With the advent of 4G in India, we hope that [cloud technology] will become more relevant,” Mudholkar says. Digital India is still hard at work to bring the much-desired online infrastructure, and on its agenda is high-speed Internet connectivity.
If and when all these elements come together, India’s manufacturing sector shows massive promise. The seamless collaboration enabled by cloud means more than just added efficiency. As firms increase the efficiency and accuracy of their processes, they produce higher-quality items in India—and as demand for these products explodes, the nation will become more globally competitive.
The government of Nepal
will ensure greater repres-
entation of the Madhesi
people in the local bodies,
said the country’s Deputy
Prime Minister Bimalendra
Nidhi on Tuesday. He added
that elections cannot be
delayed and that the Mad-
hesis will have to show flex-
ibility even as the Madhesi
morcha leaders said that
they are determined to pre-
vent the election process
without the constitutional
amendments.
BRICS nations will soon con- sider a proposal to frame ‘guiding principles’ for in- vestment policymaking to boost investment flows into Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa as well as take steps to promote e- commerce among the five leading emerging econom- ies.
In a break with social customs on widowhood, an NGO in Telangana’s Warangal district arranged an ‘empowerment programme’ at which ‘sindoor’ was applied to the forehead of widows by women local body representatives and activists. The NGO, Bala Vikasa, wanted to send out a message against the stigma of applying ‘sindoor’—the vermilion mark—and also presented flowers to be worn by the widows. The ‘empowerment awareness programme’ held in Karimnagar on Saturday was attended by the constituency MP, B Vinod Kumar, Zilla Parishad chairperson Tula Uma
BRICS nations will soon con- sider a proposal to frame ‘guiding principles’ for in- vestment policymaking to boost investment flows into Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa as well as take steps to promote e- commerce among the five leading emerging econom- ies.
In a break with social customs on widowhood, an NGO in Telangana’s Warangal district arranged an ‘empowerment programme’ at which ‘sindoor’ was applied to the forehead of widows by women local body representatives and activists. The NGO, Bala Vikasa, wanted to send out a message against the stigma of applying ‘sindoor’—the vermilion mark—and also presented flowers to be worn by the widows. The ‘empowerment awareness programme’ held in Karimnagar on Saturday was attended by the constituency MP, B Vinod Kumar, Zilla Parishad chairperson Tula Uma
vIn a bid to benefit small
farmers in India and glob-
ally, Indian Council of Agri-
cultural Research (ICAR)
and the International
Crops Research Institute
for the Semi-Arid Tropics
(ICRISAT) would work to-
gether on crop improve-
ment and agronomy pro-
grammes for grain legumes
and dryland cereals.
Divorce cases may be fought on video
in future rather than in crowded
courtrooms amidst strangers.
Mr. Tillerson’s tour comes
after a missile launch last
week that Pyongyang de-
scribed as a drill for an at-
tack on U.S. bases in Japan.
The U.S. has 28,000 troops
stationed in South Korea to
defend it from the North, but
the capital Seoul is within
range of Pyongyang’s artil-
lery and analysts believe any
conflict could risk rapid es-
calation and heavy casual-
ties.
End of strategic patience
Even so, Mr. Tillerson an- nounced the end of United States’ “strategic patience” — the stance of the previous
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwDvecljY6w
End of strategic patience
Even so, Mr. Tillerson an- nounced the end of United States’ “strategic patience” — the stance of the previous
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwDvecljY6w
The legal challenge of the Congress in the Supreme Court against the BJP’s claim to form the government in Goa brings to fore a vacuum in the Constitution. In the case of a hung legislature, is the Governor bound to follow the constitutional convention to call upon the single largest party to form the government and prove its majority in the House? Or, as the court endorsed on Wednesday, can a political rival cobble together a post-poll alliance to form a majority that overcomes the single largest party and form the government?
The Manohar Parrikar government came to power on a first-come-first-appointed basis despite the fact that the BJP came second in the Assembly elections. The Governor did not consult the single largest party, the Congress, before giving Mr. Parrikar the green signal.
The SC, in turn, said the Congress did wrong by not staking its claim to form the government. It had shown no proof to the Governor that it had the requisite numbers to prove a majority in the House. The debacle exposes the fact that there are no specific guidelines in the Constitution on who the Governor should invite to form a government in a State where rival parties with narrow majorities engage in a face-off.
The constitutional convention of inviting the single largest party in the case of a fractured mandate has been outlined by the Sarkaria Commission recommendations, which were affirmed by a Constitution Bench of the SC in Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India in 2005.
The Commission report specifically dealt with the situation where no single party obtained absolute majority. It provided the order of preference the Governor should follow in selecting a Chief Minister in such a fluid situation: (1) An alliance of parties that was formed prior to the elections. (2) The single largest party staking a claim to form the government with the support of others, including independents. (3) A post-electoral coalition of parties, with all the partners in the coalition joining the government. (4) A post-electoral alliance of parties, with some of the parties in the alliance forming a government and the remaining parties, including independents, supporting the government from outside.
It is clear that the leader of the party which has an absolute majority in the Assembly should be called upon by the Governor to form a government. However, if there is a fractured mandate, then the Commission recommends an elaborate step-by-step approach and has further emphasised that the Governor should select a leader who, in his/her judgement, is most likely to command a majority i
Beyond the vote
The Dutch election result is a boost for parties facing populist rivals elsewhere in Europe
Fears that the tide of populism would sweep relent- lessly across Europe have been somewhat belied by the result of the election in the Netherlands. Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) retained its primacy by winning 33 seats, ahead of Geert Wilders’s anti-European Union, anti-Islam and anti-migrant far- right Party for Freedom (PVV). The proportional rep- resentation system, with 28 parties competing for 150 seats in the lower House of a bicameral legislature, means that a coalition government is inevitable. Until a week or so before the elections, Mr. Wilders was leading the opinion polls, slipping behind Mr. Rutte only in the very last stretch. The Prime Minister’s pre-election gains have now translated into an electoral victory. This is being attributed in part to his tough stand against the Turkish government’s attempts to campaign in the Netherlands for its President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s upcoming referendum to consolidate power. The spec- tacle of clashes between the police and people of Turk- ish origin in Rotterdam, following bans on Turkish min- isters addressing crowds, could have also worked in favour of Mr. Wilders, who argues that migrants and Muslims do not it into Dutch society. Mr. Wilders, who wants to ban the Koran, ‘de-Islamise’ the Netherlands, and pull out of the EU, has indicated the country has not seen the last of him. His warning must be taken seri- ously: the PVV won 20 seats, ive more than last time.
The most notable gains on Wednesday, however, were for pro-EU parties, the liberal D66 and the Green- Left, led by 30-year-old Jesse Klaver who is pro-refugee, opposes populism and speaks of tolerance and em- pathy. This may have cost the PvdA (Labour) party, which sufered a precipitous decline in seats from 38 to nine, losing voters to other parties on the left. Overall, the election results have, at least for now, stemmed the growth of populism and given the EU a much-needed shot in the arm. The irst task for Mr. Rutte will be to stitch together a coalition, which is likely to consist of other centrist parties. The government will then have to navigate what is a turbulent period in Europe. This will involve protecting the rights of refugees and treating those displaced with compassion and respect, while at the same time addressing the legitimate concerns and needs of those who have been hit by austerity and are feeling left behind by globalisation. It will require hav- ing meaningful and fair conversations about immigrant integration and Dutch values without giving in to Is- lamophobia and the scapegoating of minorities. In this, Mr. Rutte and his partners will be assisted by the eco- nomy, which is growing at a respectable 2%, and by the fact that the far right in France and Germany — which go to the polls this year — will not ind it easy to capitalise
sukhoi agreement with india
The Dutch election result is a boost for parties facing populist rivals elsewhere in Europe
Fears that the tide of populism would sweep relent- lessly across Europe have been somewhat belied by the result of the election in the Netherlands. Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) retained its primacy by winning 33 seats, ahead of Geert Wilders’s anti-European Union, anti-Islam and anti-migrant far- right Party for Freedom (PVV). The proportional rep- resentation system, with 28 parties competing for 150 seats in the lower House of a bicameral legislature, means that a coalition government is inevitable. Until a week or so before the elections, Mr. Wilders was leading the opinion polls, slipping behind Mr. Rutte only in the very last stretch. The Prime Minister’s pre-election gains have now translated into an electoral victory. This is being attributed in part to his tough stand against the Turkish government’s attempts to campaign in the Netherlands for its President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s upcoming referendum to consolidate power. The spec- tacle of clashes between the police and people of Turk- ish origin in Rotterdam, following bans on Turkish min- isters addressing crowds, could have also worked in favour of Mr. Wilders, who argues that migrants and Muslims do not it into Dutch society. Mr. Wilders, who wants to ban the Koran, ‘de-Islamise’ the Netherlands, and pull out of the EU, has indicated the country has not seen the last of him. His warning must be taken seri- ously: the PVV won 20 seats, ive more than last time.
The most notable gains on Wednesday, however, were for pro-EU parties, the liberal D66 and the Green- Left, led by 30-year-old Jesse Klaver who is pro-refugee, opposes populism and speaks of tolerance and em- pathy. This may have cost the PvdA (Labour) party, which sufered a precipitous decline in seats from 38 to nine, losing voters to other parties on the left. Overall, the election results have, at least for now, stemmed the growth of populism and given the EU a much-needed shot in the arm. The irst task for Mr. Rutte will be to stitch together a coalition, which is likely to consist of other centrist parties. The government will then have to navigate what is a turbulent period in Europe. This will involve protecting the rights of refugees and treating those displaced with compassion and respect, while at the same time addressing the legitimate concerns and needs of those who have been hit by austerity and are feeling left behind by globalisation. It will require hav- ing meaningful and fair conversations about immigrant integration and Dutch values without giving in to Is- lamophobia and the scapegoating of minorities. In this, Mr. Rutte and his partners will be assisted by the eco- nomy, which is growing at a respectable 2%, and by the fact that the far right in France and Germany — which go to the polls this year — will not ind it easy to capitalise
sukhoi agreement with india
An unedited mutation
While it might appear that we’ve cured ourselves of our eugenic baggage, science soldiers on
Jacob Koshy
Whenever there’s progress in the ield of genetics, there’s cause for worry. For some years now, these mixed feelings are being evoked by a gene-altering technology called CRISPR (clustered regularly inter- spaced short palindromic repeats),
which refers to a suite of gene-editing techniques. It can be used to target speciic stretches of genetic code and to edit DNA at precise locations, permanently modify genes in living cells and organisms, and possibly correct disease-causing mutations. So far, all of the CRISPR-related research is fo- cussed on plants, animals and lifeforms far removed from the human universe. Last week, a team from China reported in- triguing results from CRISPR-modiied human embryos.
According to the New Scientist, the team has corrected ge- netic mutations in a few cells in three normal human embryos using CRISPR. Previous attempts have always been on abnor- mal human embryos and success rates (typically less than 10%) were too low to be viable. In this study, normal embryos, tweaked by deleterious mutations introduced by genetically diseased sperm, were corrected. The numbers involved are still low, but the fact that normal embryos seemed to be more receptive to gene-editing is a queasily exciting development.
China should take a fresh look at ties with India: Report post up win of bjp
While it might appear that we’ve cured ourselves of our eugenic baggage, science soldiers on
Jacob Koshy
Whenever there’s progress in the ield of genetics, there’s cause for worry. For some years now, these mixed feelings are being evoked by a gene-altering technology called CRISPR (clustered regularly inter- spaced short palindromic repeats),
which refers to a suite of gene-editing techniques. It can be used to target speciic stretches of genetic code and to edit DNA at precise locations, permanently modify genes in living cells and organisms, and possibly correct disease-causing mutations. So far, all of the CRISPR-related research is fo- cussed on plants, animals and lifeforms far removed from the human universe. Last week, a team from China reported in- triguing results from CRISPR-modiied human embryos.
According to the New Scientist, the team has corrected ge- netic mutations in a few cells in three normal human embryos using CRISPR. Previous attempts have always been on abnor- mal human embryos and success rates (typically less than 10%) were too low to be viable. In this study, normal embryos, tweaked by deleterious mutations introduced by genetically diseased sperm, were corrected. The numbers involved are still low, but the fact that normal embryos seemed to be more receptive to gene-editing is a queasily exciting development.
China should take a fresh look at ties with India: Report post up win of bjp
A rethink may also be required on India’s own neighbourhood policy. In September last year, the government exerted considerable heft with each of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) countries to cancel a summit in Pakistan after the Uri attacks. The move was a part of India’s plan to “isolate” Pakistan until it takes action on terror. The truth is that the plan worked for the SAARC summit, but not beyond that, in part because of Pakistan’s involvement with China and the B&R initiative, which has already been signed on to by Afghanistan, Maldives, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh (Nepal is expected to join soon). Even Afghanistan and Bangladesh, which suffer the most from terrorism emanating from Pakistan, will inevitably be drawn into the B&R group of countries more and more for connectivity and trade, more so in the absence of SAARC. Significantly, it is the Afghanistan leadership that has come out most strongly on the need for India to find its way into the B&R. Both President Ashraf Ghani and former President Hamid Karzai, on visits to India in the past few months, have stressed the importance of connecting India to Central Asia via Afghanistan, joining a “strategic arc” of countries from Iran to Russia and China. These countries, including Iran, Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan, are connecting to each other via B&R through Iran’s North-South corridor, CPEC and other routes already in place, while India’s plans for Chabahar port are still to get off the ground. “Economically, Afghanistan has become a part of Central Asia,” Mr. Ghani has said. Clearly, Afghanistan’s desire to reduce its dependence on Pakistan trade will eventually cut it off from all of South Asia.
Contours of a compromise
If China so wishes, it could still make amends by using the Afghan desire to remain connected by putting the CPEC on an alternate route: to Afghanistan and not PoK, connecting it to the Silk Route envisaged. This would not only build a bigger arc for the B&R route, it would sidestep India’s concerns over sovereignty, and leave the door open for it to join the project on its eastern frontiers via BCIM or to even just be an observer. The issue of specific projects in PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan would remain, but they could be dealt with in the manner the Chinese funding of the Karakoram
takes money to make money. CSIR-Tech, the commercialisation arm of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), realised this the hard way when it had to shut down its operations for lack of funds. CSIR has filed more than 13,000 patents — 4,500 in India and 8,800 abroad — at a cost of ₹50 crore over the last three years. Across years, that’s a lot of taxpayers’ money, which in turn means that the closing of CSIR-Tech is a tacit admission that its work has been an expensive mistake — a mistake that we tax-paying citizens have paid for.
Recently, CSIR’s Director-General Girish Sahni claimed that most of CSIR’s patents were “bio-data patents”, filed solely to enhance the value of a scientist’s resume and that the extensive expenditure of public funds spent in filing and maintaining patents was unviable. CSIR claims to have licensed a percentage of its patents, but has so far failed to show any revenue earned from the licences. This compulsive hoarding of patents has come at a huge cost. If CSIR-Tech was privately run, it would have been shut down long ago. Acquiring Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) comes out of our blind adherence to the idea of patenting as an index of innovation. The private sector commercialises patents through the licensing of technology and the sale of patented products to recover the money spent in R&D. But when the funds for R&D come from public sources, mimicking the private sector may not be the best option.
Patents and moral hazard
While it’s true that it costs lakhs of rupees to get a patent in India, government-funded research organisations are likely to spend more money on patents so long as they are not asked to bear the risk. Reckless filing of patents using public funds may be explained by the economic concept of moral hazard. According to economist Paul Krugman, it happens in “any situation in which one person makes the decision about how much risk to take, while someone else bears the cost if things go badly”. In the case of public-funded research, the reckless filing of patents without due diligence results from the moral hazard of the government bearing the risk of patents that don’t generate revenue. In the insurance sector, moral hazard refers to the loss-increasing behaviour of the insured who acts recklessly when the loss is covered by another. Insurance companies check moral hazard by introducing copayment from the insured. Dr. Sahni’s statement that CSIR laboratories need to bear 25% of expenses for their patents acknowledges the moral hazard.
The National IPR Policy released last year does not offer any guideline on distinguishing IPR generated using public funds from private ones — it views every IPR with private objectives by insisting on commercialisation. Dissemination of technology to the masses, participation in nation-building and creating public goods are rarely objectives that drive the private sector. The IPR policy of some publicly-funded research institutions allows for 30-70% of the income generated through the commercialisation of the patent to be shared with the creators of the invention, i.e., scientists and professors on the payroll of the government. Such a policy could promote private aggrandisement and may work against public interest. In contrast, the IPR policy of private companies does not allow for a payback on the share of royalties earned by patents.
Possible solution
The fate of CSIR-Tech is proof that the current model of commercialisation does not work with respect to publicly-funded research. So, how do we ensure that public-funded research reaches the masses and check the excessive filing of patents without due diligence? A possible solution to preserve the objective of publicly funded research is to devise an IPR policy wherein patents are initially offered on an open royalty-free licence to start-ups. Once start-ups commercialise the inventions successfully, the royalty-free licence could be converted into a revenue-sharing model.
It is predominantly taxpayers’ money that goes into public-funded research. When research is commercialised by private entities, it tends to be sold back to the public at a price. America is in the midst of such a conundrum, where talks are going on of granting French pharmaceutical company Sanofi exclusive licence for the drug against the Zika virus — a drug which has already cost the American exchequer $43 million in R&D. Granting Sanofi this would defeat the purpose of public funds expended on research as the company would charge the American public again for the life-saving drug.
Putting granted patents on an open licence can be testimony to the commercial viability of the things we are patenting using public money. Not only would it bring a sense of accountability to the managers who run the system but it would also open up publicly-funded research to a whole lot of people, especially start-ups, who can now test, verify, work and put the patented technology into the market.
Cabinet posts would not be limited to those who are electable rather than those who are able. At the end of a fixed period of time — say the same five years we currently accord to our Lok Sabha — the public would be able to judge the individual on performance in improving the lives of Indians, rather than on political skill at keeping a government in office.
The fear that an elected President could become a Caesar is ill-founded since the President’s power would be balanced by directly elected chief executives in the States. In any case, the Emergency demonstrated that even a parliamentary system can be distorted to permit autocratic rule. Dictatorship is not the result of a particular type of governmental system.
Direct accountability
Indeed, the President would have to work with Parliament to get his budget through or to pass specific Bills. India’s fragmented polity, with dozens of political parties in the fray, makes a U.S.-style two-party gridlock in Parliament impossible. An Indian presidency, instead of facing a monolithic opposition, would have the opportunity to build issue-based coalitions on different issues, mobilising different temporary alliances of different smaller parties from one policy to the next – the opposite of the dictatorial steamroller some fear a presidential system could produce.
Any politician with aspirations to rule India as President will have to win the support of people beyond his or her home turf; he or she will have to reach out to different groups, interests, and minorities. And since the directly elected President will not have coalition partners to blame for his or her inaction, a presidential term will have to be justified in terms of results, and accountability will be direct and personal.
problem of direct accountability can be mentioned in withdrawal of mayor type system in state like HP and rajasthan
To tackle the second aspect first, unless the Supreme Court changes its mind, any such amendment would violate the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution as was decided with, and since, the Kesavnanda Bharti case. There is no way to get around this unless the Supreme Court now takes a wholly different view.
No comments:
Post a Comment