Urban issues such as these are not considered political and not spoke of by many political parties which is why a group of people from different parts of the country including 150 civil society organizations, activists, scholars, urban workers’ collective got together and presented their charter of demands for Inclusive and Just urban development to active political parties.

The citizen’s charter has been already been endorsed by14 parties including INC, CPI (M), TDP, NCP, RJD, AAP, TMC, NC, DMK and CPI to name a few.

Evita Das, Independent Urban researcher, who has also contributed to the preparation of the charter, told TwoCircles.net, All the 12 demands mentioned in the charter of demands are very important to have a just, inclusive livable city.”

More than 30% of India’s population in cities lives in slums that are bereft of basic amenities. And in contrast they are occupying only 5% of the land but still referred to as land encroachers.

The other 2 highlights in the charter of demands are the zero-eviction policy. The cut-off dates set up the regressive Government policies to determine the legal status of the settlements should go. These policies drive the poor to the outskirts of the city rendering them homeless furthering marginalizing the poor.

The other main demand is the implementation of the 74^th Constitutional amendment Act (CAA) that confers autonomy to the Urban Local Bodies (ULB). The Urban local bodies should be capacitated with funds and staff so that urban planning is localized and there is transparency.

The charter also demands allocation of gender budgeting to address the lack of representation from Dalit Bahujan women. And protection of informal workers who have migrated to cities through social security schemes such as healthcare, maternity benefits and pensions should be extended to the migrant workers as well who form part of the urban populace.

Evita Das says, “Smart Cities or the SPV model has worked against the urban poor. The SPV (Special purpose Vehicle) model aimed at creating smart cities has bypassed the 74 CAA ignoring the local bodies. We are demanding that ULB’s should be at the helm of the development planning and the SPV model should go”.

The SPV and ULB are supposed to have 50:50 equity shareholdings but it has not happened.

Through this charter of demands the urban poor and the 2 lakh individuals who have drawn the demands are promoting a gender just inclusive society with sustainable growth thus giving Indian cities a new design that makes them both liveable and smart.

Courtesy: Two Circle

The post 14 Political parties, 150 organisations sign charter for ‘liveable cities, not smart cities’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In anticipation of this, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched three major urban flagship schemes in 2015: Smart Cities Mission, Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation (AMRUT), and the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana-Urban (PMAY-U or prime minister’s urban housing scheme).

With the 2019-20 budget set to be released in an election year, urban India can expect a bigger slice of the pie, experts estimate. But with the government lagging behind its targets, development in the sector remains dismal, showed an IndiaSpend analysis of available government data.
Here are our main findings:

1. While the union budget expenditure on urban development in 2018-19 was the highest ever, as a share of the grand total this had actually declined by 0.2 percentage points to 1.7% of the budget.
2. Barely 7-20% of the central assistance earmarked for the three flagship schemes have been used since their launch, indicating that states remain chronically underfunded.
3. In the three schemes, work has been sanctioned for not more than a third of the set targets which will meet their deadlines in 2019-20 and 2021-22. The number of works actually completed is even lower.
4.  

On January 28, 2019, IndiaSpend contacted the ministry of housing and urban affairs for comments. We will update the story if and when they respond.

Why we need to pay attention to urban development
Over a century to 2001, the population residing in India’s urban areas grew by 17.1 percentage points to 28.5%. By 2011, this grew to 30% with 377 million Indians now residing in urban areas. In 20 years to 2031, the population is expected to double to over 600 million or 41% of the country.

The Indian economy is expected to grow alongside the urban population expansion as cities and towns offer several entrepreneurship and employment opportunities. More than 60% of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) is generated in urban areas, the government said in this 2014-15 standing committee report. The country’s 100 largest cities, which hold 16% of the population and occupy 0.24% of its land area, produce 43% of its GDP.

Rural-urban linkages need to be strengthened for “comprehensive and inclusive development”, the government said. The transition to a quasi-urban society has to be accompanied by a commensurate increase in the supply of housing and basic urban services such as water supply, sewerage and drainage network, garbage disposal facilities, and planned urban mobility, it added.

Despite the government’s recognition of the fact that unbridled urbanisation can lead to a rise in slums, worsening environmental conditions, and a decline in standard of living, the problem is set to snowball with not only continued rural distress and migration, but also the expansion of villages into small towns.

About 190 million Indians–equivalent to the combined population of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka–live in overgrown ‘villages’, according to a new study, IndiaSpend reported on January 23, 2019. Classified as ‘large’ and ‘very large’ villages–less than 25% of their population is engaged in non-agricultural work–these areas continue to miss out on urban infrastructure, housing and basic services necessary for sustainable living in densely populated regions.

How is government spending on urban development?
As we mentioned earlier, current spending on urban development constitutes 1.7% of the total budget, a 0.2-percentage-point decline since 2017-18 when it was 1.9%–the highest in a decade, showed an IndiaSpend analysis of budget data over 10 years since 2009.

In 2018, finance minister Arun Jaitley allocated Rs 41,765.13 crore for urban development–a 64% increase from 2014 when the NDA took charge of the government from the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. This is actually a 2.8% increase over the previous year 2017-18, when the NDA merged the ministry of housing and poverty alleviation and the ministry of urban development. In 2017, the allocation had grown a significant 35.7% from 2016-17.  

Still, the highest rate of increase in expenditure allocation for the two urban ministries was recorded in 2014, when the UPA released its interim budget before the general elections of May 2014–the urban budget then rose 108.8% from Rs 11,831 crore to Rs 24,702 crore, and its share of the grand total rose from 0.7% to 1.4%. When the NDA came to power a few months later, they increased the allocation by 3% to Rs 25,548 crore.

How NDA’s flagship schemes are faring
Smart Cities Mission:
For the mission, the government has so far allotted Rs 16,604 crore, roughly a third of the promised outlay of Rs 48,000. Of this, Rs 3,560 crore has so far been utilised, 7% of the programme’s outlay, according to this Lok Sabha response by the ministry on January 1, 2019.
The mission is supposed to transform 100 cities into “smart cities” by 2022, through the application of information and communications technology to manage basic services such as water supply, sanitation, housing, waste management and mobility.

With a budget of Rs 48,000 crore, the Centre was to invest Rs 500 crore per city. The state governments had to put in a matching contribution through private investments in projects. The mission could be implemented either as a “pan-city” programme that incorporates information technology (IT) with the use of public infrastructure across the city, or as an “area-based development” which introduces IT infrastructure in a smaller portion of the city.

In terms of physical progress, the ministry has approved 5,151 projects worth Rs. 2.05 lakh crore for the selected 100 cities, according to this Lok Sabha response by the ministry on December 11, 2018. As of November 30, 2018, work on less than a third of these–or 1,675 projects–worth Rs. 51,866 crore (25% of the approved cost) is being done, the response further said. It is unclear how many of those projects have so far been completed.

The mission also came for criticism from the latest standing committee meeting on urban development held in July 2018. While the budget allocation over the last three years for the scheme has been over Rs 15,000 crore, “the revised expenditure is much lower at around Rs 10,094 crore with an even lower actual expenditure”, the committee observed in its report, adding it was “perplexed” about this.

“The committee observe numerous instances of one agency undoing the work of another agency and strongly feel that lack of coordination between implementing agencies is a major reason why the intended benefits are still not visible to public,” the committee said, adding that it had reservations about the mission causing “uneven development” in the areas surrounding smaller towns.

Of projects worth Rs 2.03 lakh crore, 21%–worth Rs 43,088 crore–are being carried out in convergence with other schemes, the ministry told the standing committee in its response.
 

Source: Lok Sabha, Press Information Bureau

AMRUT:
AMRUT, like its predecessor, the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), aims to develop basic urban infrastructure. For five years upto 2019-20, and with a focus on water supply, sewerage, septage management and stormwater drains, the government has so far allotted 27% or Rs 13,447 crore of the Rs 50,000 crore central assistance promised to states. Of this, Rs 9,877 crore (19.88%) has so far been utilised, according to this Lok Sabha response by the ministry on January 1, 2019.

Upto July 2018, the ministry had approved State Annual Action Plans–proposed by states as plans for each year–under the programme to the size of Rs 77,640 crore for various infrastructure projects, it informed the standing committee. Of this, 50% of project funds have been allotted to water supply works, 42% to sewerage and septage management and the rest to other components included in the AMRUT scheme. As many of these works are capital-intensive long-term projects, they are expected to be completed in three years, the government said.

While real-time information on actual implementation of the scheme at the ground-level across India remains unavailable, here are some achievements made under the programme:

• In the water supply sector, contracts for 600 projects worth Rs 21,762 crore had been awarded as of July 2018, according to data presented by the ministry in its reply to the standing committee in July 2018, the latest and only data available in public. Of these, 42 projects, or 7%, worth Rs 112 crore (0.5% of awarded contracts’ worth) had been completed.
• In the sewerage and septage management sector, contracts for 318 projects worth Rs 15,058 crore had been awarded, and four projects (1.3%) worth Rs 12 crore (0.07% of approved spending) had been completed as of July 2018.
• In the storm water drainage sector, contracts for 71 projects worth Rs 1,139 crore had been awarded and 11 projects (15%) worth Rs 4 crore (0.3%) have been completed, the ministry said.

Source: Lok Sabha, Press Information Bureau

PMAY (U): Of the Rs 1 lakh crore worth of central assistance sanctioned so far for constructing homes under the PMAY scheme, which is an amalgamation of previous housing schemes, about a third of funds, or Rs 33,652 crore, have been allocated and 20% or Rs 20,892 crore actually utilised, according to the Lok Sabha response from January 1, 2019.

Of a targeted 12 million houses to be constructed under the PMAY urban scheme, as of December 10, 2018, 6.8 million or 56% had been sanctioned for construction, according to this press release. Of these, 3.5 million or 29% of the target had been grounded for construction and 1.2 million houses (10%) had been completed, the ministry said. In the next three financial years, to meet its target of 12 million houses by 2022, the government will have to finish construction on roughly 9,813 houses across India every day.
 

Source: Lok Sabha, Press Information Bureau

Data on the government’s actual progress of its urban schemes remain inconsistent, making it difficult to assess their progress, experts who we spoke to pointed out. This is especially so for centrally-sponsored schemes such as Smart Cities, and AMRUT, where states are expected to meet some part of the cost and maintain records of implementation. “It is difficult to gauge what exactly is happening at the implementation-level of the programmes. We can’t rely on any of the figures,” Nilanchala Acharya, research coordinator at the Centre for Budget and Governance Accountability (CBGA), a Delhi-based think-tank, told IndiaSpend.

Experts also complained about the lack of clarity and accountability. “There is absolutely no transparency in the way these schemes are functioning. It is obvious there are overlaps and no clear accountability for various works under different schemes,” T R Raghunandan, advisor to Accountability Initiative of the Centre for Policy Research, a Delhi-based think-tank, told IndiaSpend.

What the urban sector needs right now
The upcoming budget is likely to increase its spending on urban India, experts said, but will probably focus more on highly publicised projects that mainly serve the middle and upper classes. “It is likely that the government will allot over Rs 51,000 crore for the urban sector–in absolute figures, this is high but when you adjust it for inflation, it is not that much of an increase,” Acharya said. He added there is likely to be more funding for water supply projects, and the Smart Cities Mission this election year as it has quicker, tangible output compared to other schemes.
But the budget for urbanisation needs to focus more spending on the social sector. “Current schemes are directed towards serving 20-30% of the urban population who comprise the city’s elite–we need to focus on urban healthcare, livelihoods, affordable public transport, public housing, community centres and parks to improve the all-round quality of life,” Acharya said.  

Experts also welcome more investment in the rural sector as it may help stall the burgeoning pressure on cities. “People come to cities in search of jobs, it is necessary to try and ease the distress migration by focusing on these rural linkages,” Acharya said.  
Raghunandan believes that while the government needs to focus more on urban development, it has to do this by empowering local urban governments. “Obviously a lot more money needs to be pumped into the urban sector but we need decentralisation of power for the money to be actually used,” he said.

While the UPA’s JNNURM programme intended (but eventually failed) to offer states monetary incentives to bring in reforms aimed at strengthening participatory governance, the new flagship schemes, run by special purpose vehicles (SPVs), discourage the decentralisation of power to urban local bodies and citizens altogether, Raghunandan said.

“Citizens have no say in how they want their city to develop,” he said. “We can’t have smart cities without streamlining processes and fixing accountability.”

(Saldanha is an assistant editor with IndiaSpend.)

Courtesy: India Spend
 

The post Funds Not Used, Work Not Cleared in Key Schemes For India’s Burgeoning Cities appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Government of India (GOI) allocated Rupees 7060 crores for the Smart Cities Mission in its interim budget of 2014-15. The budget of 2015-16 had a provision of Rupees 6000 crores for the Mission and the development of 500 habitations under the National Urban Rejuvenation Mission (NURM). A government panel has approved the allocation of Rupees 2.73 crores over the next ten years for the development of 100 smart cities under the NURM.

The ‘Mission Statement and Guidelines’ for the Smart Cities Mission released by the Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD) on June 25, 2015 identified in the Mission the following strategic components for implementation: retrofitting, redevelopment, green field development and pan-city development. The MoUD is in the process of setting up the Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for the Mission. Convergence with other government schemes, are also the guidelines for the release of funds for the Mission. 

However, there are key issues that need to be publicly debated and discussed — regarding the very concept of Smart Cities in general and the Smart Cities Mission, in India – that are yet to be discussed publicly by opposition political parties and within the Indian parliament. From a bare reading of the concept and thrust of the policy document, it is quite obvious that the model as conceived by the GOI will lead to non-inclusive development. Smart Cities are being seen as meeting the aspirations of only India’s educated middle class.

The focus is on the implementation of technology for providing the middle classes with the instruments of online access for the use of public services. Smart technology (ICT) based solutions will require large investments from high technology vendors identified as originating from the United States coupled with the real estate builders from India. The likes of McKinsey Global Institute and Price Waterhouse Coopers have been roped in, to prepare the reports. Needless to say these investors will demand handsome returns on their investment.

While the users of these new technologies among the middle classes will pay only in part to provide for these returns, it is the Indian poor as a whole, who will be bearing the burden of public investment promised by the Modi Government. The poor will also pay for the Smart City projects in the form of displacement. The poor will pay through the loss of their existing homes to pave the way for the implementation of new projects of redevelopment and Greenfield development.

While the users of these new technologies among the middle classes will pay only in part to access these services in return, it is the Indian poor as a whole, who will bear the burden for the public investment promised by the Modi Government. The poor will also pay for the Smart City projects in the form of displacement. The poor will pay through the loss of their existing homes to pave the way for the implementation of new projects of redevelopment and Greenfield development.

The smart cities programme envisages the implementation of projects with the help of public private partnerships (PPPs). The land to be acquired for smart projects under these will affect not only slum dwellers but also the farmers living within peri-urban areas. The dream of 24×7 water supply of the middle classes will be realised but at what kind of social cost for the poor? The crucial issue of decent living (liveability) for the urban poor needs to be central to any development, including the envisaged Smart Cities concept. The resource requirements, including energy and its associated environmental impact –costs of an instrumented automated wired city —raise concerns on the front of environmental sustainability too.

The social exclusion of citizens lacking in information technology (IT) competence and categorising them as IT uneducated is also a serious issue that needs to be tackled up front. Smart Cities in the Indian socio-economic context mean dilution of the democratic right of the poor to the city itself, this time the exclusion will be routed through technology. The technology divide can be expected to deepen further through these burgeoning smart cities.

The last decade saw the initiation of e-governance programmes as part of the municipal reform agenda. Experience indicates that the poor have remained excluded from the e-platforms, and the municipalities have had to continue with the use of manual systems of capturing data and complaints in parallel with computerised systems.

Information available on the funding strategy for smart cities suggests that Rupees 7 lakh crores will be required over the next 20 years to provide for the infrastructure. Some estimates suggest that Rupees 35,000 crores per year will be required to support the Smart Cities Mission. However, it is not clear whether this amount covers on-off investments. Obviously private sector investment will be ad hoc and will further be driven solely by a profit motive. It is however not clear as yet who will have to pay for the maintenance of this infrastructure. Without a substantial share of funding coming from either the GOI and state governments, can we expect urban local bodies in poor financial health to pay for the maintenance of technology based infrastructure of Smart Cities into which the Modi Government plans to lock-in a huge amount of public investment?

Foreign and private capital will be mainly targeting investments that have a higher rate of return, and the expansion of public services to be implemented in a universal service framework will not come into existence. The guidelines and notes released do not provide information on this aspect at all.

Delivering good governance to all –Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas —implies that the government needs to pursue a universal approach on the providing of public services. If the Smart Cities by design are not targeted to undo the un-smart expansion of real estate into the wetlands and commons that served the cities’ drainage needs, it would not be incorrect to presume that we should be ready to face more urban (manmade) disasters of the likes of the Chennai floods (and earlier Mumbai, 2005) and the accompanying misery that these brought to their residents. All the cities, big and small, face the challenge of having to prepare themselves in advance to face extreme weather conditions that are expected to multiply.

Wireless technologies, sensor networks and digital (surveillance) will not make cities smart and sustainable. What Chennai saw in respect of the flooding of its own international airport will be repeated if we are not willing to undo un-smart expansion of the cities driven by corporate greed. Let us remember that the Chennai floods did not spare even the office of Infosys. How we can expect the IT infrastructure to be spared in Smart Cities?

If we are not willing to act against the big offenders among the high tech companies and real estate developers in respect of encroaching on the urban commons (land), then surely as a nation and its people we must discuss the Smart Cities mission threadbare, before-hand.

The Modi Government must be made to rethink the focus and emphasis behind this Mission of city development. While it appears that soot-boot ki sarkar wants to help its friends among the corporates, the opposition has a task cut out for itself. Opposition parties need to expose the undemocratic design of Smart cities. They should not allow the Modi Government to hide behind its self-acclaimed tag of smart governance. The process of development of Smart Cities is neither participatory nor transparent. It is an undemocratic project which needs to be opposed, tooth and nail.

 (The author is the Convener National Working Group on Patent Laws; his email is  dinesh.abrol@gmail.com)

The post Not so Smart, the Smart City appeared first on SabrangIndia.