By TCN News,
New Delhi: Observing that the term ‘good governance’ is being commonly used in politics these days, Dr Onkar Mittal, president, Civil Society Network, said, it is imperative to know what it stood for and the challenges it has thrown up before governments.
“Urban governance should be transparent, responsive and geared to the actual needs of the poor and the marginalised. The concept of urban local government had been linked to improvement in management systems for delivery of public services such as water and sanitation, primary education, hygiene, preventive and basic health,” Dr Mittal said here.
Dr. Onkar Mittal, President, Civil Society Network, New Delhi delivering the lecture
He was delivering a lecture on ‘Urban Governance and Challenges of Decentralisation and Citizen Participation’ on February 21 organised by the Institute of Objective Studies (IOS).
Referring to the First War of Independence in 1857, he said, Queen Victoria too had hinted at giving good governance, but India preferred self-governance. He argued that the World Bank focused on six points of good governance as they were directly connected to governmental action and held that such countries as were acting on these points would be treated as countries of good governance.
According to him these points were: holding of elections as scheduled in order to seek popular mandate; political stability – a stable government that could ensure violence free-environment; civic amenities such as power, water supply, education, etc.; appointment of a regulatory authority to keep a tab on the organisations supplying power and similar other basic amenities; action against corruption, and parity in the payment of wages to labourers, farm workers, etc.
Stating that those in power must not be allowed to resort to extravagance, Dr Mittal maintained that for the urban poor, who formed the majority population of Delhi, and who lived in different kinds of slum settlements, the challenge of social development of children, youth and women and the guarantee of peace and security of life and liberty had even a higher priority over the provision of these essential public services.
A new framework for local urban governance and citizens’ participation in the slum areas of Delhi should provide for effective action on the ground, he said. He noted that as Delhi did not enjoy full statehood, issues such as delivery of civic amenities and corruption came into the open. Commenting on the status of Delhi, he said the issue of full statehood had been in discussion for the last 10-15 years.
Tracing Delhi’s past, he explained that it was a complete state in 1857. “But after the 1857 Uprising, the status of Delhi as a state was diluted by amalgamating some of its parts with Punjab. The national government appointed the Sarkaria Commission in 1991 to examine the question of statehood for Delhi. The commission in its report did not favour full statehood for Delhi, but recommended the status of a state under the control of the Central government. In the light of Sarkaria Commission recommendations, Delhi was granted the status of an associate state by bringing an amendment to the Constitution in 1993.”
He said that this was the genesis of a plethora of problems that multiplied over the years. Today, Delhi government had no control over DDA (Delhi Development Authority), land, police, etc. He held that even the municipal corporations are not under its control, these report to the Union Ministry of Urban Development directly.
He observed that under the existing system of governance, orders came from above, but there was no mechanism to send complaints up for redressal. “People’s involvement in governance is possible only when their complaints reach the appropriate level,” he said.
Dispelling the misconception that Delhi government depended a great deal on the Centre for funds and could not move ahead without it, he said that the State’s annual budget estimates accounted for about Rs 36,000 crore. Funds for the budget were generated by the state government from its own resources. He lamented that none of the parties contending for power in Delhi had made an attempt to identify and analyse the key challenges at the macro (city), meso (district and municipal zone) and micro (assembly segment, municipal ward, mohalla and locality) levels. “This was important to grasp the constraints in public service delivery, social and economic development and the provision of security.”
Dr Mittal said that Smart Settlement for Sustainable Development (SSSD) needed to be conceptualised with the redefining of the availability of used as well as unused public spaces in the city. Urban governance in the 21st century required a joined-up working with horizontal and vertical integration, he concluded.
Professor ZM Khan, IOS secretary general, in his presidential remarks underlined the importance of urban governance, decentralisation of civic administration and citizens’ participation in it.
Senior advocate Mushtaq Ahmad conducted the proceedings. Those who attended the lecture included vice chairman of the IOS, Professor Refaqat Ali Khan, Surender Panwar, Farman Riyaz, Khalid Nadeem Khan, Imran Ghani, Zuber Khan, Habib Akhtar, Sultan Sirajuddin, Mohammad Arif Ahmad, Aziz-ur-Rehman, SM Siddiqui, Tajdar Siddiqui, Zeeshan Khan, Rakhi Gupta and Saman Naaz.