The Standing Committee on Coal and Steel (Chair: Prof. Chintamani Malviya) submitted its report on ‘Implementation of District Mineral Foundation (DMF) and Pradhan Mantri Khanij Kshetra Kalyan Yojana (PMKKKY)’ on December 27, 2018.

The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 was amended in 2015 to enable the state governments to set up DMFs. The DMFs seek to work for the benefit of persons in districts affected by mining related operations. Under the Act, mining lease holders are required to make contribution to DMF funds. This contribution is equivalent to a certain percentage of the royalty paid by them. PMKKKY was launched in 2015 to implement the projects approved by DMFs in coordination with the ongoing schemes of the central government and state governments.

Key observations and recommendations of the Committee include: Allocation of funds: The Committee observed that under PMKKKY, 60% of the DMF funds are required to be utilised for projects in high priority sectors, such as health, education, drinking water, sanitation and environment, among others. It noted that this is resulting in spending getting prioritised over certain sectors and on people and areas who may not be directly affected by mining activities. The Committee recommended that the requirement to use 60% funds in high priority sectors should be done away with. Instead, 60% of the funds must be spent on the people living in areas directly affected by mining related operations.

Implementation: The Committee observed that till August 2018, Rs 21,235 crore has been collected under DMFs. Of this, projects worth Rs 15,548 crore have been sanctioned. It also observed that out of the 81,624 projects sanctioned, only 22,026 projects worth Rs 4,888 crore have been completed, reflecting non-initiation of projects and slow spending pattern. The Committee recommended that the Ministry of Mines should put a monitoring mechanism in place for timely allocation and utilisation of funds. Further, provisions must be made for fixing accountability in case of unnecessary delays in implementation.

Composition of DMF: The Committee noted that composition of DMFs specified by state governments is dominated by bureaucrats in most states, without much representation of public representatives. The Committee recommended that the local Member(s) of Parliament must be appointed as the Chairman of the Governing Council of the respective DMF, for which the Ministry may urgently notify revised guidelines.

Social audit: The Committee noted that feedback from the people living in the mining affected areas is important in determining the adequacy and efficiency of DMFs in those areas. This will provide these people an opportunity to scrutinise the developmental initiatives being implemented for them. It will also make them aware of their rights and entitlements under the DMF. The Committee recommended that the Ministry may prescribe for social audits of DMFs, which would be conducted by the people living in mining affected areas.

Accountability: The Committee noted that there is a lack of transparency and public accountability in the functioning of DMFs and their projects. It recommended that all relevant information (such as composition of DMF, funds collected, list of directly affected areas, and list of beneficiaries) should be publicly available. The Committee observed that the Ministry has developed national and district level portals with information on DMFs. It recommended that till such information is made available on portals, necessary steps may be taken for the dissemination of such information. This could be done by displaying the information at district and panchayat level offices, through public meetings, and awareness programmes.

Review mechanism: The Committee observed that the Ministry has not taken any specific initiatives for achievement of the objectives of PMKKKY. It also observed that the meeting recently conducted with state governments for deliberation on implementation of PMKKKY was held only after suggestions of the Committee. It recommended that the Ministry should play a proactive role and make efforts to ensure proper implementation of projects by states. Further, the Ministry should hold review meetings at regular intervals, and regular follow up meetings every three months with state governments.

The Committee on Estimates (Chair: Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi) submitted its report on the performance of the National Action Plan On Climate Change (NAPCC) on December 10, 2018. The NAPCC was launched in June 2008 to deal with issues related to climate change.

Regulation of NAPCC: The NAPCC comprises eight missions, including: (i) National Solar Mission, (ii) National Water Mission, and (iii) National Mission for a Green India. Each mission is anchored under a Ministry, which is responsible for its implementation, budgetary provisions, and its actionable priorities. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF) is the coordinating Ministry of NAPCC. The broad policy initiatives of the Central Government are supplemented by actions at the level of state governments and Union Territories.

National Solar Mission: The Committee noted that the Mission is expected to generate 1,00,000 MW by 2021-22, at an expected cost of Rs 6,00,000 crore. It noted that the funding requirement for the targeted solar power generation will be met from budgetary support, internal, and international financing. However, it expressed concerns about the lack of funds in relation to the targets under the Mission. It noted that the government’s outlay for the 12th Plan period is Rs 13,690 crore, which is a fraction of the required investment. The Committee recommended that an analysis of financial support from each source be undertaken by the government and a revised mission document be brought out indicating the sources of financing.

National Mission on Enhanced Energy Efficiency: The Committee noted that the Mission had under-utilised allocated funds. It noted that between 2010-11 and 2016-17, Rs 914 crore was the budgeted expenditure, which was revised to Rs 259 crore. Of this, only Rs 208 crore was spent. The Committee stated that one of the reasons for reduced allocation was delays in certain approvals. It recommended that the Ministry ensure that the funds are utilised for the schemes for which they have been allocated.

National Water Mission: The Committee noted that the major components of the Mission include development of a comprehensive water database and assessment of impact of climate change on water resources. It was informed of an exercise undertaken to map all the water bodies in India. In this connection, the Committee referred to studies indicating that water availability data is unreliable due to use of outdated collection techniques and methodologies. Siloed information collection and sharing, especially between States, adds to costs and inefficiencies. The Committee recommended reviewing the techniques and methodologies of data collection and preparing a comprehensive database of all water bodies.

National Mission on Sustainable Habitat: The Committee noted that the Mission aims at promoting sustainability of habitats though improvements in energy efficiency in buildings, urban planning, and improved management of solid and liquid waste. The objectives of the mission are being met through four schemes, including the Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation, and the Swachh Bharat Mission. By 2031, these schemes are expected to reduce Green House Gas emission to the tune of 270 million tonnes.

The Committee observed that the emphasis of the Mission is limited to urban habitats only and does not take into account the requirements of the rural habitats. It recommended that the Mission introduce a comprehensive and integrated plan encompassing the needs of both rural as well as urban habitats.

National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture: The Committee noted that although the Mission focuses on different aspects of agriculture, it does not include income security of farmers. It observed that the crop insurance scheme and the MSP scheme implemented by the government have not made farming remunerative. It recommended that the government consider these elements for the Mission and apprise the Committee of steps taken in this regard.

The Standing Committee on External Affairs (Chairperson: Sh Ramesh Bais) submitted its report on ‘Assessment of the Working of Tribal Sub-Plan’ on January 3, 2019. The Tribal Sub-Plan (TSP) aims to bridge the gap between the Schedule Tribes (STs) and the general population with respect to all socio-economic development indicators in a time-bound manner. Key observations and recommendations of the Committee include:

Allocation of Funds: The Committee noted that earlier, earmarking of funds towards TSP was done by the concerned Ministries against their Plan allocation. After the merger of Plan and non-Plan expenditure, the Ministry of Finance revised the rate of allocation of funds towards TSP in December 2017. Currently, there are 41 central Ministries implementing TSP through different schemes. The Committee noted that the allocation of funds towards TSP by various Ministries has been meagre after the merger of expenditure heads.

The Committee recommended that the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (Ministry) should direct all Ministries to earmark funds according to the prescribed percentage allocation of their total scheme outlays. Further, it recommended that the Ministry ask the Department of Rural Development to allocate funds for its flagship Schemes like MGNREGA under TSP to ensure that benefits of these Schemes reach to tribal people. The Committee also recommended that the Ministry direct all Ministries to furnish a bi-annual statement regarding scheme-wise expenditure under TSP.

Allocation of funds by states: The Committee noted that according to the guidelines for earmarking funds to states under TSP, the state governments are required to allocate funds out of their total plan outlays, in proportion to their tribal population. It noted that some States are not adhering to these guidelines. For example, in 2015-16 and 2016-17, Madhya Pradesh did not allocate funds as per the proportion of tribal population of these States. The Committee recommended that the Ministry pursue the matter with all states and ensure that funds towards TSP are earmarked as per the guidelines.

Under-utilisation of allocation by states: The Committee observed that for the years 2015-16 and 2016-17, many state governments are not fully utilizing funds allocated to states under the TSP. The Committee recommended that the Ministry should monitor state-wise expenditure of TSP expenditure, particularly in the tribal dominated States, by holding meetings with secretary level officers of the state governments on quarterly basis.

Shortfall in Health Centres: The Committee observed that there is a shortfall of 1,240 Primary Health Centres (PHCs), 273 Community Health Centres (CHCs) and 6,503 sub-Centres in Tribal areas as on March 31, 2017. The Committee were informed that Ministry has formulated a proposal to ensure adequate health infrastructure in 94 Scheduled Tribes-dominated districts, where tribal population is 50% or more. The Committee noted that 40 of these districts still do not adequate health infrastructure in the form of PHCs. The Committee recommended that the Ministry should ensure availability of facilities and doctors in PHCs and CHCs by giving regular advisories to the state governments and concerned Ministries.

Data on beneficiaries: The Committee noted the Ministry did not have the data of the beneficiaries of various schemes implemented by different Ministries under TSP. It noted that the Ministry stated that the status of implementation of various projects and their outcome is maintained by the concerned Ministries of the state governments. The Committee recommended that the Ministry should develop a mechanism to collect data of performance of various schemes, for assessment of the success of TSP.

The Standing Committee on Agriculture (Chair: Mr. Hukmdev Narayan Yadav) submitted its report on ‘Agriculture Marketing and Role of Weekly Gramin Haats’ on January 3, 2019. Agriculture marketing in most states is regulated by the Agriculture Produce Marketing Committees (APMCs) established by state governments. Small and marginal farmers face various issues, such as inadequate marketable surplus, long distance to nearest APMC markets, and lack of transportation facilities, in selling their produce in APMC markets. Gramin Haats are markets in rural areas where such farmers can sell their produce without going to APMC markets. Key observations and recommendations of the Committee include:

Issues with APMCs: The Committee observed that provisions of the APMC Acts are not implemented in their true sense, due to reasons such as: (i) limited number of traders in APMC markets thereby reducing competition, (ii) cartelisation of traders, and (iii) undue deductions in the form of commission charges and market fee. Further, the Committee observed that most farmers lack access to government procurement facilities including APMC markets. It recommended the central government to prioritise the creation of alternative marketing platforms, and hold stakeholder consultations for reforms in agriculture marketing.

Reforms in APMC Acts: The Committee observed that APMC Acts need to be reformed urgently. The Acts are highly restrictive in promotion of multiple channels of marketing and competition in the system. The Committee noted that the central government is continuously pursuing state governments for reform in APMC Acts through model Acts. However, there is lukewarm response of state governments towards reforms in the Acts. It recommended that the central government constitute a Committee of Agriculture Ministers of all states to arrive at a consensus and design a legal framework for agriculture marketing.

Fees: The Committee observed that market fee and commission charges are to be levied on traders, but instead are collected from farmers. In some states, market fee is levied even when it is not applicable. Also, market fee is levied multiple times on the same commodity when traded across multiple APMC markets, even within the state. It recommended that (i) fees and cess levied on agricultural produce should be removed, and (ii) the central government should hold discussions with state governments for the same.

Availability of markets: The Committee observed that the average area served by an APMC market is 496 sq. km., which is much higher than the 80 sq. km. recommended by the National Commission on Farmers (Chair: Dr. M. S. Swaminathan) in 2006. The Committee noted that there is a need of 41,000 markets to meet this requirement. It recommended that the central government (i) initiate consultation with state governments to increase the number of agriculture markets, and (ii) create marketing infrastructure in states which do not have APMCs.

Infrastructure: The Committee observed that infrastructure and other civic facilities in most APMC markets are in a very bad shape. Markets also fare poorly in banking, internet connectivity, and drying facilities. It recommended that the central government (i) initiate consultation with state governments to improve infrastructure, banking facility, digital connectivity and other facilities in these markets, and (ii) devise a centrally sponsored scheme for modernisation of APMC markets.

Gramin Haats: The Committee noted that Gramin Haats can provide farmers direct access to consumers, require less transportation cost, and thus, may emerge as a viable alternative for agriculture marketing. The Committee recommended the central government to hold discussions with state governments to keep Gramin Haats out of the ambit of the APMC Acts.

GrAM scheme: The Committee noted that the aim of the Gramin Agricultural Markets (GrAM) scheme is to improve the infrastructure and civic facilities in Gramin Haats across the country. Under the scheme, 4,600 of the existing 22,000 Haats will be developed and upgraded using MGNREGA and other government schemes. It recommended that the central government (i) increase the number of Haats being targeted under the scheme and ensure presence of a Haat in each panchayat of the country, and (ii) make the scheme a fully funded central scheme.

The Committee noted that since the GrAM scheme requires funds available under various government schemes, inter-ministerial coordination is required at the central and state levels. It recommended that a monitoring committee should be formed for planning and time bound implementation of the scheme.

e-NAM scheme: The Committee noted that 585 markets across 18 states are connected on the portal of the Electronic National Agriculture Market (e-NAM) scheme. The scheme networks the existing APMC markets with the aim to create a unified national market for electronic trading of agricultural commodities. The Committee recommended that the central government should increase the coverage of the scheme to states which do not have APMCs. It also recommended that the government should start a training program on e-NAM portal to enhance digital literacy of farmers and increase their participation.

The Standing Committee on Information Technology (Chairperson: Mr. Anurag Singh Thakur) submitted its report on ‘Setting up of Post Bank of India as a Payments Bank- Scope, Objectives, and Framework’ on January 8, 2019. The Indian Post Payment Bank (IPPB) is a financial service provider, launched with the mandate of improving financial inclusion through the postal network in the country. The IPPB is a public sector company under the Department of Posts. Key observations and recommendations of the Committee include:

Aadhar-based authentication: The Committee stated that Aadhar-based authentication is vital for financial inclusion. Therefore, the Committee was concerned about the potential impact of the Supreme Court judgement on the IPPB (the Court struck down Aadhar linkage where no subsidies or benefits were involved). The Committee observed that discontinuation of Aadhar-based authentication had a negative impact on the vision and business model of IPPB. It recommended that IPPB should take up the matter with UIDAI/RBI for suggesting alternative modes of authentication.

Recruitment in IPPB: The Committee noted that IPPB was recruiting staff through direct recruitment, deputation from Public Sector Banks, and professional search firms for specialised resources. However, out of 3,500 banking professionals proposed to be employed, IPPB has only recruited 2,152 employees so far. The Committee recommended that the recruitment process should be expedited, and that it be informed of the steps taken by IPPB in this regard.

Service-level agreements: In order to ensure that the work of Department of Posts (DoP) does not get affected while performing IPPB-related activities, IPPB have built Service-Level Agreements (SLAs) in consultation with DoP. The SLAs specify details related to working hours, transaction limits, and turnaround time for business operations. The Committee recommended that DoP and IPPB should develop a mechanism to monitor that all elements of SLAs are fully practiced to ensure long-term sustenance of IPPB. Further, the IPPB and DoP should periodically review the SLAs.

Training of users: The Committee noted that training of end users was one of the major challenges faced by IPPB. In this context, it recommended that training courses should be conducted periodically for end users to upgrade their skills. Further, it recommended that IPPB should explore the possibility of associating their staff with schemes under the Digital India programme such as National Digital Literacy Mission.

Competitiveness: The Committee noted that IPPB is likely to face stiff competition from private payment banks (such as Airtel, Jio, and Paytm payment banks). It observed that that the 4% interest rate offered by IPPB is lower compared to other payment banks. In order to increase their customer base and compete with private players, the Committee recommended that the current interest rate may be reviewed.

Digital literacy: The Committee observed that IPPB had only 9,000 merchants on the ground, of which 10% were active. Given the low level of merchants enabled on the ground, the Committee recommended that IPPB should focus on digital literacy, consumer education, and hand-holding of merchants in rural and remote areas.

The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) released a performance audit of the Accelerated Irrigation Benefits Programme on January 8, 2019. The Accelerated Irrigation Benefits Programme (AIBP) was launched in 1996 as a central assistance programme and is currently implemented by the Ministry of Water Resources, River Development, and Ganga Rejuvenation. AIBP was initiated with the aim of accelerating the implementation of irrigation projects that exceed the resource capabilities of states. Key findings and recommendations include:

Irregular inclusion of projects: AIBP provides eligibility criteria such as the cost of a project, the stipulated time period, and the stage of completion, among others, for the inclusion of projects and schemes under its purview. In its report, the CAG noted that of the 201 Major, Medium Irrigation (MMI) projects undertaken between 2008-17 (the period covered by the audit), 30 projects were in violation of the criteria prescribed. Amongst Minor Irrigation (MI) schemes, the audit found 41 cases of inclusion of schemes that violated criteria. It found that these irregularities in inclusion had led to losses amounting to Rs 3,718 crore.

Benefit Cost Ratio: The Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR), which measures the ratio of annual benefits from irrigation to the annual cost of providing those benefits, is essential for determining the economic feasibility of a project. The CAG observed that in 28 MMI projects in nine states and 82 MI schemes in 10 states, uniform parameters were not used for the calculation of BCR. Inadequate surveys and assessments of water availability, among other deficiencies, contributed to inaccuracies in calculated BCRs. The report observed that actual BCRs were likely lower than those calculated, leading to modifications in design and revision of cost estimates. As a remedy, the CAG recommended that BCRs for projects be reviewed continuously and be based on realistic assumptions.

Delay in releasing funds: Between 2007-17, the Ministry of Water Resources, River Development, and Ganga Rejuvenation released Rs 19,184 crore for 115 MMI projects and Rs 12,809 crore for all MI schemes. As per the CAG report, there was short release of funds in various projects, resulting in non-realisation of revenues amounting to Rs 1,251 crore. The audit attributed this shortfall to delays in the submission of proposals by states and lapses in the release of funds by state governments. Additionally, the report found that Utilisation Certificates for funds amounting to Rs 2,187 crore were not submitted to the Ministry of Water Resources in time. The CAG recommended that state governments be held responsible for conducting adequate checks on work and creating systems of accountability for deficient execution.

Diversion of funds: Test checks of project reports found that funds to grantees had been diverted and utilised for expenditures not permissible under AIBP. The CAG report determined that a total of Rs 1,578 crore were diverted in 13 states, as a result of which projects were deprived of funds necessary for timely completion. The report also highlighted financial irregularities caused by parking of funds in bank accounts and fraudulent expenditures.

Lack of deterrents: As per AIBP guidelines, failure to complete a project on time would result in the grants being treated as loans that would later be recovered from the state government. In its audit, the CAG found that the Ministry of Water Resources had failed to invoke this provision for 105 projects facing delays ranging from one year to 18 years. This had in turn led to a weakening of the provision as a deterrent against slow implementation.

Cost overrun: Delays in the implementation of projects, inefficient work management, combined with changes in the scope of projects resulted in a cost overrun in 84 projects from Rs 40,943 crore to Rs 1,20,772 crore. The CAG found that cost overruns were caused by factors related to: (i) delays in land acquisition, (ii) delays in rehabilitation and resettlement measures mandated by the Land Acquisition Act, and (iii) undue favour given to contractors. The CAG noted that some of these delays could have been avoided and pointed to deficiencies in monitoring by central and state agencies. It recommended that the Ministry of Water Resources, River Development, and Ganga Rejuvenation ensure regular monitoring of performance at state and central levels and intensify efforts towards completion of projects.

Background: The survey was conducted between November 2018 and February 2019 and covered 92040 households in 6136 villages across States and UTs of India. The survey used the PPS (Probability Proportion to Size) sampling methodology, which yields results within a confidence interval of 95%.

Key findings: The NARSS confirmed the Open Defecation Free (ODF) status of 90.7% of villages which were previously declared and verified as ODF by various districts/States. 1% of households were found to have access to toilets during the survey period (the corresponding figure as per the SBMG MIS in November 2018 was 96%) 5% of the people who had access to toilets used them.

7% of villages which were previously declared and verified as ODF were confirmed to be ODF. The remaining villages also had sanitation coverage of about 93%. 4% of the villages surveyed found to have minimal litter and minimal stagnant water.

Impact and significance of SBM: Since its launch in October 2014, the SBM, the world’s largest sanitation program, has changed the behaviour of hundreds of millions of people with respect to toilet access and usage. 500 million people have stopped defecating in the open since the SBM began, down from 550 million at the beginning of the programme to less than 50 million today.

Over 9 crore toilets have been built across rural India under the Mission. Over 5.5 lakh villages and 615 districts have been declared ODF, along with 30 ODF States and Union Territories.

About SBM: To accelerate the efforts to achieve universal sanitation coverage and to put focus on sanitation, the Prime Minister of India launched the Swachh Bharat Mission on 2nd October, 2014.

The Mission Coordinator for SBM is Secretary, Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation (MDWS) with two Sub-Missions, the Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) and the Swachh Bharat Mission (Urban). Together, they aim to achieve Swachh Bharat by 2019, as a fitting tribute to Mahatma Gandhi on his 150th Birth Anniversary. The aim of Swachh Bharat Mission (Gramin) is to achieve a clean and Open Defecation Free (ODF) India by 2nd October, 2019.

Objectives: To bring about an improvement in the general quality of life in the rural areas, by promoting cleanliness, hygiene and eliminating open defecation. To motivate communities to adopt sustainable sanitation practices and facilities through awareness creation and health education. To encourage cost effective and appropriate technologies for ecologically safe and sustainable sanitation.

To develop community managed sanitation systems focusing on scientific Solid & Liquid Waste Management systems for overall cleanliness in the rural areas. To create significant positive impact on gender and promote social inclusion by improving sanitation especially in marginalized communities.

Highlights: The scheme will be available for exports effected from March 1, 2019 to March 31, 2020. Eligibility: All exporters, duly registered with relevant Export Promotion Council as per Foreign Trade Policy, of eligible agriculture products shall be covered under this scheme.

Exceptions: The assistance is available for most agricultural product exports with some exceptions such as live animals, products of animal origin, milk, cream, curd, butter, buttermilk, whey, rice, wheat, tobacco and garlic. The assistance, at notified rates, will be available for export of eligible agriculture products to the permissible countries, as specified from time to time. The assistance shall be admissible only if payments for the exports are received in Free Foreign Exchange through normal banking channels.

The scheme shall be admissible for exports made through EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) ports only. The scheme covers freight and marketing assistance for export by air as well as by sea.

Impact of the scheme: This scheme is likely to mitigate the disadvantage of higher cost of transportation of export of specified agriculture products due to trans-shipment and to promote brand recognition for Indian agricultural products in the specified overseas markets.

About Pradhan Mantri Shram Yogi Maan-Dhan Yojana: PM-SYM is a voluntary and contributory pension scheme that will engage as many as 42 crore workers in the unorganised sector.

Eligibility: The unorganised sector workers, with income of less than Rs 15,000 per month and who belong to the entry age group of 18-40 years, will be eligible for the scheme. Those workers should not be covered under New Pension Scheme (NPS), Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) scheme or Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO). He or she should not be an income tax payer.

Benefits: Minimum Assured Pension: Each subscriber under the scheme will receive minimum assured pension of Rs 3000 per month after attaining the age of 60 years. In case of death during receipt of pension: If the subscriber dies during the receipt of pension, his or her spouse will be entitled to receive 50 percent of the pension as family pension. This family pension is applicable only to spouse.

In case of death before the age of 60 years: If a beneficiary has given regular contribution and dies before attaining the age of 60 years, his or her spouse will be entitled to continue the scheme subsequently by payment of regular contribution or may even exit the scheme.

Contribution to the scheme: Contribution by the Subscriber: The subscriber is required to contribute the prescribed contribution amount from the age of joining the scheme till the age of 60 years.

Medium of contribution: The subscriber can contribute to the PM-SYM through ‘auto-debit’ facility from his or her savings bank account or from his or her Jan- Dhan account.

Equal contribution by the Central Government: Under the PM-SYM, the prescribed age-specific contribution by the beneficiary and the matching contribution by the Central Government will be made on a ‘50:50 basis’.

What is SWIFT? It is a messaging network that financial institutions use to securely transmit information and instructions through a standardized system of codes. Under SWIFT, each financial organization has a unique code which is used to send and receive payments.

SWIFT does not facilitate funds transfer: rather, it sends payment orders, which must be settled by correspondent accounts that the institutions have with each other.

The SWIFT is a secure financial message carrier — in other words, it transports messages from one bank to its intended bank recipient. Its core role is to provide a secure transmission channel so that Bank A knows that its message to Bank B goes to Bank B and no one else. Bank B, in turn, knows that Bank A, and no one other than Bank A, sent, read or altered the message en route. Banks, of course, need to have checks in place before actually sending messages.

Facts for Prelims: SWIFT India is a joint venture of top Indian public and private sector banks and SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication). The company was created to deliver high quality domestic financial messaging services to the Indian financial community. It has a huge potential to contribute significantly to the financial community in many domains.

Significance of SWIFT: Messages sent by SWIFT’s customers are authenticated using its specialised security and identification technology. Encryption is added as the messages leave the customer environment and enter the SWIFT Environment.

Messages remain in the protected SWIFT environment, subject to all its confidentiality and integrity commitments, throughout the transmission process while they are transmitted to the operating centres (OPCs) where they are processed — until they are safely delivered to the receiver.

About UNSC: What is it? The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is one of the organs of the United Nations and is charged with the maintenance of international peace and security. Its powers include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of military action through Security Council resolutions; it is the only UN body with the authority to issue binding resolutions to member states.

Members: The Security Council consists of fifteen members. Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, and the United States—serve as the body’s five permanent members. These permanent members can veto any substantive Security Council resolution, including those on the admission of new member states or candidates for Secretary-General.

The Security Council also has 10 non-permanent members, elected on a regional basis to serve two-year terms. The body’s presidency rotates monthly among its members.

Proposed reforms: Reform of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) encompasses five key issues: categories of membership, the question of the veto held by the five permanent members, regional representation, the size of an enlarged Council and its working methods, and the Security Council-General Assembly relationship. There is also a proposal to admit more permanent members.

India’s demands: India has been calling for the reform of the UN Security Council along with Brazil, Germany and Japan for long, emphasising that it rightly deserves a place at the UN high table as a permanent member.

Why India should be given a permanent seat in the council? India was among the founding members of United Nations. It is the second largest and a one of the largest constant contributor of troops to United Nations Peacekeeping missions. Today, India has over 8,500 peacekeepers in the field, more than twice as many as the UN’s five big powers combined.

India, since long time, has been demanding expansion of UNSC and its inclusion as permanent member in it. It has been a member of UNSC for 7 terms and a member of G-77 and G-4, so permanent membership is a logical extension.

The main objective behind the report was to measure the presence of fine particulate matter known as Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5, which has been recorded in real-time in 2018.

Highlights of the report: The report, based on a study of 3000 cities, said that 64 percent of the cities exceeded the World Health Organisation’s annual exposure guideline for PM 2.5. In South Asia itself, 99 percent of the cities exceeded the WHO’s safe standard exposure of 10 micrograms/cubic metre annually. Of the 10 cities with highest pollution, seven are in India, while one is in China and two are in Pakistan.

India’s Gurugram led the list of most polluted cities in the world in 2018, followed by Ghaziabad, Faridabad, Noida, and Bhiwadi in the top six worst-affected cities. Delhi was ranked at number 11 on the pollution chart. Among the top 30 most polluted cities, India makes up for 22 with five in China, two in Pakistan and one in Bangladesh. The only non-Indian city in the top five list is Faisalabad, Pakistan. Delhi was ranked as the most polluted capital in the world, with Dhaka at second and Kabul at third position.

China made a remarkable improvement since 2013 as the country’s pollution levels have gone down by 40 percent. In 2013, Beijing topped the pollution charts. Beijing ranks now as the 122nd most polluted city in the world in 2018. In South Asia, out of 20 most polluted cities in the world, 18 are in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. In Southeast Asia, Jakarta and Hanoi are the most polluted cities.

Measures to improve air quality: As suggested by Greenpeace, following measures can be employed to fight air pollution in the country: Improving public transport. Limiting the number of polluting vehicles on the road. Introducing less polluting fuel (Bharat VI). Strict emission regulations. Improved efficiency for thermal power plants and industries. Moving from diesel generators to rooftop solar.

Increased use of clean renewable energy. Electric vehicles. Removing dust from roads. Regulating construction activities. Stopping biomass burning, etc.

What is Form 26? A candidate in an election is required to file an affidavit called Form 26 that furnishes information on her assets, liabilities, educational qualifications, criminal antecedents (convictions and all pending cases) and public dues, if any. The affidavit has to be filed along with the nomination papers and should be sworn before an Oath Commissioner or Magistrate of the First Class or before a Notary Public.

The objective behind introducing Form 26 was that it would help voters make an informed decision. The affidavit would make them aware of the criminal activities of a candidate, which could help prevent people with questionable backgrounds from being elected to an Assembly or Parliament.

When and how was it introduced? Like most recent electoral reforms in India, Form 26 was introduced following a court order. The genesis of the affidavit can be traced to the 170th Report of the Law Commission, submitted in May 1999, which suggested steps for preventing criminals from entering electoral politics. One of the suggestions was to disclose the criminal antecedents as well as the assets of a candidate before accepting her nomination.

What has changed? Earlier, a candidate had to only declare the last I-T return (for self, spouse and dependents). Details of foreign assets were not sought. Offshore assets, as per the February 26 notification, means “details of all deposits or investments in foreign banks and any other body or institution abroad and details of all assets and liabilities in foreign countries”. It is now mandatory for candidates to reveal their own income-tax returns of the last five years rather than only one, and the details of offshore assets, as well as the same details for their spouse, members of the Hindu Undivided Family (if the candidate is a karta or coparcener), and dependents.

Context: Exercise Al Nagah III, third in the series of bilateral joint exercise between India and Oman is scheduled to be held from 12 to 25 March 2019 at Jabel Al Akhdar Mountains in Oman.

The exercise will see both the armies exchanging expertise and experience in tactics, weapon handling and firing, with an aim to enhance interoperability in counterterrorist operations in semi urban mountainous terrain.

NALSA has been constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, to provide free legal services to weaker sections of society. The aim is to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reasons of economic or other disabilities.

As per section 3(2) of Legal Service Authorities Act, the Chief Justice of India shall be the Patron-in-Chief. and a serving or retired Judge of the Supreme Court nominated by the President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, shall be the Executive Chairman.

Important functions performed by NALSA: NALSA organises Lok Adalats for amicable settlement of disputes. NALSA identifies specific categories of the marginalised and excluded groups and formulates various schemes for the implementation of preventive and strategic legal service programmes.

Services provided by the agency include free legal aid in civil and criminal matters for the poor and marginalised people who cannot afford the services of a lawyer in any court or tribunal.

Free legal services include provision of aid and advice to beneficiaries to access the benefits under the welfare statutes and schemes and to ensure access to justice in any other manner.

What made US announce this? The US observed that India has implemented a wide array of trade barriers that create serious negative effects on United States commerce. Despite intensive engagement, India has failed to take the necessary steps to meet the GSP criterion.

Background: The US had launched an eligibility review of India’s compliance with the GSP market access criterion in April 2018, following concerns raised by its medical devices and dairy industry. The Indian government’s attempts to arrive at a “balanced” package that would address the US’s concerns and protect the Indian public’s welfare were not successful.

In 2017, India had capped prices of cardiac stents and knee implants, slashing these over 70% and 60% respectively. The move impacted US giants like Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific and Stryker.

Concerns: This could be a big blow for India’s competitiveness in items groups such as garments, engineering, and intermediary goods in the American market. This could impact India’s competitiveness in items groups such as raw materials in the organic chemicals sector and intermediary goods in the US market, alongside items such as iron or steel, furniture, aluminum and electrical machinery.

How India benefitted from GSP? India has been the biggest beneficiary of the GSP regime and accounted for over a quarter of the goods that got duty-free access into the US in 2017. Exports to the US from India under GSP — at $5.58 billion — was over 12 per cent of India’s total goods exports of $45.2 billion to the US that year. The US goods trade deficit with India was $22.9 billion in 2017.

What is GSP? The GSP, the largest and oldest US trade preference programme, is designed to promote economic development by allowing duty-free entry for thousands of products from designated beneficiary countries. It aims to promote economic growth in the developing world by providing preferential duty-free entry for up to 4,800 products from 129 designated beneficiary countries and territories.

It was instituted on January 1, 1976, and authorised under the US Trade Act of 1974.

What is the objective of GSP? The objective of GSP was to give development support to poor countries by promoting exports from them into the developed countries. GSP promotes sustainable development in beneficiary countries by helping these countries to increase and diversify their trade with the United States. GSP provide opportunities for many of the world’s poorest countries to use trade to grow their economies and climb out of poverty.

Possible impact: India’s Department of Commerce feels the impact is “minimal”, given that Indian exporters were only receiving duty-free benefits of $190 million on the country’s overall GSP-related trade of $5.6 billion.

Some experts feel the move will not have a major impact on India also because it has been diversifying its market in the Latin American and the African region and its trade with countries of the Global South has also been expanding at a “very competitive pace”.

At the same time, the move could hit Indian exporters if it gives an edge to competitors in its top export categories to the US.