Mihir S Sharma’s article on austerity (“Austerity abuse”, June 9) makes a factually incorrect statement when it criticises the Planning Commission for being late in presenting the 12th Plan, when the first year of the Plan has commenced. Since this view has been expressed by some others also, I would like to present the correct picture.
The established practice is that the approach paper is approved by the National Development Council (NDC) in the year before the Plan begins and the full Plan is approved by the NDC in the course of the first year. The 10th Plan and the 11th Plan were approved in December of 2002 and 2007, respectively.
On this basis, we are on track. The approach paper for the 12th Plan was approved last year and we will be ready for the NDC by September or October at the latest. On this basis we are actually doing better than past performance.
More importantly, the issue is not just a matter of past practice but this timing is also reasonable in substance. To have the 12th Plan approved before the start of the first year we would have needed to interact with ministries on the five-year perspective in October and November of 2011-12 which is precisely the time when ministries were busy with discussions with the finance ministry on revised estimates for 2011-12 and on non- Plan requirements for the next year. To get them to focus on the five-year targets this would have to be done in August and September, when we would have no clear picture of the Plan expenditure outcome for 2011-12, which is the base year of the 12th Plan. Besides, the present timing does not disrupt work since 90 per cent of the expenditure in the first year is on ongoing 11th Plan programmes. New Plan programmes, for the 12th Plan, redesigned to reflect lessons learned from the 11th Plan, have to be processed for government and Cabinet approval and this usually happens in the course of the first year of the Plan. The new designs come into effect from the second year onwards.
Mihir S Sharma’s article suggests that there is impatience to know the details of the 12th Plan and I welcome this. I can promise readers that the Plan will be different from the usual for several reasons. First, we have consulted widely as never before, including multiple consultations with the states and separate consultations with 900 civil society organisations. Second, we are considering innovative departures from the past in how centrally sponsored schemes should be redesigned to give much greater flexibility to the states and to panchayati raj institutions, or PRIs. Third, we propose to present not just an aspirational base projection, but to look at the consequences of not doing what is necessary in terms of alternative scenarios.
But I should not do more at this stage than whet the appetite, as we have yet to get approval from the full Planning Commission and Cabinet. My main message is: don’t criticise us on timing — hold your ammunition for the substance which will be unveiled very shortly. We would value the fullest possible discussion of substantive issues.
Montek Ahluwalia
Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission, New Delhi
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201 · E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
