Elitist tag dogs Bangalore Metropolitan Region Bill

That there is no consensus on the Bangalore Metropolitan Region Bill, 2010 in its present form, is clear. At a meeting held on Wednesday to discuss the Community Participation Law in the form of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 2011, activists, representatives of RWAs, former and present members of municipalities of other districts, made it clear that they do not want the bill to be discussed, let alone be passed. The attendees of the state-level meeting on — 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (Nagarapalika Act) and Ward committees in Karnataka: Status in 2010 and future — termed the bill elitist saying it would only serve investors seeking access to the state’s resources, mainly land.

S Krishna Kumar, former advisor to the governor, suggested that authors withdraw the bill and give themselves time to reflect on the recommendations. Emphasising on planning at this stage is a misplaced priority when governance at all stages is deteriorating.

“There is an element of dishonesty, lack of clarity and definitions do not match. The size of the Metropolitan Planning Council and Metropolitan Planning Board is not known. What kind of plans will be made by these bodies is also not clear. There are managerial contradictions, inconsistencies and problem of harmonising various plans,” he said chairing the discussion on ‘Bangalore Metropolitan Region Bill — What it holds for the future’.

He also added that the committee system of functioning required resources and expertise. The need now is to prescribe something that is doable, not look at fancy problems of only the few. “Fix inconsistencies, look at current concerns. This bill is very half-baked,” he said.

One of the participants NV Krishna Kumar, policy analyst, JD(S) was equally critical. Calling the bill a “politically naive” one, he said that the bill does not seek to make BBMP more transparent, it would not solve the city’s day-to-day problems, not improve administration but could only lead to better planning.

“Why those serving on the Metropolitan Board should get a salary but not those in the ward committee?” he asked. Also, the proposal that all planning agencies come under one roof could be deemed anti-poor, he said. While the bill sought to improve transparency and accountability, it says nothing about councillors charged with corruption, he said.

Drawing attention to the bill’s mention of harnessing of the internet, he said that BBMP’s website was a black sheep in the IT capital of the country. Also, the budget should be factual not fictional. The bill has to address resources without the funds, improve financial decentralisation. The draft does not talk about measures to improve financial crunch in the civic authority, he said.

K Prakash, secretary, Bangalore District Committee, CPI (M) said that the bill would not ensure equitable development. “Who would be benefited by the planning and infrastructure development? The reports already show that only the creamy layer of cities can access a large chunk of facilities available. “About 75% of the workforce in the city is unorganised and we have to target our plans at these people,” he said. Other aspects like revenue sharing, engaging big contractors for an entire ward for all major and minor works have to be thought about, he said.

Members of the audience reacted strongly, too. “Self government should also mean self revenue. The grant system should be abolished and a percentage of the revenue should go to the wards,” a former corporator from Mangalore said.