Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by Zebra, Jan 1, 2015.
Planning Commission renamed as 'NITI Ayog' - The Economic Times
By PTI | 1 Jan, 2015, 11.30AM IST
'Niti Ayog': Planning Commission's new avatar | Zee News
Thursday, January 1, 2015 , Zee Media Bureau
PM to chair 'Niti Aayog': Here's what the revamped Planning Commission aims to do - The Economic Times
By ECONOMICTIMES.COM | 1 Jan, 2015
congress is slaming it as an anti-nehru move
communist are slaming since it was derived from soviet era
so has anything really has changed or only name has changed.
third if something has really changed including then get it in consutitution or from parliament since if and when congress or its supported gov comes we see its come back
so how its members are going to be decided and when they are going to be decided
I mean we had heard that CM/gov of state would be members how are they going to be selected and its going to be rotentional basis so what would be there tenure
All this should be backed by some kind off law or else other gov would come and change whole thing
The earlier planning commission was formed in a similar fashion by executive order of GoI. Source
So no need to get anything passed by Parliament. Yes the next government has every right to change NITI Aayog if they wish.
Regarding selection of members, I guess once the members are selected and the guidelines are made public everything will be clear.
So basically it's like a super think thank, an advisory on economic policies. But wasn't that the same ideology of planning commision?
I don't think chief ministers had a say in planning commission, now they do. If I understand correctly modi did not like the way Montek singh did not give importance to chief ministers and how they had to go to planning commission with a begging bowl every time.
But I agree that a new body needs to take over. It is time we stopped thinking with socialistic ideology. We need a mix of socialism and capitalism.Whether this new one will help, only time can tell.
Btw anybody has any idea what is the annual income of government at country level? I know income thru taxes is around 7 lakh crores but unable get overall revenue from all sources like revenue from government entities like banks, psu's etc..
What about 5 years plans.
thats what i am telling new gov would come would disband it
untill and unless new body is backed bt some kind of law
how is fiance to state gov would be now decided . i head its now going to determine by fiance ministry
that would to power to central gov
At best it will be a Planning Commission merely renamed.
At worst it will be a NAC-PC hybrid.
National policy and financial allocation is a given issue, no matter how it is implemented.
Therefore, it would be wrong to state that the new mode is a 'repackaging' of the dinosaur of the Nehruvian socialism.
Unlike the Planning Commission, the 'NITI Ayog' is for governance across the public and private domains.
The Cabinet resolution says. "Everyone has a stake in ensuring good governance and effective delivery of services. Creating Jan Chetna, therefore, becomes crucial for people's initiative.
In the past, governance may have been rather narrowly construed as public governance. In today's changed dynamics â€“ with 'public' services often being delivered by 'private' entities, and the greater scope for 'participative citizenry', governance encompasses and involves everyone."
The NITI Aayog will also seek to put an end to slow and tardy implementation of policy, by fostering better inter-ministry and better Centre-State coordination.
The Governing Council, unlike what was in the Planning Commission, will have all Chief Ministers on board. Therefore, the States will have a say in policy making, monitoring and finance disbursement because the new body will allow state governments to determine the architecture of economic growth and development, the resolution says: "The one-size-fits-all approach, often inherent in central planning, has the potential to create needless tensions and undermining the harmony needed for national effort. The resolution quotes Dr Ambedkar that it is "unreasonable to centralise powers where central control and uniformity is not clearly essential or is impracticable."The Planning Commission was unpopular with chief ministers as it engaged in promotion of Centre-to-state one-way flow of policy.."
There will also be the Regional Council to address common issues of the region. A good departure.
Unlike before there will be specialists in all fields not from the Govt, but from acknowledged leaders in that field who will advise as a part of the Forum as special invitees.
This is a more inclusive forum than the Planning Commission and more positive in the stakeholders deciding their future rather than a select band of so called 'experts' and bureaucrats.
Therefore, it would not be wise to act as cheerleaders of the Congress and friends, who have nothing else left to establish their presence except to carp as loudly as feasible.
The Planning Commission came into being with an Executive Order and not a Law.
So, would this new dispensation.
There is no harm in backing it with a law, but there's no hurry for that. It could be taken up later when both BJP has comfortable majority in the RS and also the body has had a couple of years or so at work.
I wonder if getting a backing by law is essential.
These are matters of execution and if this is cast in stone through a law, then there will be no leeway for any successive Govt to be innovative and contemporary to the time.
The Planning Commission was indeed essential to lay the foundation of India. Now that the foundation has been laid, it has become essential to keep attuned to the contemporary environment and the aspirations of the people, by becoming more inclusive and less directive in nature.
Who knows what will be the requirement in the future.
Therefore, a law would only strangle initiative to be contemporary in the future scenario.
Well just as any decision, its weighing the pros and cons.
A law might restrict changes in the future (though not necessarily for a government with sufficient majority); that however, needs to be balanced against the sheer political vindictiveness that permeates our current system where so much of the discourse is driven by sheer hatred against one man.
Nehru could have done what he wanted with this body (as he did in many other cases), he chose not to go the law route. Times have drastically changed though and if the political climate dictates differently, I'd argue the current government should go the law route, though as I said, there is hardly any hurry given that we are not even a year into this administration.
The current opposition clearly cannot be trusted to put nation above politics as demonstrated by their repeal of critical NDA's anti-terror laws in their mad-desire for minority appeasement.
Separate names with a comma.