• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

Committees and commissions -- Take them seriously

R. J. Venkateswaran

THE Expert Group on Railways, under the chairmanship of Dr Rakesh Mohan, in its interim report submitted in March, said: ``Indian Railways is one of the most studied institutions on the planet. For almost every conceivable question that can be asked ther e already exists a comprehensive and rigorous report that lays out the facts and indicates the answers. What is striking, however, is that there has been little action on the many reports it has commissioned''.

Take, for instance, taxation. In 1951, the then Finance Minister, C. D. Deshmukh, set up the Taxation Enquiry Commission, under the chairmanship of John Mathai. Its terms of reference were very comprehensive. The Government decided to associate with the Commission two foreign experts on taxation and public finance. Deshmukh expressed the hope that the Commission would help lay the foundations of a tax system best suited for the development of the economy on a firm and sound basis. In the subsequent year s, more expert committees were set up to study the tax system. But no appropriate action was taken on the basis of their reports.

Mr N. A. Palkhivala said, in a speech in Madras in 1965, that the direct tax laws suffered from five defects which the government had ``resolutely refused to tackle''. These were: Absolute uncertainty; complexity verging on incomprehensibility; excessive and cumulative burdens which make dishonesty immeasurably more rewarding than integrity and hard work and make India the highest taxed nation; injustices inherent in fatuous laws and arbitrary provisions; and an administration marked by petrification of discretion and paralysis to do justice''.

The Committee on Tax Reform, headed by Dr Raja Chelliah, in its report released in 1992, said that the ``Income Tax Department is in shambles, record keeping is abysmal and the statistics on assessees, income assessed and taxes paid are unreliable becaus e of inadequate and varying coverage''.

There are many other crucial areas where the good work done by committees and commissions has not helped the country bring about the necessary improvements. For example, in 1968 the Administrative Reforms Commission produced a competent and comprehensive report on various aspects of the system of administration. In 1984, the Government set up the Economic Administration Reforms Commission, headed by L. K. Jha. But despite the good work done by these bodies and also by several task forces and study group s, the administrative machinery is yet to be properly geared to the needs of development.

Edwin Montague, Secretary of State for India, in the early part of the 20th century, described the administration as ``swathed in red tape and slow in motion''. This is true even today though the need for the administration to function at the highest lev el of efficiency has never been felt so acutely as at present.

In this context, it will be relevant to recall the description of the working of the bureaucracy. Referring to his experience of the first Board meeting of Hindustan Steel, Prakash Tandon wrote in his book, Return to Punjab, thus:

``...Whether the Board met weekly or annually, the agenda papers would still have arrived like the irregular and ever-swelling course of a mountain stream. The agenda itself consisted of papers of varying sizes, quarto, foolscap, double foolscap, some pa ges folded upwards, sideways, and at the corners. I did wonder whether there was not a gamesmanship in it to send the agenda items inversely in their order of importance, placing some important items last on the table, after the meeting. References, cros s-references, correspondences with ministries, etc, were reproduced. Dozens of columns and hundreds of figures filled the statements but never was an attempt made at evaluation, assessment, statement of alternatives or recommendations. Only at the end th ere was the charming euphemism for indecision -- the Board may kindly decide...''

Problems of export promotion and import control have been the subject of study by several expert committees. But most recommendations have not been implemented promptly and properly. It is not surprising, therefore, that India's share in world exports co ntinues to be less than one per cent.

Like its predecessors, the Vajpayee Government also has set up commissions and committees without a careful assessment of the problems they have to study. Last July, it constituted the National Commission on Population to provide an overall guidance to t he national effort at population stabilisation. The Commission consists of some 125 members. The Prime Minister is the Chairman and the Planning Commission Deputy Chairman is its Vice-Chairman. There is no doubt that this Commission will not be able to m ake an impact on any aspect of the population problem. This is yet another instance of the Government resorting to the whimsical appointment of commissions and committees.

We may, however, take some comfort from the fact that even in the US, committees and similar bodies are not always taken seriously. An American industrialist has given the following advice to those who may be called to serve on them: ``Do not say anythin g until the meeting is half over. This will create the impression that you are a wise person. Be as vague as possible. This will avoid irritating others. When in doubt, suggest that a sub-committee be appointed. Be the first to move for adjournment. This will make you popular. This is what every one is waiting for.''

(The author is a Kolkata-based freelance writer.)