[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Administrative Note:

Week's Agenda: Population

> To the best of my knowledge, there is no escape from this in a democracy.
> If you include any principle other than individual representation, then
> you endanger the concept of democracy. The MP constituency should not 
> be larger than 10 lakh people, i.e., we must split all the existing
> constituencies into half, appx. 

i hope you are aware of the existing situation. the number of seats was
supposed to be reviewed every 10(?) years. sometime in the 60s, the 4
southern states ganged up and got a freeze for 30 years saying that
states which do not contain their population are rewarded with more
representation. the 30 years will expire soon. i do not know the exact
date. how can this issue be sorted out without causing tooo much
surely, the states with huge populations need more representation.

> > (a) Are we in agreement that population growth should be contained?

> The word "contained" is highly charged. Let us say: while population size
> has not been shown to be adversely related to either economic growth or

Population growth definitely is adversely related. Please look up which
have the maximum birth rate and maximum illiteracy. There is no harm in
containing population growth. 

> pollution, it is in the interest of all concerned to encourage policies
> that help people choose lesser children for themselves.

Encouraging never works. Action should be taken. Money can help here.
(I posted an article by jairam ramesh earlier). Of course, we can't
in the manifesto that money will be used. Maybe "actively pursue family
planning measures" should be enough.

> > (b) Should there be rewards for achieving this/ punishment for not?

> Dead against any intervention in people's choice. Provide them with

No punishments. What is the harm in giving rewards? 

> children. My dissertation paper, almost ready, studies institutions and
> fertility in Thailand, and evidence is substantially clear:

All this works only in the long run. You'll have to decide if you want
see results in 5 years. If so, we'll have to "actively pursue family

> > (c) are states' interests in population control different from the 
> > national interest. 

i did not understand this one. how can it be different?

> > (d) Should we devise a system of representation that factors in 
> > population+productivity+tax revenues+etc., while determining 
> > representation in parliament?

> NO. Only one adult, one vote.  

agreed with one adult one vote. i am sure this issue will come up again
when we discuss political reforms.


This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list:  debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/