Food poisoning and waterborne diseases are severe health hazards in Karnataka, says one expert report. Another study reveals that more than 4,000 villages in the state face drinking water scarcity. But such facts and statistics are hardly given importance when the government and legislature discuss these issues. Debates often end up in mere partisan rhetoric. Can’t these discourses be driven by facts?
Fresh hopes arise, therefore, when a new government comes in. It is not that people expect all persisting issues to get solved in one stroke. But they look forward to new approaches to be tried. That is why, when Chief Minister HD Kumaraswamy talks about the Israel model of water management, it catches the public imagination. A new government is basically an effort in exploring new ideas in governance. Is it then not reasonable to expect that from Kumaraswamy’s government?
One key necessity is to bring back rational thinking in policy-making. Leaders and parties are increasingly influenced by either ideology or preoccupations or self-interested pressure groups. This needs to be replaced with some rationale in law-making and the execution process. It calls for creating space for informed discussions, based on hard facts and figures.
The last government, for instance, was right when it thought of bringing a law to curb superstition, but the “Karnataka Prevention and Eradication of Inhuman Evil Practices and Black Magic Bill-2017,” which was passed finally, fell very short on many real aspects. This is what happens when policy measures are taken without open-minded public debate. Without a holistic objective and ears for feedback, how can one expect effective policy decisions? The legislature must facilitate quality debates, driven by empirical data, not emotional drama.
When government truly starts looking at hard facts from the ground, the administration of its schemes will achieve efficiency. Statistics, it is said, serves as the eyes and ears of administration. Be it the traffic problem in Bengaluru or seafront erosion in coastal districts, or the shortcomings in the school mid-day meal programme. Field realities can only be learnt by getting reliable information from the ground. The government has its own machinery for such information inflow. The Directorate of Economics and Statistics (DES) is meant for that. Even other departments have their own statistics and research wings.
Historical perspectives on an issue can be obtained by previously commissioned expert studies. The troubles in vital sectors like agriculture, public health, irrigation, education, etc., could find remedies if government actions are based on true reflection upon unbiased data. The solutions to the current crisis of finding money for the farm loan waiver, for instance, may be hidden in the data compiled by agencies on farming, cooperative and finance sectors.
Similarly, if a social sector programme like ‘Anna Bhagya’ is to be sustainable, its benefits should reach only those truly below poverty line (BPL) families. But the previous government admitted that it did not have a reliable list of genuine BPL families.
Another key function in government is resource allocation through annual budgeting. It sets the tone and direction of governance. Political compulsions, however, often dictate resource allocation. Otherwise, how can sectors like primary education or healthcare be consistently let down when it comes to funding? Why are politically attractive freebies increasing every year in the name of social welfare, without really being backed by any assessment of their need? Why should important irrigation projects in Krishna or Cauvery river basins continue to suffer from lack of adequate funding?
A relatively resourceful state like Karnataka, too, has been unable to allocate enough monies to these sectors. It all boils down to imprudent budgetary allocation. Hence, the finance ministry needs to be more realistic and concerned about long-term welfare. Unless data-driven decision-making drives the budgeting process, developmental objectives won’t be achieved. If Kumaraswamy is to do a great job as CM, he must first insulate the finance department from economically unviable political decisions.
Access to right information
Equally important is public awareness. Sensitising people on vital issues of common concern may help effective implementation of government programmes. But, citizens often suffer from a handicap: while one segment of society fails to get access to the right information, another section gets carried away by propaganda in this age of mass media. All these lead to manipulation of public opinion.
Empowering people through right information, therefore, is necessary. The culture of looking at societal issues through the prism of science must be nurtured. Be it the cause of public cleanliness and hygiene or reducing the use of pesticides by farmers, it takes enormous effort to build public awareness. Such public education is a long-term task. Designated government institutions, therefore, need to take up these tasks on priority. A body like the Karnataka State Council for Science and Technology (KSCST) could do this by providing expertise on adopting problem solving science and technology tools.
These are a few suggestions that could help the new government breathe fresh air into governance. The key point is to adopt a rational approach in law-making, budgeting, and programme implementation. Such an approach may be resisted by the political class, but it will instil discipline in governance over time. The common people will embrace it when they see the benefits of such an outlook.
Shall we expect, then, more informed debates when the government and legislature tackle issues such as water-borne epidemics or shortage of drinking water the next time? Winston Churchill is quoted as having said, a democratic government can often find the best solutions by just hearing an average voter for 10 minutes!
(The writer is Director, Centre for Conservation Biology and Sustainable Development, Sirsi)