Niti Aayog to give 7-year strategy and a 15-year long-term vision?!

It is often said if you want to do away with an institution, just dismantle it completely. If you think of replacing it with another one, there are chances that the second one will just eventually become a clone of the first one. The longer the first one has served the more this is likely to be true as well.

We are seeing this in the case of Niti Aayog. It has replaced Planning Commission with Niti Aaog (meaning Policy Commission) but gradually it is just becoming the same type which it wanted to replace. It has similar set of advisers who see no wrong with whatever the government does. So much so, it even releases reports which don’t stand upto facts.

Apparently the 12th plan got over on 31 March 2017.

Niti Aayog held a recent meeting in which we see new buzzwords like strategy, vision and so on. And 5 year is to be replaced by 7 year , 15 year and so on. The body is also sticking to 8% growth rate assumption which was hyped by Planning Commission earlier. This 8% assumption has been behind most of India’s problems today as expectations have fallen short leading to all kinds of mismatches.

What is even more perplexing is how the Commission did not discuss the most important issue haunting India – lack of water. We can keep making all kinds of claims about economy growing thrice of its current size to keep pleasing the media and international bodies like credit rating agencies. But on basic aspects we are no where close to even our neighbors.

Water should be our number one priority across government and policy.


2 Responses to “Niti Aayog to give 7-year strategy and a 15-year long-term vision?!”

  1. vikramml Says:

    We used to copy the west and now we copy China. Picking a growth number and targeting it, is backwards logic. Why is 8% a good number? What if implementing a certain set of policies increases the rate of growth to 12%? And, what is even more asinine is we have various impediments to growth, which if removed might give us a higher growth rate. Forward/Normal logic would indicate a focus to remove the impediments and to let the natural rate of growth be what it should be. Instead, we keep the constraints, yet we want growth and at a specific rate. It is beyond retarded. Growth rate should be a side effect of policies that are required, not the main goal.

    Secondly, we have institutions in name. Cargo cult institutions. We borrow the name and appearance but there is nothing within. They are hollow, in terms of funding, facilities, expertise, depth of knowledge in terms of deep connections with academia, etc, etc. Again, we do it backwards, instead of focusing on funding and developing long term expertise, which would then result in an institution, we first name a building and hope that that by itself will result in what it is supposed to do.

  2. vikramml Says:

    Oh and by the way, the growth rate should be a measure of private sector growth (largely, with some it coming from public infra, defense, etc), so the fact that the govt is deciding or aiming what private sector growth should be, is again severely retarded.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: