The 6th ministerial meeting of WTO at Hong Kong, once again brought to the frontiers, the pro-globalisation and anti-globalisation campaigners. The globalisation, when on one hand implies that when one part of the world gets into trouble, it can appeal to the rest for help; on the other, it implies that trouble in one part can quickly be exported to the rest.
Globalisation, as a phenomenon has been existing since ages, as is evident in trade relations with Roman world in ancient period, presence of silk route etc. The debate that is ensuing between the two groups is of more recent origin, starting in 1990s when WTO was formed as an embodiment of globalisaion. What the two groups are arguing over is the framework which globalisation is following after the formation of WTO.
The pro-globalisation campaigners argue that………………
* Globalisation is the soul of the laissez faire economy and the spirit of the principle of relative advantage of Adam Smith, according to which each country would produce that which was most profitable in terms of its resources and through free international trade, an optimum allocation of goods would result.
* It will benefit both the producers and consumers of the developing country. Greater technology-transfer will increase the growth of manufacturing sector and the services in the third-world. As more jobs will be outsourced, it will certainly help in increasing the consumption power of the consumer.
* Now, the consumers have greater choice in picking the goods, increasing competition makes it compulsive for the producers to add quality.
* The era of monopolies is coming to a halt. Thus, the third-world countries like India, China, Brazil and many more have become the major competitors of the developed world. So are more countries likely to follow in the future.
* The privatization of the industries has not only helped in curbing red-tapism, but it has also encouraged greater entrepreneurship and venture capitalism.
* Large amount of remittance flows to the developing world help in bringing greater amount of foreign currency to the country.
* Outsourcing of jobs has not only checked brain drain but has resulted in reverse brain drain whereby many specialists, business-executives and technical experts are visiting the respective countries.
* Benefits not only accrue through trade, but globalisation of health services, education, has opened the floodgates of opportunities for people to avail the best possible health-care and education.
* This will help in raising the overall standard of living of the poor.
* No longer there will be technological isolation and as globalisation marches, the geographical boundaries between countries will cease to hold meaning, resulting in the formation of one community, i.e. global community.
* It was matter of past that everything American was being emphasized. It is the result of globalisation alone, that Indian foods have made their way in the international market.
* Traditional arts and crafts are not far from reaping the benefits of globalisation. There is a revival of this cultural heritage and the work of fashion designers, who with a little blending to suit the new tastes, have popularised the precious but dying age-old art and craft.
* The developed world is equally to benefit as it helps in checking rampant immigration and the consequent problems.
But the anti-globalisation campaigners argue that in the garb of providing benefits, globalisation has done more damage to the majority of the population.
* Globalisation is the product of the crisis of the developed world whereby its capitalists are looking for bigger markets to invest their profits.
* Uruguay Round was a non-negotiated round as the talks were between US and European Union and the decision was imposed on the rest of the world.
* Those who are reaping the benefits are the upper and middle classes, not the bottom strata. In fact globalisaton has resulted in greater insecurity of livelihood for the poor.
* The high rates of suicides among farmers are a blot for our civilized society and sovereign nation.
* Globalisation was aimed at reducing the cost of inputs. However, the cost of seeds and other agricultural inputs have risen. So it has burdened the already suffering farmers.
* Developed countries give a lot of subsidies to their farmers, whereby; farmers from the developing countries cannot compete with them and end up in losses.
* Unemployment rates have reached an all-time high. Government has ceased to be a major employer. Jobless growth in the last decade provides a substantive proof to this.
* The so-called 'labour reforms' actually aim to deprive the worker of his job security, and the hire and fire policy puts him at the mercy of the employer.
* Treaties that are being signed in the name of free trade are actually treaties for benefiting pharmaceutical giants, agro-business and the like, not the poor farmer. So it is resulting in monopolies and closure of markets not opening of markets.
* Those who boast that globalisation provides a level playing field to all the players forget that level playing field has relevance only if all the players are equally strong at the beginning. Poor country and rich country cannot compete fairly due to the relatively better off position of the latter.
* Those who argue that globalisation will provide bigger markets to the capitalists of the developing countries need to be reminded that if we raise the consumption power of the domestic consumers, there is enough potential to tap in the domestic market itself.
* Inferior quality goods are being dumped into the domestic market resulting in the exploitation of the consumers.
* There is nothing to boast of the growth of ITES as they are catering to only a small chunk of the population, while majority of the population remains untouched.
* Poverty, illiteracy continue to be the stark reality and third-world is not in the state for allowing foreign players on its soil with rights at par with the domestic producers.
* Globalization has further widened the gap between the rich and the poor with poor becoming more poorer.
* In the name of cultural exchange, what is being imported is pornography, vulgarity and a number of foreign channels that hit at the very roots of our cultural values.
Finally, it can be said that globalization per se is not bad. But to make sure that the benefits percolate to the grassroots level, words of Mahatma Gandhi are befitting here, who said that when in dilemma about the rightfulness of the decision, think of the poorest man you have ever met, and ponder over, what benefit will the decision have for him, you will never end up making a wrong decision.
So the aim should be fair trade and not free trade.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Should There Be Reservation For Women In The Parliament?
The issue of giving reservation to women in Parliament continues to linger on session after session, with no consensus being reached, while the opinion continues to be divided over the bill. It remained a non-starter through seven Lok Sabhas, from 1996 onwards.
In 1952, the women representation was 4.4% and after fifty years, it is 8.8%. It is far below the world average of around 15%. In the present Lok Sabha, only 44 MPs are women, i.e. less than 10%.
As per the report of Inter-Parliamentary Union on June 30, 2005, India ranks 134th among 183 countries in terms of percentage of women legislatures in the Parliament.
Those who are in favour of reservation for women in Parliament argue that………..
* The basic premise of giving reservation to any section of society is positive discrimination, which implies granting greater benefits to those sections that due to certain social and historical circumstances are not at par with rest of the society. To reap the benefits of equality of opportunity and providing a level playing field to all the players, reservation is extended.
* Indian constitution grants reservation to socially and educationally backward sections of the society. Women comprise one such section, who due to patriarchal traditions of the society continue to be deprived of equality vis-à-vis men. Reservation to women is one such attempt towards greater equality.
* 73rd amendment act, 1992 provided 33% reservation to women in Panchayati Raj Institutions.
This gave leadership of women a statutory status. Traditionally, the leadership capability of women has always been undermined. However, various case studies reveal that women sarpanches were able to implement many socially beneficial decisions like prohibition of liquor etc. This has given a new sense of achievement to them and more of them aspire to come out of their traditional role to create a new environment for the new generation.
Similarly, reservation in Parliament will certainly go a long way in raising the status of women.
* The increasing criminalisation of politics, which is a great barrier to participation of women in contesting elections, can be checked by granting reservation to women in Parliament, which will make it mandatory for political parties to field women candidates.
* Women can better represent the interests of women in legislature. At present, inspite of the best efforts of the government, our social security schemes continue to have a male bias, viz National Rural Employment Guarantee Act by extending employment to just one able bodied person per household is implicitly biased against the working of women.
* Most of the political parties have a male majority of party workers even after more than 50 years of independence.
Way back in the early decades of 20th century, father of nation, Mahatma Gandhi had recognised the role of women in national politics. In his writings in Young India, he wrote, "Woman is the companion of man gifted with equal mental capacity, she has the right to participate in the minutest details of the activities of men, she has the same right of freedom and liberty as he."
The concern can be addressed by extending reservation to women in the Parliament.
* The crimes against women are rampant in the society, whether it is in the domestic sphere or the outer world. By empowering the women, this can be checked to large extent, as laws alone cannot help until the women are empowered.
* Though the status of women has considerably increased over the years and they are present in almost all spheres, yet the bulk of women, especially from rural areas still continue to be neglected. An important half of the entire social framework has been kept dormant and languishing and any reservation in the highest legislative body will ensure them better participation and understanding of the system.
However, those who doubt that the reservation of women will be an effective tool in their empowerment, argue that……..
• * Women have made great strides so far without any reservation and they can go further without reservation. This will give her a greater sense of achievement as by competing with men without reservation they can prove their mettle better.
* If political history of the country during the last 50 years has anything to show, reservation for weaker sections has become more of political gimmicks and an agenda of vote bank politics. Creamy layers among the weaker sections continue to skimoff the benefits generation after generation, while the relatively weaker members still continue to live with their deprivation.
Reservation for women also has the tendency to meet similar fate over the years with lower caste and poor women not benefiting. It will create more and deeper schisms than ever before.
* Moreover, mere laws cannot empower without measures at other fronts like education, developing entrepreneurial skills etc. So the need is to change the mindset of society. Reservation doesn't guarantee a general change of attitude towards women.
* The need is to have responsible and sensible woman MPs, not the MPs who are puppets in the hands of their husbands. And, this cannot be achieved without supplementary measures for empowerment.
* Without other measures of empowerment, criminalisation of politics cannot be checked, as the relatively weaker women will continue to be suppressed by their stronger counterparts.
* The reservation would go against democratic norms and even developed countries like US and UK have not given any reservation to women.
* Instead of providing reservation, we need to provide women with more avenues of development, so that their end of empowerment is realized. Our end is to empower women not to provide reservation. So we need to chalk out the best possible way for their empowerment, and not just provide reservation, and think that our duty towards empowering them is over.
Finally, it can be said that reservation for women in Parliament will give them a greater say in the politics of the country, but other measures of empowerment should follow.
Women in spite of all the stumbling blocks are trying hard to make space for themselves in the political arena. To cope up with the inhibiting factors, women need to be more articulative in coordinating the social and economic roles thus making space for the new political role in her life, and enjoying the benefits of reservation. So we should treat reservation as a means to an end and not an end in itself.
In 1952, the women representation was 4.4% and after fifty years, it is 8.8%. It is far below the world average of around 15%. In the present Lok Sabha, only 44 MPs are women, i.e. less than 10%.
As per the report of Inter-Parliamentary Union on June 30, 2005, India ranks 134th among 183 countries in terms of percentage of women legislatures in the Parliament.
Those who are in favour of reservation for women in Parliament argue that………..
* The basic premise of giving reservation to any section of society is positive discrimination, which implies granting greater benefits to those sections that due to certain social and historical circumstances are not at par with rest of the society. To reap the benefits of equality of opportunity and providing a level playing field to all the players, reservation is extended.
* Indian constitution grants reservation to socially and educationally backward sections of the society. Women comprise one such section, who due to patriarchal traditions of the society continue to be deprived of equality vis-à-vis men. Reservation to women is one such attempt towards greater equality.
* 73rd amendment act, 1992 provided 33% reservation to women in Panchayati Raj Institutions.
This gave leadership of women a statutory status. Traditionally, the leadership capability of women has always been undermined. However, various case studies reveal that women sarpanches were able to implement many socially beneficial decisions like prohibition of liquor etc. This has given a new sense of achievement to them and more of them aspire to come out of their traditional role to create a new environment for the new generation.
Similarly, reservation in Parliament will certainly go a long way in raising the status of women.
* The increasing criminalisation of politics, which is a great barrier to participation of women in contesting elections, can be checked by granting reservation to women in Parliament, which will make it mandatory for political parties to field women candidates.
* Women can better represent the interests of women in legislature. At present, inspite of the best efforts of the government, our social security schemes continue to have a male bias, viz National Rural Employment Guarantee Act by extending employment to just one able bodied person per household is implicitly biased against the working of women.
* Most of the political parties have a male majority of party workers even after more than 50 years of independence.
Way back in the early decades of 20th century, father of nation, Mahatma Gandhi had recognised the role of women in national politics. In his writings in Young India, he wrote, "Woman is the companion of man gifted with equal mental capacity, she has the right to participate in the minutest details of the activities of men, she has the same right of freedom and liberty as he."
The concern can be addressed by extending reservation to women in the Parliament.
* The crimes against women are rampant in the society, whether it is in the domestic sphere or the outer world. By empowering the women, this can be checked to large extent, as laws alone cannot help until the women are empowered.
* Though the status of women has considerably increased over the years and they are present in almost all spheres, yet the bulk of women, especially from rural areas still continue to be neglected. An important half of the entire social framework has been kept dormant and languishing and any reservation in the highest legislative body will ensure them better participation and understanding of the system.
However, those who doubt that the reservation of women will be an effective tool in their empowerment, argue that……..
• * Women have made great strides so far without any reservation and they can go further without reservation. This will give her a greater sense of achievement as by competing with men without reservation they can prove their mettle better.
* If political history of the country during the last 50 years has anything to show, reservation for weaker sections has become more of political gimmicks and an agenda of vote bank politics. Creamy layers among the weaker sections continue to skimoff the benefits generation after generation, while the relatively weaker members still continue to live with their deprivation.
Reservation for women also has the tendency to meet similar fate over the years with lower caste and poor women not benefiting. It will create more and deeper schisms than ever before.
* Moreover, mere laws cannot empower without measures at other fronts like education, developing entrepreneurial skills etc. So the need is to change the mindset of society. Reservation doesn't guarantee a general change of attitude towards women.
* The need is to have responsible and sensible woman MPs, not the MPs who are puppets in the hands of their husbands. And, this cannot be achieved without supplementary measures for empowerment.
* Without other measures of empowerment, criminalisation of politics cannot be checked, as the relatively weaker women will continue to be suppressed by their stronger counterparts.
* The reservation would go against democratic norms and even developed countries like US and UK have not given any reservation to women.
* Instead of providing reservation, we need to provide women with more avenues of development, so that their end of empowerment is realized. Our end is to empower women not to provide reservation. So we need to chalk out the best possible way for their empowerment, and not just provide reservation, and think that our duty towards empowering them is over.
Finally, it can be said that reservation for women in Parliament will give them a greater say in the politics of the country, but other measures of empowerment should follow.
Women in spite of all the stumbling blocks are trying hard to make space for themselves in the political arena. To cope up with the inhibiting factors, women need to be more articulative in coordinating the social and economic roles thus making space for the new political role in her life, and enjoying the benefits of reservation. So we should treat reservation as a means to an end and not an end in itself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)