Let Rural Pragmatism Decide

Editorial:
The Sikkim Bhraman of the Chief Minister is a welcome move. Of course, work in government department’s suffers when the CM takes the Government to the people, but that should hardly be a reason for complaint since government offices were never models of efficient management even when the Secretaries were in station. Detractors of the government also snigger at the effort, alleging it to be politicking and contending that attendance was thin. Such comments are expected and hardly surprising, and while they are fine to keep some political conversation going, it should not detract from the possibilities that a Chief Minister undertaking a 40-day village-to-village tour of a State can achieve in promoting rural pragmatism to the primacy it deserves in rural development planning.
Many announcements have been made in the course of the 31 days of touring that the CM has completed, and one of the most substantial has been his direction to concerned engineers and officials to explain all projects at Gram Sabhas before they are initiated. This turns bureaucratic attitudes on its head. From a situation where Gram Sabhas are ‘guided’ by district authorities, one is looking at a situation where departmental planning will be whetted by people at the grassroots level. While the CM has not specified whether these Gram Sabha briefings will be informational or consultational in nature, it is obvious that projections which are not rooted in ground realities will be exposed by the people and more pragmatic options introduced to nuance rural development in Sikkim. Should such consultations be made the norm officially, the Gram Sabhas will become more meaningful forums and attendance will improve. The other short-coming of planning in Sikkim, often rued by the CM in his recent addresses, of projects being contractor-driven rather than need-driven, will also get resolved with such an initiative. Department’s here are guilty of not taking the people into confidence even as they project works as being undertaken for their benefit, and the increasing litter of PMGSY roads causing more hardships than the benefit of connectivity are one example of it. Obviously, if a Gram Sabha is informed in advance about the alignment of such a road, they will ensure a redrawing of the road if it bulldozes through a water source. Ditto for works which get delayed endlessly, but are not complained against because the people did not know that it has been sanctioned. The fact that the CM has directed that people be briefed in advance even about plantation drives, with complete details like the number and kind of saplings to be planted, apart from serving an informational need, will also guarantee better monitoring and evaluation. What is more, such an approach reiterates that people are more significant than just recipients of sops.
Admittedly, one of the better initiatives of the recent years has been the revitalisation of panchayati raj institutions in the country. One says revitalisation because village-level bodies were always effective and progressive in the country until the British centralised administration and decision-making and Independent India continued with the practise. These institutions lost important centuries which has compromised their relevance and effectiveness. In Sikkim’s case, damage has also been caused by the regressive tendencies which have not allowed the village level organisations to evolve and keep pace with time. A mend is hopefully afoot now. It is still early days though, which is perhaps why even though the policy has changed and the political will expressed, the mai-baap attitude continues on the ground. It is offensive to think that mindsets trained in urban settings can teach anything to people groomed on the practicality of rural pragmatism. It is wrong for Gangtok, for example, to decide what plants Damthang should plant. The people there will know which foliage makes sense and which species has dwindled in their neighbourhood forests. Left to planners too distant from the beneficiaries, they will probably sanction aromatic plants which make no sense to the area when what the people need is probably something that also offers fodder or firewood. The move to give villages an advisory role and a stronger voice will iron out the inconsistencies of what may be well-intentioned, but are essentially poorly informed initiatives. The one and only focus of the powers-that-be and the powers-that-execute should be to convince the villages that they are free to agree, dissent, criticise and refuse not only what has been decided for them, but also what they have commissioned themselves. They might need awareness programmes on how to maintain books, but what they need more is reassurance that the Social Audit & Vigilance Committees that every panchayat should have, can function freely and effectively. Everything else – proper planning, proper gram sabhas, transparency and exact book keeping – will automatically fall in place.