A blog about Policy

Montek Singh Alhuwalia is right on the money,

Stop subsidising higher education and increase the fees. That is the recipe of Montek Singh Alhuwalia to improve the quality of education. The Deputy Chairman of India’s Planning Commission was addressing students at the University of Mumbai’s 150th convocation ceremony on Sunday.[link]

In a country which is unable to provide quality primary education to millions of kids, subsidizing higher education makes no sense at all. Unfortunately, there is a strong sense of entitlement attached to higher education-somehow the government is obliged to provide for college education. As with all subsidies, it has acquired a logic of it’s own and it is extremely difficult to force this change.

There is of course a second, equally strong argument for increasing fees. Only this will allow the institutions to have at least some degree of autonomy so that they can chart their policies independent of day to day political interference. Also, this would help them  expand facilities and truly become world class institutions. In the current set up, U.G.C funding is just about enough to pay the non-plan expenditure, mainly salaries. This ensures that the vociferous unions keep their mouth shut. The capital demands which are essential for the growth of the institutions are largely unmet.

Interestingly enough, Planning Commission has suggested that money allocated to education be halved, so how will government attempt to fund ambitious primary education projects?

The government may talk of its commitment to elementary education, but when it comes to walking the talk, it turns to you and me. It is likely that in the next fiscal, a larger portion of government spending on elementary education will be met by the 2% education cess.[link]

There is a much better way. As Sam Pitroda recently said, privatize B.S.N.L. This alone will net the government close to 80,000 crores.

What is the government doing in telecom industry anyway?

National Knowledge Commission has recommended allowing foreign universities to set shop in India.

Foreign educational institutions should be allowed in with policies that ensure that “there is an incentive for good institutions and a disincentive for sub-standard institutions to come to India”. It also clearly proposes that a “level-playing field must be ensured and all rules that apply to domestic institutions should also be applicable to foreign institutions. (emphasis mine)[link]

While the proposal to allow foreign universities must be welcomed, the devil lies in the fine print. The universities would be allowed only if they follow ‘all domestic rules’. This would include, apart from being forced to follow government reservation mandates, regulations on the levels of fees they can charge. It is open to question whether top foreign universities would be interested in opening campuses if they are forced to deal with the legendary Indian bureaucracy and constant interference from the University Grants Commission. The NKC, to it’s credit has recommended setting up a Independent Regulatory Authority for Higher Education(IRAHE) to take away the regulatory powers from the Human Resources Development Ministry. This proposal would meet strong resistance from the mandarins of the ministry and it remains to be seen if the Prime Minister can summon enough courage to take them on.

Interestingly enough, on the same day the NKC submitted it’s report to the government, the Vice Chairman of the commission, Dr. P.M Bhargava came out strongly against the entry of foreign universities.

The move to invite foreign universities to offer education in India today came under attack from Vice Chairman of National Knowledge Commission P M Bhargava who said it would lead to commercialization of higher education.”This move is to commodities education. Education is not at all a commodity,” …”No good university will come. The second grade and third grade university will come and make profits in the name of quality education,” he told a news agency later.[link]

Dr. Bhargava doesn’t explain why only second or third grade university would be come. Is it because of the policies his commission has recommended?

Dr. Bhargava’s whole premise of commercialization of higher education is, to put it mildly, ridiculous. By the commission own estimates, only 7% of Indians have access to higher education-how many of those are sufficiently equipped for today’s knowledge economy is another matter altogether. The government which cites lack of funds as reason for not being able to guarantee primary education should surely not invest more in higher education, especially when there are private parties willing to share the burden. And it’s not as if government own institutions are doing a stellar job . Yes, there are enough private institutions which are nothing more than ‘educational shops’. But they are merely symptomatic of the larger problem-due to the excessive regulations and constant government interference, only the political elite is able to set up universities. That such institutions still thrive is indicative of an unmet demand and pointer towards more liberalization.

So while I applaud Dr. Bhargava’s thinking that every Indian university can be turned into a Harvard and wish him luck, the more realistic elements in the government must work hard towards creating a conducive environment for attracting top universities. That such universities are not exactly enamored by the government is patently clear.

(Bhargava link via RJ who comments on it here)

While the government had no trouble in finding 20,000 crore for expanding higher education subsequent to implementation of OBC reservations -a minister explicitly said that ‘money is not a problem’, it seems money indeed is the problem when it comes to ensuring a far more fundamental right. The right to primary education which every kid is entitled to irrespective of his ability to pay.

In May this year, the ministry had circulated a model Right to Education Bill — enforcing penalty provisions for refusing admission to children between 6-14 — to the states, asking them to enact it. As an incentive to implement the proposed law, the ministry had stated that the states that enforce the Education law will get 75 per cent allocation under the Sarva Saksha Abhiyan (SSA) and those who do not, would get only 50 per cent.But the state governments are not ready to take that. Instead, they want the Central government to foot the entire bill that it takes to implement the law. Their argument was that proceeds from the education cess go to the Central government, not to them. The HRD ministry had drawn up an annual estimate of Rs 55,000 crore to implement the Right to Education law but the Planning Commission had expressed its inability to spare that kind of money. It was then that it asked the state governments to implement the law.[link]

It is not just companies that are talking of branding, the National Knowledge Commission (NKC) has suggested to PM Manmohan Singh that a rebranding exercise be undertaken to deal with the vocational education’s negative association with manual labour. To further assist in this rebranding exercise, the NKC has suggested overhauling the existing industrial training institute (ITI) system. In his letter to PM, NKC chairman Sam Pitroda has suggested that rebranding of vocational education is of the highest priority. “In order to match the modern requirement of the skills and competitiveness of the workforce, a massive rebranding exercise is of the highest priority. [link]

Very sensible suggestions. In fact, they should have gone further and proposed making ITI’s part of the University system. This would really give them brand recognition and elevate their ’status’.