< Previous | Contents | Next >
Twelfth Plan
The ‘Draft Approach Paper’ of the Twelfth Plan (2012–17) was prepared by the Planning Commission after widest consultation till date—recognising the fact that citizens are now better informed and also keen to engage. Over 950 civil society organisations across the country provided inputs; business associations, including those representing small enterprises have been consulted; modern electronic and ‘social media’ (Google Hangout) were used to enable citizens to give suggestions. All state governments, as well as local representative institutions and unions, have been consulted through five regional consultations. Though the Approach Paper for the Plan was approved by the NDC by mid-2011, the Plan Document was finalised much later after the launch of the plan (like the Tenth and Eleventh Plans).
The Draft Approach Paper lays down the major targets of the Plan, the key challenges in meeting them, and the broad approach that must be followed to achieve the stated objectives which are summed-up as follows:
(i) Growth rate of 9 per cent is targeted for the Plan. However, in view of the uncertainties in the global economy and the challenges in the domestic economy, the Approach Paper indicates that it could be achieved only if some difficult decisions are taken.
(ii) It emphasizes the need to intensify efforts to have 4 per cent average growth in the agriculture sector during the Plan period; with foodgrains growing at about 2 per cent per year and non-food grains (notably, horticulture, livestock, dairying, poultry and fisheries) growing at 5 to 6 per cent.
(iii) The higher growth in agriculture would not only provide broad based income benefits to the rural population but also help restrain inflationary pressure, which could arise if high levels of growth are attempted without corresponding growth in domestic food production capabilities.
(iv) It proposes that the major flagship programmes which were instrumental for promoting inclusiveness in the Eleventh Plan should continue in the Twelfth Plan—there is a need to focus on issues of implementation and governance to improve their effectiveness.
(v) The Plan indicates that the energy needs of rapid growth will pose a major challenge since these requirements have to be met in an environment where domestic energy prices are constrained and world energy prices are high and likely to rise further.
(vi) For the GDP to grow at 9 per cent, commercial energy supplies will have to grow at a rate between 6.5 and 7 per cent per year. Since India’s domestic energy supplies are limited, dependence upon imports will increase. Import dependence in the case of petroleum has always been high and is projected to be 80 per cent in the Twelfth Plan.
(vii) Even in the case of coal, import dependence is projected to increase as the growth of thermal generation will require coal supplies, which cannot be fully met from domestic mines.
(viii) It suggests the need to take steps to reduce energy intensity of production processes, increase domestic energy supply as quickly as possible and ensure rational energy pricing that will help achieve both objectives, viz., reduced energy intensity of production process and enhance domestic energy supply, even though it may seem difficult to attempt.
(ix) It draws attention to evolving a holistic water management policy aiming at more efficient conservation of water and also in water use efficiency, particularly in the field of agriculture.
(x) It argues that a new legislation for land acquisition is necessary, which strikes an appropriate balance between the need for fair compensation to those whose land is acquired and whose livelihood is disrupted, and the need to ensure that land acquisition does not become an impossible impediment to meeting our needs for infrastructure development, industrial expansion and urbanisation.
(xi) It maintains that health, education and skill development will continue to be the focus areas in the Twelfth Plan, and that there is a need to ensure adequate resources to these sectors—‘universal healthcare’ proposed by it, emphatically. Simultaneously, it also points to the need to ensure maximum efficiency in terms of outcomes for the resources allocated to these sectors. The need to harness private investment in these sectors has also been emphasised by the approach.
(xii) It takes cognizance of the fact that achieving 9 per cent growth will require large investments in infrastructure sector development—notes greater momentum to public investment and Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) in infrastructure sector needs to be imparted so that present infrastructure shortages can be addressed early.
(xiii) It has emphasised the importance of the process of fiscal correction. However, the paper cautions that fiscal consolidation would imply that total resources available for the Plan in the short run will be limited. Resource limitations imply the need to prioritise carefully and that some priority areas, e.g., health, education and infrastructure will have to be funded more than others.
(xiv) It also emphasizes the need for focusing more on efficient use of
available resources in view of the resource constraints. The Paper makes several suggestions in this regard, including giving implementing agencies greater amount of freedom, flexibility, promoting convergence between resources from different Plan schemes and the need for much greater attention to capacity building, monitoring and accountability.
The Twenty Point Programme (TPP) is the second Central Plan which was launched in July 1975. The programme was conceived for coordinated and intensive monitoring of a number of schemes implemented by the Central and the state governments. The basic objective was of improving the quality of life of the people, especially of those living below the poverty line. Under this, a thrust was given to schemes relating to poverty alleviation, employment generation in rural areas, housing, education, family welfare and health, protection of environment and many other schemes having a bearing on the quality of life in rural areas.
The programme was restructured in 1982 and 1986. The programme, known as the
‘TPP-86’ has 119 items grouped into 20 points which are related to the improvement in the quality of life in rural areas. Among the total items, 54 are monitored on the basis of evaluatory criteria, 65 against pre-set physical targets and rest of the 20 important items on monthly basis. The targets are fixed by the Ministries at the Centre in consultation with the states and the UTs. The allocation for the programme is done under the various Five Year Plans.
The ‘TPP-86’ was restructured and named ‘TPP-2006’ keeping in view the challenges of the 21st century with particular reference to the process of economic reforms. This was in harmony with the National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP) of the UPA Government.
This was the first programme which had ‘direct attack’ aproach on rural poverty. The forthcoming five year plan (i.e., the 6th Plan, 1980–85), launched with the slogan “Garibi Hatao”, was based on the experiences of the TPP—a right mix of economics and real politic. Over the years, the programme has been implemented uninterrupted by all political parties which
came to power at the Centre.
By mid-2015, the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation (MOSPI), which monitors the programme, in a report to the Prime Minister’s Office, had advised to wrap it up as it has outlived its utility. While the PMO decided to ‘restructure’ it on the recommendations of the Inter-Ministerial Group, which is presently working on it. It should be noted that the Government has restructured the existing 50 Centrally Sponsored Schemes (CSSs) into 30 under the active participation of the Governing Council of the NITI Aayog.
The Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme (MPLADS) is the last of the Central Plans and latest to have been launched, too. The scheme was launched on December 23, 1993 with only Rs. 5 lakh given to each MPs which was increased to Rs. 1 crore in the year 1994–95. When the MPs did put a demand to increase the sum to Rs. 5 crore in 1997–98, finally the government enhanced it to Rs. 2 crore since 1998–99. In April 2011 the corpus was enhanced to Rs. 5 crore while announcing the new guidelines for the scheme.
Basically, in the early 1990s there came a demand from the MPs cutting across party lines for such a scheme so that the fruits of development could directly reach the masses via their representatives. The government of the time decided to go in for such a scheme and the MPLADS came.
Under this scheme the Members of Parliament86 recommend some works (i.e., creation of fixed community assets, based on locally felt developmental needs) to the concerned District Magistrate. The scheme is governed by a set of guidelines, which have been comprehensively revised and issued in November 2005. Its performance has improved due to pro-active policy initiatives, focus monitoring and review.87
In recent years, many criticisms of the scheme came to the public notice, which concerned either misappropriation of the funds or non-use of the funds, especially from the backward states. The people’s representative at the PRI level have been demanding scrapping of the scheme as it infringes the
idea of decentralised planning. In it’s place, they want the funds to be given to the local bodies directly for the same kind of works specified by the MPLADS.88
In May 2014, MOSPI issued the revised guidelines for the scheme which is simple, clear and understandable to all concerned. The fine points of the guidelines are as given below:
• It provides not only the list of prohibited items under the scheme, but also that of permissible items.
• In order to encourage trusts and societies to work for the betterment of tribal people, the ceiling of Rs. 50 lakh, stipulated for building assets by trusts and societies in areas occupied by tribals, has been enhanced to Rs. 75 lakh.
• Further, to promote cooperative movement and rural development, the Cooperative Societies have also been made eligible under the MPLAD Scheme.
• The abandoned or suspended MPLAD work to be completed by the states.
• Natural and man-made calamities can also be allocated funds under it.
• Now the funds can be allocated by a MP outside of Constituency/State/UTs, too.
• It can converge with the other approved Central (like MGNAREGA) and State Government schemes.
• Funds from local bodies can be pooled with MPLADS works.
• Public and community contribution is made permissible in the scheme.
• ‘One MP–One Idea’, an annual competition for best innovation in solving local problems.
• A proper mechanism for its implementation and auditing have also been put in place.
To provide MPs a greater choice under the scheme, the list of indicative and illustrative shelf of projects has been expanded touching the fields of infrastructure development, drinking water, education, roads, health, sanitation, natural calamity, etc. The scheme has been given more dynamism
and flexibility.