Yojana Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi- an address synonymous with the Planning Commission of India. It was established in March 1950, by an executive action on the Government of India and not derived from the Constitution of India or statute. The major responsibility delegated to it was to draft the Five year plans of India i.e. to plan for the most effective and balanced utilization of country’s resources.

Taking forward from his Independence Day speech, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had scrapped the Planning Commission and on the 1st day of the year 2015 instilled ‘Niti Aayog’ (National Institution for Transforming India) instead. Niti Aayog will interact with and encourage partnerships between key stakeholders and national and international like-minded think tanks, maintain a state-of-the-art resource centre on good governance and best practices in sustainable and equitable development and actively monitor and evaluate the implementation of programmes and initiatives. Further, it will design strategic and long-term policy and programme frameworks and initiatives, and monitor their progress and their efficacy. Thus, reiterating the government plan to adopt a “Bhartiya Approach” to development. The Aayog will make ‘recommendations’, akin to its predecessor the ‘Planning commission’. The body still plays an advisory role and has no enforcement powers.

“Fluff” and “gimmickry” is what the opposition calls it. CPI(M)’s Sitaram Yechury mocked by calling it “aniti and durniti”. With apprehensions of the centre discriminating against the Non-BJP led states, they say it would help “corporate call the shots” in policymaking. CPI’s Gurudas Dasgupta went to the extent of saying that dismantling Planning commission to form Niti aayog would lead to an unregulated economy.

Do these opposing ideas really find merit in the argument of establishing best developmental mechanisms for India?
While political parties continue to justify how they feel about the government’s way ahead with policy making, the demos seems to be struggling to understand how these decisions affect their lives and what would fulfill their dream of ‘ache din’.
The heated debate on and criticism of government’s actions seems highly unnecessary in a nation which is grappling to create a niche for itself in the developed world. The topic of conversation should ideally be the affect of an action, than of the intent.

Creating a favorable climate for ‘Make In India’ is a humongous task for the government to sail the hard waters, at a time when INR has been slipping on its value and investments seem weak. Every initiative that the government takes has to inevitably focus on paving a path for development with fore-sighted value chain establishments. A mere change in the Name and executive structure of an advisory institution shall not be used to create ripples in the political alleys, thus trying to stall government functionality. Anything but disruptive hindrance in operations shall for sure cause economic losses to the nation and might turn worse than an ‘unregulated economy’.



Fiinovation |

“Fluff” and “gimmickry” is what the opposition calls it"

“Fluff” and “gimmickry” is what the opposition calls it”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s