhauled the process involved in the resolution of insolvency and bankruptcy cases of companies and individuals. The Bill was allocated two hours of time to be discussed and passed in the Lok Sabha. Several members pressed upon the Bill to be sent to a committee. It was referred to the Joint Select Committee. This committee held 12 meetings and made extensive amendments to the legislation. When the Bill was eventually taken up for discussion in May 2016, the government accepted all the amendments suggested by the committee.

Similarly, the Consumer Protection Bill that was passed in this session was also introduced in the last Lok Sabha. It was referred to the Standing Committee on Food, Consumer Affairs, and Public Distribution. The committee suggested several changes, including penalising celebrities for promoting brands indulging in misleading advertisements. Many of the recommendations made by the committee were incorporated by the government in their updated Bill.

These are just two examples of the contribution of parliamentary committees to the legislative process.

However, not everything is well with parliamentary committees. They do not have specialised staff to provide them with research and assist in the scrutiny of technical subjects. MPs are also indifferent to their participation in committee proceedings. Difficulty in maintaining the quorum and low attendance in meetings are challenges that parliamentary committee chairs have faced on multiple occasions.

If Bills are not referred to committees, legislation misses an important step of scrutiny by Parliament. Inadequate scrutiny may lead to implementation challenges and impact the purpose of enacting the law itself. Parliamentary committees are central to our legislative process and strengthening them will go a long way in making our Parliament even more effective.

Abhijit Banare and Chakshu Roy are with PRS Legislative Research (www.prsindia.org). The views are personal.

Beyond leaders’ speeches, there’s not much of parliamentary history. For instance, what was the mood in Lok Sabha when Vajpayee lost confidence motion by one vote?

Nearly 500 Members of Parliament have passed away in the last fifteen years, 25 of them belonged to India’s first Lok Sabha. That is loss of history, not just human lives. An old African saying goes: When an old person dies, a whole library burns too. Members of Parliament negotiate, debate and decide on issues that shape our country and are an invaluable part of India’s legislative and deliberative history. With each death, Indians lose valuable institutional history of Parliament and personal memories of their leaders.

There is now a pressing need to preserve Indian political and parliamentary history. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has announced a museum dedicated to all former prime ministers. As per media reports, the deadline to complete the ‘Museum on Prime Ministers of India’ is March 2020. The concept is similar to the United States’ Presidential Libraries and Museums. The Bill Clinton and George Bush libraries, for instance, have recently put together papers, records, photographs, and other historical material related to the two presidents. The Lincoln Museum in Springfield, Illinois, uses cutting-edge technology to make him accessible to school children, foreign tourists, and scholars alike.

The proposed Museum on Prime Ministers of India will capture an important but limited aspect of our parliamentary history.

But beyond the prime ministers, what we also need is the personal memories of our MPs chronicling key events in our political history, with oral history-driven anecdotes and artefacts. Indian democracy is vibrant and constantly evolving. But beyond classroom textbooks and speeches of leaders, there is very little about it in a 3-dimensional, accessible, storytelling space that not only brings it alive but is also instructive and has long-term academic value.

How Parliament remembers On 13 August 2018, former Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee, the first chairman of the parliamentary committee on information technology who had moved the first motion in Parliament for the removal of a high court judge, passed away. Three days later, on 16 August, we lost former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who had served Parliament, both in the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, 12 times.

This year saw the demise of several Indian political stalwarts. George Fernandes, the defence minister during the Kargil War who won parliamentary elections nine times, passed away in January. Last week, Ram Chandra Paswan and Sheila Dikshit passed away. Paswan was serving his fourth term in the Lok Sabha; Dikshit, besides being the longest-serving chief minister of Delhi, had been the minister of state for parliamentary affairs in the 8th Lok Sabha (1984 to 1989). Both Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Somnath Chatterjee were MPs during this period, and this was also when Parliament had passed the anti-defection law, lowered the voting age to 18 years, overturned the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Shah Bano case, and enacted a law to protect the rights of consumers. Most of these issues come up in parliamentary debates and in public discourse even today and often become reminders of an MP’s contribution or work done in his or her political life.

Parliament too remembers their contributions and pays respect to the deceased members in three broad ways. First, Parliament adjourns all businesses for the day when a sitting MP dies while the house is in session. The presiding officers (the speaker and the deputy speaker for the Lok Sabha, and Vice President of India for the Rajya Sabha) read out an obituary statement highlighting the MP’s contribution. The symbolic adjournment of the house is not mentioned in the rules of the Lok Sabha. It is a convention that continues to evolve with time.

Second, if the person deceased is a former member, besides reading out the obituary, Parliament may also commemorate the MP by installing his/her statue, bust and portrait on its premises. A 12-member committee comprising members from both the houses decides on the names of MPs whose portraits and busts will be installed in Parliament.

Third, the basements of Parliament’s library houses the Parliamentary Museum and Archives. It acquires, stores and preserves “precious records, historic documents, photographs and rare objects and articles connected with the origin, growth and functioning of Parliament and parliamentary institutions in the country.” The archive also regularly sends out requests to MPs to deposit their private correspondence, notes, memoirs, and diaries that contain references to their political career and parliamentary tenure. Until 2014, a total of 84 eminent parliamentarians and freedom fighters have deposited their diaries and private correspondence with the archive. The archive has 19,000 digitised photographs of MPs from the first to the 15th Lok Sabha. Parliament also maintains a comprehensive digitised record of all its debates since 1858.

Our Parliament currently captures the deliberations of its formal proceedings and correspondence of MPs. However, more needs to be done. The idea should also be to capture the personal accounts of MPs to note down how key events unfolded during their parliamentary tenure.

For example, what was the mood in the Lok Sabha when Atal Bihari Vajpayee lost the confidence motion by one vote in 1996; or the discussions in the Central Hall when the Indo-US nuclear deal came up for debate during the first term of Manmohan Singh. It would also be instructive to understand from MPs the negotiations that took place between the treasury and opposition to build consensus on key legislations like the right to education, land acquisition, GST, and insolvency and bankruptcy laws. Some of these might come about to be captured in a personal memoir of a parliamentarian, but then not all parliamentarians write a memoir.

The US Congress and the British Parliament have tried to address this by instituting mechanisms for capturing the oral history of their institutions. In the United States, for instance, the Center for Legislative Archives conducts oral interviews with former legislators and staff to “add to our understanding of patterns and traditions in Congress and to our familiarity with Congressional heroes, triumphs, and failures.” The Oral History Project, supported by Britain’s Parliament, is creating a sound archive of British politics since 1945. So far, the project has interviewed 160 former British MPs.

Similar attempts need to be done in India too. Such an exercise will provide valuable insights into the thinking of our MPs beyond the written text of parliamentary debates. It will help us understand how certain conventions came about and how thinking on issues evolved over the last six decades or so. These insights into how our parliamentarians carried out their businesses and what went on when critical decisions were being taken will be useful for researchers in putting together a more complete picture of the working of our Parliament. It will be central to preserving the history of India’s highest law-making institution.

The author is the Head of legislative and civic engagement, PRS Legislative Research. Views are personal.

Today, the National Medical Commission Bill, 2019 was passed by Lok Sabha. It seeks to regulate medical education and practice in India. In 2017, a similar Bill had been introduced in Lok Sabha. It was examined by the Standing Committee on Health and Family Welfare, which recommended several changes to the Bill. However, the 2017 Bill lapsed with the dissolution of the 16th Lok Sabha. In this post, we analyse the 2019 Bill.

How is medical education and practice regulated currently? The Medical Council of India (MCI) is responsible for regulating medical education and practice. Over the years, there have been several issues with the functioning of the MCI with respect to its regulatory role, composition, allegations of corruption, and lack of accountability. For example, MCI is an elected body where its members are elected by medical practitioners themselves, i.e., the regulator is elected by the regulated. Experts have recommended nomination based constitution of the MCI instead of election, and separating the regulation of medical education and medical practice. They suggested that legislative changes should be brought in to overhaul the functioning of the MCI.

To meet this objective, the Bill repeals the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and dissolves the current MCI. The 2019 Bill sets up the National Medical Commission (NMC) as an umbrella regulatory body with certain other bodies under it. The NMC will subsume the MCI and will regulate medical education and practice in India. Under the Bill, states will establish their respective State Medical Councils within three years. These Councils will have a role similar to the NMC, at the state level.

Functions of the NMC include: (i) laying down policies for regulating medical institutions and medical professionals, (ii) assessing the requirements of human resources and infrastructure in healthcare, (iii) ensuring compliance by the State Medical Councils with the regulations made under the Bill, and (iv) framing guidelines for determination of fee for up to 50% of the seats in the private medical institutions.

Who will be a part of the NMC? The Bill replaces the MCI with the NMC, whose members will be nominated. The NMC will consist of 25 members, including: (i) Director Generals of the Directorate General of Health Services and the Indian Council of Medical Research, (ii) Director of any of the AIIMS, (iii) five members (part-time) to be elected by the registered medical practitioners, and (iv) six members appointed on rotational basis from amongst the nominees of the states in the Medical Advisory Council.

Of these 25 members, at least 15 (60%) are medical practitioners. The MCI has been noted to be non-diverse and consists mostly of doctors who look out for their own self-interest over public interest. In order to reduce the monopoly of doctors, it has been recommended by experts that the MCI should include diverse stakeholders such as public health experts, social scientists, and health economists. For example, in the United Kingdom, the General Medical Council which is responsible for regulating medical education and practice consists of 12 medical practitioners and 12 lay members (such as community health members, administrators from local government).

What are the regulatory bodies being set up under the NMC? The Bill sets up four autonomous boards under the supervision of the NMC. Each board will consist of a President and four members (of which two members will be part-time), appointed by the central government (on the recommendation of a search committee). These bodies are:

The Under-Graduate Medical Education Board (UGMEB) and the Post-Graduate Medical Education Board (PGMEB): These two bodies will be responsible for formulating standards, curriculum, guidelines for medical education, and granting recognition to medical qualifications at the under-graduate and post-graduate levels respectively.

The Medical Assessment and Rating Board: The Board will have the power to levy monetary penalties on institutions which fail to maintain the minimum standards as laid down by the UGMEB and the PGMEB. It will also grant permissions for establishing new medical colleges, starting postgraduate courses, and increasing the number of seats in a medical college.

The Ethics and Medical Registration Board: This Board will maintain a National Register of all the licensed medical practitioners in the country, and also regulate professional and medical conduct. Only those included in the Register will be allowed to practice as doctors. The Board will also maintain a register of all licensed community health providers in the country.

How is the Bill changing the eligibility guidelines for doctors to practice medicine? There will be a uniform National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test for admission to under-graduate and post-graduate super-speciality medical education in all medical institutions regulated under the Bill. Further, the Bill introduces a common final year undergraduate examination called the National Exit Test for students graduating from medical institutions to obtain the license for practice. This test will also serve as the basis for admission into post-graduate courses at medical institutions under this Bill. Foreign medical practitioners may be permitted temporary registration to practice in India.

However, the Bill does not specify the validity period of this license to practice. In other countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia, a license to practice needs to be periodically renewed. For example, in the UK the license has to be renewed every five years, and in Australia it has to renewed annually.

How will the issues of medical misconduct be addressed? The State Medical Council will receive complaints relating to professional or ethical misconduct against a registered medical practitioner. If the medical practitioner is aggrieved of a decision of the State Medical Council, he may appeal to the Ethics and Medical Registration Board. If the medical practitioner is aggrieved of the decision of the Board, he can approach the NMC to appeal against the decision. It is unclear why the NMC is an appellate authority with regard to matters related to professional or ethical misconduct of medical practitioners.

It may be argued that disputes related to ethics and misconduct in medical practice may require judicial expertise. For example, in the UK, the regulator for medical education and practice – the General Medical Council (GMC) receives complaints with regard to ethical misconduct and is required to do an initial documentary investigation in the matter and then forwards the complaint to a Tribunal. This Tribunal is a judicial body independent of the GMC. The adjudication decision and final disciplinary action is decided by the Tribunal.

How does the Bill regulate community health providers? As of January 2018, the doctor to population ratio in India was 1:1655 compared to the World Health Organisation standard of 1:1000. To fill in the gaps of availability of medical professionals, the Bill provides for the NMC to grant limited license to certain mid-level practitioners called community health providers, connected with the modern medical profession to practice medicine. These mid-level medical practitioners may prescribe specified medicines in primary and preventive healthcare. However, in any other cases, these practitioners may only prescribe medicine under the supervision of a registered medical practitioner.

This is similar to other countries where medical professionals other than doctors are allowed to prescribe allopathic medicine. For example, Nurse Practitioners in the USA provide a full range of primary, acute, and specialty health care services, including ordering and performing diagnostic tests, and prescribing medications. For this purpose, Nurse Practitioners must complete a master's or doctoral degree program, advanced clinical training, and obtain a national certification.

Presently, there are around 40 central laws regulating different aspects of labour such as, industrial dispute resolution, bonus payments, and working conditions. The Ministry of Labour and Employment has proposed to consolidate these laws into four codes—wages, social security, industrial safety and welfare, and industrial relations.

The Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2019 was introduced in Lok Sabha on July 23, 2019.[1] The Code consolidates 13 labour laws relating to safety, health and working conditions. These include the Factories Act, 1948, the Mines Act, 1952, and the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. In this context, we explain key provisions of the Code.

Who will be covered under the Code? The Code applies to organisations employing at least 10 workers, and to all mines and docks. Provisions of this Code will cover both employees and workers. Employees include individuals in managerial and administrative positions. However, the Code does not apply to apprentices, or to offices of the central or state governments.

Does the Code create special provisions for different types of organisations and workers? Apart from prescribing health and safety provisions that apply to all organisations, the Code also outlines special requirements for different types of organisations (such as factories and mines) and workers (such as beedi and cigar workers). These special provisions include exceptions or additional requirements. For example, under the Code, factories are required to get a license in addition to registering under the general provisions of the Code. Similarly, the Code requires certain contractors to get licenses before hiring any contract labour. Further, audio-visual workers can only be hired after signing an agreement with employers, which must be registered with a government authority.

What are the duties of employers and employees? The Code lays down several duties of employers. These include, providing a workplace that is free from hazards that may cause injury or diseases, and providing free annual health examinations to employees. For certain organisations such as, factories and mines, the employer may have additional responsibilities. These include the obligation to notify authorities in case of an accident at the workplace that leads to death or serious bodily injury of an employee.

Under the Code, employees must take care of their own health and safety, comply with the specified standards, and report unsafe situations to the inspector-cum-facilitator. Employees also have the right to obtain information related to safety and health standards from the employer. They may do this by directly approaching the employer, or through a Safety Committee representative.

Will work hours be uniform for all workers and employees? Work hours for different types of organisations and employees will be notified by the government. This is different from the current labour laws, many of which specify work hours within the law itself. For example, the Factories Act, 1948 provides for a maximum 10 hours of work per day and 60 hours of work per week.[2]

The Code also changes work hour requirements for women. The current laws such as, the Mines Act, 1952, and the Plantations Labour Act, 1951, prohibit women from working after 7 pm and before 6 am.[3],[4] However, the Code permits female workers to work past 7 pm and before 6 am with their consent and the approval of the government.

What working conditions and welfare facilities does the Code provide for? The employer is required to provide a hygienic work environment with: (i) ventilation, (ii) comfortable temperature, (iii) sufficient space, (iv) clean drinking water, and (v) latrine and urinal accommodations. In addition, the government may specify certain other facilities such as, canteens, first aid boxes, and crèches that an employer must provide for. This is a shift from the current legislation which provides for welfare facilities like canteens and crèches, in the law itself. For instance, the Factories Act, 1948 requires the provision of canteens, ambulances, and first aid kits for organisations depending on the number of workers employed in the organisation.2

What is the leave policy for workers? The Code states that no employee can be made to work for more than six days a week. However, exceptions could be provided for motor transport workers. Annually, workers must receive one day off for every 20 days they have worked. While calculating annual leave, maternity leave and periods of lay off will be counted as days spent on duty.

What are the authorities set up under the Code? The Code requires central and state governments to set up Occupational Safety and Health Advisory Boards at the national and state level, respectively. These Boards will advise the central and state governments on the standards, rules, and regulations to be framed under the Code.

The composition of the National Advisory Board includes five representatives for employers, five representatives of employees, and five reputed persons from the fields related to occupational health and safety, amongst other members. The composition of State Advisory Boards will be decided by state governments.

How is the Code being enforced? An inspector-cum-facilitator may be appointed by the government to inspect workplaces, inquire and investigate accidents, and provide safety information to workers. In the case of factories, mines, and docks, the inspector may close or restrict employment in parts of the organisation if there is a health and safety risk.

The Code also prescribes penalties for violating provisions of the Code. An offence that leads to the death of an employee could result in imprisonment of up to two years, or a fine up to five lakh rupees, or both. Further, at least 50% of such fine may be given as compensation to the heirs of the victim. For any other violation where the penalty is not specified, the employer will be penalised with a fine between two and three lakh rupees. On the other hand, if an employee violates provisions of the Code, he could be fined up to Rs 10,000.

Does the Code provide gender specific provisions? The Code includes certain provisions specific to female and transgender workers. With respect to women, the government can prohibit employment of women in certain organisations if working there may be dangerous to their health and safety. Further, the Code allows female workers to work night shifts with their consent and subject to approval of the government. The Code also acknowledges transgender persons as a third gender by requiring separate urinal and latrine accommodations, rest rooms, washing spaces, and locker rooms for male, female, and transgender workers

The Draft Policy is built on foundational pillars of Access, Equity, Quality, Affordability and Accountability.

Background: In May this year, the draft National Education Policy (NEP) developed by a committee chaired by K. Kasturirangan was shared by the ministry of human resource development (MHRD) for public comment. A comprehensive education policy for India is on the anvil for the first time since 1986.

Key highlights of the draft: Early childhood care and education: High-quality early childhood care and education will be provided for all children between the ages of 3 and 6 by 2025. This will be done within institutions such as schools and anganwadis, which would have a mandate to take care of the overall well-being of the child—nutritional, health, and education.

These institutions will also provide similar support to families for children younger than three years of age—within their homes. The criticality of brain development in the early years has become clear in the past few decades; this policy will result in a massive positive multiplier effect on society.

Ensuring foundational literacy and numeracy: Every student will start achieving age-appropriate foundational literacy and numeracy by 2025. A slew of programmes and measures are articulated for this purpose. This is aimed at the basic issue facing our education system today—of students not being able to read, write and do elementary math.

Transformed curricular and pedagogical structure for school education: The curriculum and pedagogical structures will be designed anew to be appropriate and effective, based on children’s cognitive and socio-emotional development.

The curriculum will be integrated and flexible with equal emphasis on all subjects and fields. There will be no separation of curricular, co-curricular or extra-curricular areas—with all in a single category of equal importance.

Vocational and academic streams will be integrated and offered to all students. Examination systems will be radically changed to assess real learning, make them stress-free, and aim for improvement instead of the passing of judgements.

Universal access and retention in schools: All Indians between ages 3 and 18 to be in school by 2030. The Right to Education Act will be extended from pre-school to class XII.

Teachers at the centre: The profession of teaching, and so teachers, will be at the centre of the education system, focused on the student and educational aims. All schools will be fully resourced with teachers—with working conditions for an energetic work culture. No “temporary” teachers will be allowed; all positions will be filled with competent and qualified teachers. A development-oriented performance management system will be put in place. The teacher education system will be transformed, with rigorous teacher preparation through a four-year integrated stage and subject-specific programmes offered only in multi-disciplinary institutions.

New institutional architecture for higher education: India’s current 800 universities and over 40,000 colleges will be consolidated into about 10,000-15,000 institutions of excellence to drive improvement in quality and expansion of capacity. This architecture will have only large multi-disciplinary institutions, with significant investment.

Three types of higher education institutions will be there: Type 1 universities focused on research but also teaching all programmes, undergrad to doctoral; Type 2 universities focused on teaching all programmes while also conducting research and; Type 3 colleges focused on teaching undergrad programmes. All types will grant their own degrees. There will be no system of university affiliations.

High-quality liberal education: All undergraduate education will be broad-based liberal education that integrates the rigorous study of sciences, arts, humanities, mathematics and vocational and professional fields with choices offered to students. Imaginative and flexible curricula will develop critical thinking, creative abilities and other fundamental capacities. Multiple exit and entry points will be offered, with appropriate certification after one, two, three and four years of study. There will be a four-year undergraduate programme available in addition to three-year programmes.

Increase in public investment: There will be a substantial increase in public investment to expand and vitalize public education at all levels.

What is left out? While the policy talks about the need to bring “unrepresented groups” into school and focus on educationally lagging “special education zones”, it misses a critical opportunity of addressing inequalities within the education system.

It misses to provide solutions to close the gap of access to quality education between India’s rich and poor children. Not specifying a common minimum standard below which schools cannot fall, creates conditions where quality of facilities in some schools will only sink lower, widening this gap.

It proposes a roll back of existing mechanisms of enforcement of private schools making parents “de-facto regulators” of private schools. Parents, and particularly poor and neo-literate parents, cannot hold the onus of ensuring that much more powerful and resourced schools comply with quality, safety and equity norms.

Challenges in implementation: What is recommended is a doubling of public funding to 6% of the GDP and increasing overall public expenditure on education to 20% from the current 10%. This is desirable but does not appear to be feasible in the near future given that most of the additional funding has to come from the States. While establishing new institutions for Pali, Prakrit and Persian appears to be a novel idea, shouldn’t the Central Institute of Indian Languages in Mysuru be strengthened and perhaps even upgraded to a university with an extended mandate to take care of these languages?

Expanding coverage under the RTE Act to include pre-school children is extremely important, but should perhaps be introduced gradually, keeping in mind the quality of infrastructure and teacher vacancies. Amendment of the Act can perhaps wait for a while.

The idea of setting up the Rashtriya Shiksha Aayog under the Prime Minister and having it serviced by the MHRD is crucial in order to integrate the approaches and programmes of multiple departments. However, it is fraught with many administrative problems and possible turf battles. Bringing medical or agricultural or legal education under one umbrella is likely to be met with stiff opposition. What is going to happen, for example, to the National Medical Commission Bill, 2017?

The idea of regulation being brought under the National Higher Education Regulatory Authority, standard setting under the General Education Council and funding under the Higher Education Grants Council may require a revisit so that there is synchronisation with the current Bill for the Higher Education Commission of India.

The draft policy is silent on the Institutions of Eminence and agencies like the Higher Education Funding Agency. Language issues have to be handled sensitively in view of their emotional overtones, as witnessed recently. Protests are often made without understanding the spirit of the text.

The exercise will be institutionalized on an annual basis, during the same period every year hereafter.

What is Time Release Study? The World Customs Organization (WCO) Time Release Study is a strategic and internationally recognized tool to measure the actual time required for the release and/or clearance of goods, from the time of arrival until the physical release of cargo.

Aim: To find bottlenecks in the trade flow process and taking necessary measures to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of border procedures. The WCO TRS is specifically referenced in Article 7.6 of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) as a tool for Members to measure and publish the average release time of goods.

Uses: The TRS is being increasingly used by Members with respect to strategic planning and the proper sequencing of TFA measures in accordance with their National Committees on Trade Facilitation (NCTF). In recent years, the tool has been capturing a lot of attention worldwide; the international donor community and the WCO development partners are recommending it as a key performance measure to assess, evaluate, and enhance the implementation of the WTO TFA.

Significance and the need for it: Measuring the time taken for the release of goods meets the concerns of trade circles regarding long delays in Customs clearance. It helps Customs to respond to trade requirements where the operators need to plan ahead for the movement of goods across borders in order to meet tight production schedules and just-in-time inventory systems that require forward planning.

The time required to release goods has also increasingly become the measure by which the international trading community assesses the effectiveness of a Customs administration. The Time Release Study provides guidance to Customs administrations on the best way to apply this method of internal review.

Highlights of the National Digital Health Blueprint (NDHB): It lays out the ‘building blocks’ for the implementation of the National Health Stack (NHS), which aims to deploy Artificial Intelligence (AI) in leveraging health records.

Keeping true to the government’s larger agenda, of ‘data as a public good’, the blueprint proposes the linking of multiple databases to generate greater and granular data that can be leveraged by the public as well as private sector – including insurance companies, hospitals, apps and researchers. The blueprint proposes a National Digital Health Mission “as a purely government organisation with complete functional autonomy adopting some features of some of the existing National Information Utilities like UIDAI and GSTN.”

The policy document essentially lays the implementation plan and defines the ‘building blocks’ of the NHS. In doing so, it lays down the following objectives: To establish national and regional registries to create single source of truthin respect of Clinical Establishments, Healthcare Professionals, Health Workers and Pharmacies.

Creating a system of Personal Health Recordsaccessible to the citizens and to the service providers based on citizen-consent. Promoting the adoption of open standards by all the actors in the National Digital Health Ecosystem. Promoting Health Data Analyticsand Medical Research.

Concerns: This National Blueprint illustrates yet another example of the Centre moving forward with a major digitisation program involving the data of millions of citizens without a data protection law in place. Data security is a prerequisite for any data movement. Currently, data privacy in health is a gray area.

Data researchers and activists have expressed concerns about the development of this policy, which proposes a health data set-up on a foundation of India Stack – a bouquet of privately-owned proprietary software applications.

While Morroco became a member of this group in May this year, Ethiopia was the first African nation to be part of this global coalition in 2017. Burundi was the second African country to join this global group.

About the Global Coalition of the Willing on Pollinators: The organisation was formed three years ago, to follow up on the findings of IPBES Assessment on Pollinators, Pollination and Food Production, which found that many of the world’s pollinator species are on the decline. The initiative to form a coalition was taken by the Netherlands on December 12, 2016 at the Conference of the Parties–Convention of Biological Diversity held in Mexico.

Members: The coalition now has 28 signatories including 17 European countries, five from Latin America and the Caribbean and four from Africa.

Need: About 16.5 per cent of vertebrate pollinators are threatened with global extinction, say the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List assessments.

The assessment highlights that 75 per cent of food crops in the world and nearly 90 per cent of wild flowering plants depend, at least to some extent, on animal pollination. Pollinator-dependent species include several fruits, vegetables, seeds, nuts and oil crops, which are major sources of micronutrients, vitamins and minerals to humans.

Joining the coalition means adopting the following measures: Taking action to protect pollinators and their habitats by developing and implementing national pollinator strategies. Sharing experience and lessons learnt in developing and implementing national pollinator strategies, especially knowledge on new approaches, innovations and best practices.

Reaching out to seek collaboration with a broad spectrum of stakeholders—countries as well as businesses, NGOs, farmers and local communities. Developing research on pollinator conservation. Supporting and collaborating with each other—and those parties that are willing to join the coalition.

What is the importance of pollinators? Plants depend on pollination. Globally nearly 90% of wild flowering plant species depend on animal pollination. More than 75% of leading global crop types benefit from animal pollination in production, yield and quality.

Around 5-8% of current global crop production is directly ascribed to animal pollination, which equates to somewhere between 235 and 577 billion American dollars worldwide.

Families who have food security cards can buy subsidized rice and wheat from any ration shop in these states but their ration cards should be linked with Aadhar Number to avail this service.

About the scheme: One Nation One Ration Card (RC) will ensure all beneficiaries especially migrants can access PDS across the nation from any PDS shop of their own choice.

Benefits: no poor person is deprived of getting subsidised foodgrains under the food security scheme when they shift from one place to another. It also aims to remove the chance of anyone holding more than one ration card to avail benefits from different states.

Significance: This will provide freedom to the beneficiaries as they will not be tied to any one PDS shop and reduce their dependence on shop owners and curtail instances of corruption.

Challenges: Prone to corruption: Every state has its own rules for Public Distribution System (PDS). If ‘One Nation, One Ration Card’ is implemented, it will further boost corruption in an already corrupted Public Distribution System.

The scheme will increase the woes of the common man and, the middlemen and corrupt PDS shop owners will exploit them. Tamil Nadu has opposed the proposal of the Centre, saying it would result in undesirable consequences and is against federalism.

The Bill seeks to amend the Inter State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 with a view to streamline the adjudication of inter-state river water disputes and make the present institutional architecture robust.

Features of the bill: Disputes Resolution Committee: The Bill requires the central government to set up a Disputes Resolution Committee (DRC), for resolving any inter-state water dispute amicably. The DRC will get a period of one year, extendable by six months, to submit its report to the central government.

Members of DRC: Members of the DRC will be from relevant fields, as deemed fit by the central government. Tribunal: The Bill proposes to set up an Inter-State River Water Disputes Tribunal, for adjudication of water disputes, if a dispute is not resolved through the DRC. This tribunal can have multiple benches. All existing tribunals will be dissolved and the water disputes pending adjudication before such existing tribunals will be transferred to this newly formed tribunal.

Composition of the Tribunal: The tribunal shall consist of a Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, and not more than six nominated members (judges of the Supreme Court or of a High Court), nominated by the Chief Justice of India.

Drawbacks of interstate Water Dispute Act, 1956: The Inter State Water Dispute Act, 1956 which provides the legal framework to address such disputes suffers from many drawbacks as it does not fix any time limit for resolving river water disputes.

Delays are on account of no time limit for adjudication by a Tribunal, no upper age limit for the Chairman or the Members, work getting stalled due to occurrence of any vacancy and no time limit for publishing the report of the Tribunal.

The River Boards Act 1956, which is supposed to facilitate inter-state collaboration over water resource development, remained a ‘dead letter’ since its enactment.

Surface water is controlled by Central Water Commission (CWC) and ground water by Central Ground Water Board of India (CGWB). Both bodies work independently and there is no common forum for common discussion with state governments on water management.

Way forward: The Centre’s proposal to set up a single, permanent tribunal to adjudicate on inter-state river water disputes could be a major step towards streamlining the dispute redressal mechanism.

However, this alone will not be able to address the different kinds of problems—legal, administrative, constitutional and political—that plague the overall framework. To strengthen the cooperative federalism, disputes must be resolved by dialogue and talks and the political opportunism must be avoided. A robust and transparent institutional framework with cooperative approach is need of the hour.

Provisions related to interstate river water disputes: Entry 17 of State List deals with water i.e. water supply, irrigation, canal, drainage, embankments, water storage and water power. Entry 56 of Union List empowers the Union Government for the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys to the extent declared by Parliament to be expedient in the public interest.

Article 262: In the case of disputes relating to waters, it provides Clause 1:Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution or control of the waters of, or in, any inter-State river or river valley. Clause 2:Parliament may, by law provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any other court shall exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or complaint as mentioned above.

Context: A joint venture company namely Khanij Bidesh India Ltd. (KABIL) is to be set up with the participation of three Central Public Sector Enterprises namely, National Aluminium Company Ltd.(NALCO), Hindustan Copper Ltd.(HCL) and Mineral Exploration Company Ltd. (MECL).

The objective of constituting KABIL is to ensure a consistent supply of critical and strategic minerals to Indian domestic market. Significance: While KABIL would ensure mineral security of the Nation, it would also help in realizing the overall objective of import substitution.

Functions: The KABIL would carry out identification, acquisition, exploration, development, mining and processing of strategic minerals overseas for commercial use and meeting country’s requirement of these minerals. The company will help in building partnerships with other mineral rich countries like Australia and those in Africa and South America, where Indian expertise in exploration and mineral processing will be mutually beneficial bringing about new economic opportunities.

Samarth: What is it? It is an initiative launched by Flipkart to bring Indian artisans, weavers, and makers of handicrafts to its platform.

It will support artisans, weavers and handicraft maker by on-boarding them and helping them in process of selling on internet.

Context: Himalayan states recently met at a conclave to demand a separate ministry to deal with problems endemic to them and a green bonus in recognition of their contribution to environment conservation.

Ten out of 11 states took part in the conclave. It is for the first time that the Himalayan states have come on a single platform to take a unanimous stand on the issue of green bonus and demanded a separate ministry to deal with problems unique to them.

Outcome of the meet: A “Mussoorie resolution” was passed at the conclave making a collective pledge to conserve and protect their rich cultural heritage, bio-diversity, glaciers, rivers and lakes besides making their own contribution to the nation’s prosperity.

Rationale behind the demand for green bonus: Most of the country’s rivers originate in the Himalayas and therefore, the Himalayan states have to play the most significant role in the prime minister’s water conservation initiative.

It is also necessary because the Himalayan states’ contribution to environmental conservation is the biggest with all their green cover. The Himalayan states are also at a disadvantage because large swathes of land fell into ecosensitive zones where all sorts of development activities could not be carried out.

So, these states, by protecting forests and ecosystems, ensure larger life-saving services to the country. For these, they also face numerous restrictions in their usual development works such as taking up big projects that destroy forests. A green bonus thus is needed to compensate the Himalayan states for their disadvantages.

Indian Himalayan region: IHR is the section of Himalayas within India, spanning 11 Indian states (Arunachal Pradesh, Assam Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura, Uttarakhand) & 2 districts of Bengal and that runs along 2500 km of Himalayan ranges between Indus river basin in North-West and Brahmaputra in the East.

Approximately 9,000 glaciers of IHR store about 12,000 km³ of freshwater. This region is endowed with rich vegetation & is home to almost 36% of India’s total biodiversity. More than 41.5% area of IHR states is under forests, representing 1/3rd of total forest cover of India & nearly half (47%) of the “very good” forest cover of the country.

The total geographical area of IHR states is approximately 591,000 sq. km (18% of India) and it is inhabited by about 3.8% of the country’s population. The strategic importance of the IHR is evident from the fact that IHR states share borders with 6 neighbouring countries. This is one of India’s major carbon sink. Besides it averts soil erosion from the world’s youngest mountain range.

Payment for ecosystems services (PES): The demand for green bonus is an emerging global mode to conserve ecosystems called payment for ecosystems services (PES). And this demand has triggered interest on PES in India which has been experimenting this though in sporadic ways.

How is it allocated? This demand has been the country’s longest ever bid for PES at this scale that involves formalised distribution of incentive fund between the Union and state governments. The 12th Finance Commission (2005-10), for the first time, recognised the need to invest in resources and earmarked Rs 1,000 crores for five years to be given to states for preserving forests.

The 13th Finance Commission allocated Rs 5,000 crore, based on the area under forest cover with an added parameter of Canopy density. The 14th commission reformed the revenue-sharing formula between the Union and the states. It brought the landmark change of including forest cover as a determining factor in a state’s share.

Though it is for all states, the Himalayan states are perceived to be the natural beneficiaries given their high forest cover. In the distribution of funds to states, the commission attached a 7.5 per cent weight to forest cover. Population, demographic change, income distance and area are the other factors that decide the share of a state in central tax pool.

Coverage: At present, ecological services payment schemes cover carbon sequestration and storage, watershed development and protection, non-domestic biodiversity protection and forest protection. In the climate change regime, carbon emission reduction and other mitigation activities make huge businesses.

But agriculture and farmers have been kept out of the formal carbon market that is worth more than $100 billion. Farmers, particularly those practicing traditional farming including in Himalayan states, have been rarely considered eligible for payment for their ecological services.

Need of the hour: Now, it is being felt that farmers should be rewarded for their ecological services. Traditional farming is considered climate-resistant and less harmful to the environment.

Under the climate change mitigation and adaptation plans, agro-biodiversity is mentioned as a potential instrument to be explored. The poorest farmers living in degraded environment usually practise this type of farming. When agriculture with low ecological footprint is encouraged for payment for ecological services, it would serve two purposes — bring down poverty and make agriculture climate-resistant.

Way ahead: The demand for a ‘green bonus’ by Himalayan states, thus, is not only a valid one but also an ecological necessity. They should demand more, because by giving them more India’s plains can be saved from many disasters.