This Pandemic Should Help the Govt Acknowledge the Crucial Role NGOs Play

While the government seems to appreciate the potential of NGOs in addressing the immediate aftermath of the lockdown, the need is to foster a complementary and collaborative engagement which looks far beyond.

“A crisis is the sum of intuition and blind spots, a blend of facts noted and facts ignored.” This observation made by Michael Crichton, an American author, a few decades ago could not have been more relevant to our rulers at present.

As realisation of the imminent threat posed by the COVID-19 pandemic sank in, the government took some concrete steps focusing on social distancing. The nationwide three-week lockdown was key among them.

In the aftermath of the lockdown, the prime minister reached out to NGOs. Speaking through a video link on March 30, Narendra Modi called on the NGOs to help the government during the lockdown by providing basic necessities to the underprivileged, supplying medical and protective gear, and assisting with awareness campaigns on social distancing. Exactly a week later on April 6, NITI Aayog, the think-tank of the Union government, wrote to over 90,000 NGOs, industry associations and international organisations seeking their assistance in delivering services to the poor and health and community workers to combat the pandemic.

The NGOs, and civil society in general, had already started reaching out to people who were facing crises. Even the informal groups which had come together during the recent agitation against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and National Register of Citizens shifted their focus and started helping the poor and the needy.

The outreach by the highest echelons of power, though understandable in the face of a crisis, is hugely at variance with the government’s policy of clamping down on NGOs. India has witnessed a fast-shrinking civic space and intolerance towards any kind of criticism of government policies and decisions. The last decade, regardless of the ruling dispensation at the Centre, has seen a host of adverse actions aimed at curtailing NGOs’ operations and whatever autonomy they had.

From strictures introduced through revisions of the Foreign Contributions (Regulation) Act in 2010 to the cancellation of FCRA licenses of over 20,000 NGOs in 2018 to the recent amendment to the laws governing tax exemption to NGOs thereby forcing them to register afresh every five years, the list is long and every blow more painful than the previous one.

Also read: How Can India Revive Its Philanthropic Heritage?

It is no one’s case that reasonable regulations on NGOs should not be introduced, and laws should not be implemented to address issues of their violation. But opposition to the very idea of NGOs based on the ruling dispensation’s ideology, and considering their activities ‘detrimental’ to the national interest, is certainly adversarial to the idea of a republic and the interests of its people.

An article by a serving Indian Police Service officer of additional director general rank published in the RSS mouthpiece Organiser in January this year, for instance, advocates for a complete ban on foreign funding for NGOs regardless of their purpose. It recommends that as an exception, only Overseas Citizens of India should be allowed to donate to Indian NGOs for the purpose of the preservation and study of ancient Indian texts and traditional knowledge. This is only one example of the onslaught on NGOs, with government sanction.

While foreign funding is not the only source of money for NGOs, it does constitute a substantive part of it, considering India’s constrained capacity for social sector spending on account of a low tax-to-GDP ratio of only 17 (China’s is 24, South Africa’s 28, Russia’s 30 and Brazil’s 35) and very small corporate social responsibility contribution to social sectors.

The Organiser article cites total foreign funding of over Rs 2 lakh crore during the last two decades. On the other hand, the Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) had mentioned in its report (2013) that on average, around Rs 950 core were provided as grant to NGOs from both Union and state governments for the period from 2002-03 to 2008-09. Assuming, the quantum of funding remained similar over the next decade also, it would roughly amount to around Rs 20,000 crore government funding to NGOs during the last two decades, which is only about 10% of the foreign funding received by NGOs during this period.

The first pan-India exercise to enumerate NGOs and gather information about them was carried out in 2015 not by a social organisation but by the federal investigator, Central Bureau of Investigation, on the orders of the Supreme Court to assess their compliance to the regulations governing NGOs in India. The CBI reported at least 3.1 million NGOs registered across all the states and UTs in India under the Societies Registration Act. The number has since increased to over 3.4 million.

Also read: ‘I Was Blacklisted and Deported For My NGO Activities’

NGOs in India play a wide range of roles including but not limited to service delivery, welfare works for community development, promoting democracy, human rights, equitable governance and citizens’ participation etc. In view of the limited fiscal space available to the government, its social sector spending remains highly inadequate.

The effects of inadequate social sector provisioning are exacerbated by the erosion of safety nets at the community level. Lack of childcare arrangements for working women, especially those in low-income groups, and decline of elderly care in families across different income groups are two examples. In such a situation, the contribution of NGOs, to marginalised sections of society in particular, assumes significance.

Coming back to the COVID-19 crisis, our response will have to be both immediate as well as long term. While the government seems to appreciate the potential of NGOs in addressing the immediate aftermath of the lockdown, the need is to foster a complementary and collaborative engagement which looks far beyond. Support in expansion of facilities and capacity in the health sector, as well as frontline service providers like ASHA, ANM and AWW etc., are obvious areas of collaboration in the medium and long run.

There are other numerous less obvious yet very crucial spheres where NGOs can play a role to enhance the effectiveness of the government’s response. For example, as the government re-prioritises its spending to address the economic impact of the crisis, the ministries and departments for marginalised communities and for social sectors such as women and children, social justice, tribal welfare, water and sanitation and education etc. will be best placed to benefit from the research-based advocacy of NGOs about protecting budget allocation for the focus groups/areas of these ministries/departments.

NGOs can also help in bridging the gaps in safety nets affecting migrant labourers, rural and urban poor as well as most marginalised communities like sex workers and transgender people etc. The lurking danger of an environmental disaster due to climate change further necessitates the need for effective and sustainable collaboration between government and NGOs. Not only that, NGOs have the human resources, expertise and experience in these areas, the re-prioritisation of international donors for addressing the aftermath of the crisis gives them the leverage to  bring some additional funds into the country, which is the need of the hour.

Also read: Offensive Against NGOs, Rights Advocates is Intended to Stifle Criticism

However, for all this to materialise, an environment of mutual trust and respect is absolutely necessary. It can be achieved by taking a few confidence-building measures like withdrawing the newly introduced rule of NGOs having to register afresh for IT exemption every five years, which is scheduled to come into effect from June 2020.

These small measures have no consequence for the government, nor do they have any financial implications. Yet they are likely have a tremendous effect by signalling the government’s shift in attitude towards NGOs. Appreciating NGOs’ work, regardless of their approval or criticism of the government, should be the corner stone of this shift.

Asadullah works with the Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability. He can be reached at asad@cbgaindia.org.

India Must Focus on Quality Education as a Solution to Sexual Violence

Rather than relying on punitive measures as a quick-fix solution, the government must work on bringing about social transformation, a role that education can play.

The recent wave of sexual violence reported from across the country – against women in general and little girls in particular – is not only disturbing but also thought-provoking. The response of the civil society, media and government towards these deplorable instances has largely been ad hoc and reactionary, both in terms of form and substance. There has been a tendency to discuss sexual violence against women only after a particularly gruesome incident or the reporting of a series of such incidents. After that, the debate slowly fades away.

By completely disregarding the extensive sexual violence perpetrated against women on a daily basis, we obstruct the process of building a narrative around this malaise. As for the substance of the debate, it is always reactionary. The possible ‘solutions’ to the ‘problem’ emerging from the debate are largely confined to: public execution of the culprit, a ‘new tougher law’, better implementation of the existing laws, improved measures for security, encouraging women to speak up against abuse and social transformation – shedding patriarchy and creating a culture of respecting women. While a few of these ‘solutions’ are simply outrageous, others might be effective in varying degrees.

The government, while conveniently and selectively buying people’s arguments, usually comes up with ‘newer’ or ‘tougher laws’ to prosecute sexual offences against women and children. Notwithstanding the evidence that deterrence out of fear of retribution is limited, the provision of punitive measures besides being ‘visible’ and ‘quick action’ is much easier to introduce than a cultural shift or an attitude transformation which might actually offer a lasting solution.

Role of school education

The big question, however, is how to initiate and accomplish this cultural shift and attitude transformation. It is hugely surprising that the role of school education is rarely taken into account while addressing this question. The debate on ensuring quality education these days never goes beyond learning levels, student scores in literacy and numeracy, skill acquisition or competency development and percentage of marks scored.

One might wonder whether it is purely idealistic or outrightly foolish to expect quality education to help society address issues like patriarchy, discrimination against social groups who are perceived vulnerable and, above all, violence. If the answer is yes, then how are we going to achieve cultural transformation or attitude change to form a society which rejects patriarchy, discrimination and violence, particularly, sexual violence against women? If the answer is no, then why is the role of education not being considered as one of the measures to effectively and sustainably address these issues? Why the outcomes for quality education being pushed by the government through its different institutions not refer to the attitudinal change and social transformation with regard to these very serious issues an outcome as well?

Interestingly, India’s National Policy on Education (NPE), 1968 does clearly assign to education the role of social transformation. It states ‘… Education has an acculturating role. It refines sensitivities and perceptions that contribute to national cohesion, a scientific temper and independence of mind and spirit”. (Emphasis added)

In fact, the perspective of Indian academics has been even more lucid much before the NPE. Radha Krishnan (whose birth anniversary is celebrated as Teachers Day) for instance, puts in perspective the educational outcome in terms of knowledge, skill and social transformation. He states:

“The aim of education is not the acquisition of information although important, or acquisition of technical skills, though essential in modern society, but the development of that bent of mind, that attitude of reason, that spirit of democracy which will make us responsible citizens”.

Key issues missing in the discourse on quality education

Evidently, government’s agenda for quality education is neither in policy perspective nor does it take into account prevailing social realities giving rise to violence, particularly, sexual violence against women. The short-term outcome-focused approach to quality education that has little regard for critical enablers of quality in terms of content and process i.e. curriculum and pedagogy, conveniently ignores the National Curriculum Framework, NCF (2005).

The NCF underscores the need to view the representation of knowledge in textbooks and other materials from the larger perspective of the challenges facing humanity and the nation. It notes that no subject in the school curriculum can stay aloof from these larger concerns, and therefore the selection of knowledge proposed to be included in each subject area requires careful examination in terms of socio-economic and cultural conditions and goals.

A little less than one-third of our total population is in the schooling stage, spending a significant portion of their time every day on learning alone. Credit: José Morcillo Valenciano/Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

Despite the NCF being endorsed under the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, curricular reforms (which include reforms in; curriculum, textual material, teaching – learning processes and assessment of pupils’ learning) to address the issues of patriarchy, discrimination, intolerance and violence do not find mention in the discourse on quality education.

Obstacles facing quality education

Myopic vision is not the only challenge between us and quality education, poor institutional capacity and a serious shortage of public resource are equally overwhelming obstacles. A major reason for the absence of curricular reforms from the discourse on quality education is government’s complete dependence for public provisioning of school education on schematic interventions like the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan. These schemes focus at best on medium-term objectives. They have little scope and even lesser funds for interventions to improve curriculum and pedagogy beyond poorly funded, low-quality teacher training.

On the other hand, the institutional capacity for curriculum and pedagogy-related research and development that plays a critical role in curricular reform has either waned or has failed to come up on account of poor planning and perennially meagre public provisioning. The institutional capacity has been significantly inadequate at the national and state levels (NCERT, NCTE and SCERTs) whereas, at the district level, it is almost extinct in most places.

The District Institute of Education and Training (DIET), the sole institution for curriculum and pedagogic research and training at the district level, is barely surviving. Since most districts have several thousand teachers working in hundreds of government schools, therefore, DIETs’ crucial role in addressing the need for academic support, guidance and curricular development is absolutely crucial. Unfortunately, DIETs are in no position to fulfill this huge obligation. Of the 700 odd districts in the country, over a hundred districts have no DIET. Around 600 DIETs which are functional in as many districts have a little less than 50% vacancy in their academic (faculty) positions.

The salary cost against the filled academic posts is shared between Centre and states in 60:40 ratio under the Central government-sponsored Teacher Education (TE) scheme. The outlays (Centre plus states share) for the last many years have remained at around Rs 700 crore, which is barely enough to support the salary component of filled up academic positions. This leaves virtually no funds for research, development and programme work. The TE scheme with well above 90% expenditure over the last several years is a classic evidence refuting government’s claim that public resource allocation for social sector is adequate and the problem lies with expenditure efficiency alone.

Coming back to the issue of sexual violence against women and its sustainable solution, the discourse must inform at least three points of engagement for civil society and polity, including – sexual violence against women cannot be addressed by legal and security measures alone, social transformation through quality education is a more comprehensive and sustainable solution; present discourse on quality education is short-sighted besides being oblivious to prevailing social realities including sexual violence against women, which is out of sync with India’s policy perspective on quality education; and institutional capacity and public resources required to address these issues through quality education including curricular reforms in line with our policies, are highly inadequate.

The big question is whether we as a society sense the need, the urgency and the opportunity to demand through popular mobilisation in an election year a commitment from the political dispensation to address these issues, comprehensively and sustainably. If we could do this, it will be a good first step in a long journey.

The question assumes significance as a little less than one-third of our total population is in the schooling stage, spending a significant portion of their time every day on learning alone. This population, nearly half of it being women, would exercise maximum influence on social and political discourse in the country over the next half a century at least – good enough a future, quality education must envision and plan for.

Asadullah is with Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability (CBGA), New Delhi. His work has focused on issues of school education for more than 15 years. He can be reached at asadullah@cbgaindia.org. Views expressed are personal.