India is not a post-constitutional democracy

All political parties have to be registered and state that they will conform to constitutional principles. Once this is done by them, any violation of this which is brought to the election commission's notice through complaints can be used to question the registration itself. They could be disqualified or even de-registered in case of severe violations.

To a large extent un-elected and un-electable or failed political workers get nominations as chairpersons or presidents in boards, corporations and similar authorities. sometimes like in the case of Karnataka Milk Federation (KMF) elections are held, but most likely rigged as well. Similar nomination without public scrutiny happens in case of batf and abide and an extra constitutional role for corporates in city planning is created. Corporate or business plans for growth do not have any space in this form at all!

Social justice and equity plans or other plans for a city like Bengaluru or region need to go through a metropolitan planning committee (mpc) which if formed properly is likely to have representatives from various parties and technically qualified people. To prevent a single party from dominating decisions in the mpc elected reps from all different parties and urban and rural jurisdictions shd be represented.

And if they are unaware they shd legalistically read up Part-IX (73rd CAA) and Part IX-A (74th CAA) of the Indian Constitution both of which have just completed 20 years recently.

Better days are ahead if more people know how to prepare plans with a constitutional morality, and more people inside and outside government have the capacity and the capability to conform to it and make other committees like batf or abide conform to it.

Equality before law as well as one person one vote are constitutional principles. Similarly equity in terms of resource allocation or use is just as important. In urban or rural areas any other form of influence will amount to buying favours / lobbying or even reverse clientelism (from corporates to politicians).

We need more people to commit themselves as upholders of constitutional norms. As the local government delivers facilities closest to the people all attempts to divert resources away from human development and reallocate funds to more profitable "infrastructure growth" comes into conflict with both the role of local government and constitutional norms.

We must bring back the focus on the all round development of people's and local government capacities and capability to deliver the amenities and facilities.

 
Separating the roles of government such as in the case of MP's vs MLA's vs corporator's / councillor's / panchayat members, and respect for all tiers of government (esp., local govt) are part of this framework of principles. So while the state govt provides the funds, functions and functionaries, the local government provides the facilities and amenities.

extra constitutional forms like govt committees for infrastructure or other corporate lobbies should not deliberately encroach on the constitutional form instead they must allow democratic decision making. Any number of committees as per law could be started but they have to confirm such principles and conform to them. These are the built in checks and balances and those who support the constitution will agree that an important role for citizens also exists for protecting the same, nurturing and helping move ahead.

'privatising' politics: b.pac decreasing political risk to corporate investment ?

There are connections of b.pac founders and members to industry lobby groups like assocham, ficci, fkcci,nasscom or cii. these are industry or business chambers which influence and keep up group pressure on the Union and state govts for favourable policies. one such is associated chambers of commerce and industry (assocham) which has suggested points for the party manifestos :url link here (assocham moots 5-point growth agenda for parties in Karnataka )

and the report below correctly mentions that it is the IT- BT barons who are now funding 14 candidates from all parties with Rs 5 lakh each + campaigning online for them : url link here (IT-BT barons to fund 14 candidates).

Is it possible that the instability and inaction resulting from the 5 year term BJP govt has had an impact where rate of growth of Karnataka state has suffered due to which the it- bt honchos in the disguise of b.pac would like to ensure continued growth of their sectors? adb based in manila has cautioned the private corporate sector in general on the political risks and has therefore moved their project oriented decsion making to predominantly bureaucratic parastatal funding and investment institutions. If adb got a chance they would even have prepared a long term buisness plan for the KUIDFC in Karnataka -but were prevented from doing so at the last minute. Is this exactly the kind of business plan which is now being executed by b.pac through lobbying, and influencing outcomes so that political party manifestos and voting in elections by others need not create any setback for them, their business and business growth?


b.pac and other similar groups would like to decrease political risk arising in the KLA elections 2013, by asking parties to align with their it-bt business agenda, and their Bengaluru agenda viz.,
implementing the report of the Karnataka Information Technology and Communication (ict) Group which is over Rs 2,50,000 crores investment over 15 years just for Bengaluru : url link here ( The $50b Pai-Naidu Plan: too much, too late ). This was presented to the GoK after b.pac had coalesced but before it was formally launched as a trust on feb 3rd 13.
bmrg bill and bbmp legislation (initiated by abide but now backed by broad consensus in it-bt sectors through b.pac)

fact is that the pac's are a US phenomenon which gained strength before the 2010 elections to senate and congress and were supported by the US supreme courts 2010 decision in Citizens United vs Federal election commission.

b.pac has been inspired by them to push the agenda of ppp's (private sector-politician partnership) and it may well end up beginning the process of 'privatisation' of politics in Karnataka and India.

reference : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee

First Lok Sabha Post-JNNURM election

15th Lok SABHA MP's must debate JNNURM

1. In 2005 before the JNNURM launch, OUR MP's never debated the mandatory and optional conditions which were part of reforms package.
2. Since these conditions were thrust upon the states who needed to enter a tripartite MoU with the Union, State and City governments being signatories, there is a need to debate the conditions of the reforms.
3. These reforms were essentially a sop to the lobbies of Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) who had been demanding the same for a long time and still continue to do after 5 years of huge profits.
4. The 15th Lok Sabha MP's must undertake a wide ranging public consultation process on the success/ failure of JNNURM !
5. Urban areas have been developed in extremely inequitous manner.
6. Costly and expensive Facilities are being provided to rich and elite people who get massive tax concessions (www.cbgaindia.org) in excess of Rs 300,000 crores / year for the last 4 years 2004-08.
7. Projects must be prepared on priority to fulfil the essential needs services of the masses, the urban poor and the lower middle class.
8. Funding for the same should also be provided adequately.
9. Property taxes must not be escrowed to give an opportunity to payback investors THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. They must be invested in basic needs of the electorate such as drinking water, proper roads, air quality maintenance and pollution control.
10. Social Audit and monitoring that the funds must not be misused is to be introduced as a peoples initiative.
11. The GoI's 11th Plan document pushes back the date for achieving the urban drinking water targets to 2012. This needs to be relooked at and targets must be fulfilled earlier.
12. Development cannot happen for the rich only leaving the poor behind.

Development needs in Urban India

How is it possible for successive ruling Indian Union Govts to continue to spend large sums of money every year without fulfilling the goal of providing basic amenities to all?
It is because there are various advocates who want a priority allocation of funds and who want to ensure that funds are diverted to INFRASTRUCTURE.
Does this really boil down to a fight for funds between essential services and subsidies for the cement, steel, sand, concrete and construction industry?
Will a poor citizen not get the basic needs like food and drinking water if he cannot afford it? Can a policy which is formulated like this be constitutionally correct even if it violates fundamental rights?

The right to food and right to water should be the main first priority for all who vote and also all who are elected.

Why is JNNURM such a big failure now?

In JNNURM a huge amount of funds (Rs. 55,000 crs) was allocated to projects by the Ministry of Urban Development, since each city corporation already had a number of projects waiting for funds. These projects were not prepared by local governments through identifying people's basic needs but generated by consultants and project proponents and developers etc. This JNNURM scheme has come to mean many different things for various sectors.
Becoz it does not cater to local essential needs like household level water supply, but only concentrates funds and resources on big-ticket infrastructure projects, JNNURM is responsible for the violation of basic human rights.
This is exactly why JNNURM is such a big failure now. It only set out to benefit a chosen few and not the aam admi at all.