uid

When I opposed Aadhaar in 2010 , I was called a BJP stooge. In 2016 I am still opposing Aadhaar for the same reasons and I am told I am a Congress die hard. No one wants to see why I oppose Aadhaar as it is too difficult. Plus Aadhaar is FREE so why not get one ? Ram Krishnaswamy

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -Mahatma Gandhi

In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place. Mahatma Gandhi

“The invasion of privacy is of no consequence because privacy is not a fundamental right and has no meaning under Article 21. The right to privacy is not a guaranteed under the constitution, because privacy is not a fundamental right.” Article 21 of the Indian constitution refers to the right to life and liberty -Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi

“There is merit in the complaints. You are unwittingly allowing snooping, harassment and commercial exploitation. The information about an individual obtained by the UIDAI while issuing an Aadhaar card shall not be used for any other purpose, save as above, except as may be directed by a court for the purpose of criminal investigation.” -A three judge bench headed by Justice J Chelameswar said in an interim order.

Legal scholar Usha Ramanathan describes UID as an inverse of sunshine laws like the Right to Information. While the RTI makes the state transparent to the citizen, the UID does the inverse: it makes the citizen transparent to the state, she says.

Good idea gone bad
I have written earlier that UID/Aadhaar was a poorly designed, unreliable and expensive solution to the really good idea of providing national identification for over a billion Indians. My petition contends that UID in its current form violates the right to privacy of a citizen, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. This is because sensitive biometric and demographic information of citizens are with enrolment agencies, registrars and sub-registrars who have no legal liability for any misuse of this data. This petition has opened up the larger discussion on privacy rights for Indians. The current Article 21 interpretation by the Supreme Court was done decades ago, before the advent of internet and today’s technology and all the new privacy challenges that have arisen as a consequence.
Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP Rajya Sabha

“What is Aadhaar? There is enormous confusion. That Aadhaar will identify people who are entitled for subsidy. No. Aadhaar doesn’t determine who is eligible and who isn’t,” Jairam Ramesh

But Aadhaar has been mythologised during the previous government by its creators into some technology super force that will transform governance in a miraculous manner. I even read an article recently that compared Aadhaar to some revolution and quoted a 1930s historian, Will Durant. Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Rajya Sabha MP

“I know you will say that it is not mandatory. But, it is compulsorily mandatorily voluntary,” Jairam Ramesh, Rajya Saba April 2017


Special

Here is what the Parliament Standing Committee on Finance, which examined the draft N I A Bill said.

1. There is no feasibility study of the project]

2. The project was approved in haste

3. The system has far-reaching consequences for national security

4. The project is directionless with no clarity of purpose

5. It is built on unreliable and untested technology

6. The exercise becomes futile in case the project does not continue beyond the present number of 200 million enrolments

7. There is lack of coordination and difference of views between various departments and ministries of government on the project

Quotes

What was said before the elections:

NPR & UID aiding Aliens – Narendra Modi

"I don't agree to Nandan Nilekeni and his madcap (UID) scheme which he is trying to promote," Senior BJP Leader Yashwant Sinha, Sept 2012

"All we have to show for the hundreds of thousands of crore spent on Aadhar is a Congress ticket for Nilekani" Yashwant Sinha.(27/02/2014)

TV Mohandas Pai, former chief financial officer and head of human resources, tweeted: "selling his soul for power; made his money in the company wedded to meritocracy." Money Life Article

Nilekani’s reporting structure is unprecedented in history; he reports directly to the Prime Minister, thus bypassing all checks and balances in government - Home Minister Chidambaram

To refer to Aadhaar as an anti corruption tool despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary is mystifying. That it is now officially a Rs.50,000 Crores solution searching for an explanation is also without any doubt. -- Statement by Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP & Member, Standing Committee on Finance

Finance minister P Chidambaram’s statement, in an exit interview to this newspaper, that Aadhaar needs to be re-thought completely is probably the last nail in its coffin. :-) Financial Express

The Rural Development Ministry headed by Jairam Ramesh created a road Block and refused to make Aadhaar mandatory for making wage payment to people enrolled under the world’s largest social security scheme NRGA unless all residents are covered.


Search This Blog

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

9235 - Letters: Not apt conclusions - Business Standard

Letters: Not apt conclusions
Business Standard  |  New Delhi 
December 31, 2015 Last Updated at 21:02 IST

The editorial, "Govt health insurance will only make pvt hospitals richer" (December 29), is too simplistic and rather misplaced. Kindly let me respond to it succinctly.

The direct benefits transfer platform, or JAM - Jan-Dhan Yojana, Aadhaar and mobiles - is the right way forward as it would minimise leakage and target the people actually in need and at the time they need it. All 29 states must take the lead in ensuring that processes are carried out smoothly so that citizens find it easy to avail of such schemes. This is an area where systems across several countries in Asia find it difficult to cope with. Yet Thailand's universal health coverage programme is a good starting point to understand how a scheme should be implemented. The country started its 30-baht scheme - as it was originally called - in 2005-06 and now, it is widely acknowledged as a success.


The editorial says that in India even well-implemented schemes such as Andhra Pradesh's long-running medical insurance programme, Aarogyasri, found it tough to cope with the demands of cost increases from private hospitals. But consider this: The cost of radiation therapy for treatment of cancer in private hospitals is three to four times that under Aarogyasri. Despite such disparities, the intake of patients in private hospitals is not significantly low. Generally, hospitals - whether private or government-run - are operating to near-full capacity in treating cancer through radiation therapy.

Where the editorial says that the Aarogyasri in Andhra Pradesh has a bias towards paying for serious and instrusive procedures, it is natural that people are more likely to claim insurance when the charges are high. Affordability and aggregate out-of-pocket payment are key determinants. Nonetheless, the liability on the person who is paying - under Aarogyasri, this would be the government - will continue to rise not only per capita, but also as an aggregate, as incidence and prevalence of diseases both increase.

In the first instance, the issue is of generating adequate funds to pay for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of a disease, not just to try and reduce the treatment cost. The experience of implementing insurance schemes in Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat, to name just two states, has been positive. It indicates the need to put in place an insurance coverage mechanism that will generate adequate funds at the level of the central government, which can then distribute these to the states for use in health care.

The editorial says that better healthcare in India is a moral and practical necessity. But health infrastructure in the country is led by the private sector and would continue to be so in the foreseeable future. Even the addition of new capacity for treatment is being driven by the private sector. Would the sector not strive to make it profitable and sustainable? But who will pay for such capital expenditure?
Praneet Mehrotra Singapore

Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in

All letters must have a postal address and telephone number