Small states means Better Administration – Better Government – Participation of common man in the administration Creation of small state is one of the answers to Reduce corruption or At least corruption amount. Know – Why we should support the creation of small states? Reality Views by sm - In India, when congress declared that a new state Telangana will be created from AP. Everyone in India started to discuss about the creation of small state, is creation of small state is good for India ? or is creation of small state is bad for India?
Many Indians opposed this creation of small states in India by giving many reasons. Following are the few reasons why people oppose the creation of small states. • Creation of small state will divide India • Creation of small state will take the India to pre British era • Danger from China, china wants to divide India. • Small states in India are not making progress , Chattisgarh and Jharkhand • Small states Depend on Central Government • What is the guarantee that small states will make the progress? • Politicians want to become the chief Minister or for the political power.
• Hatred Among state will increase • Election vote should be counted who is defeated Like these I am sure there are many more reasons to oppose creation of small states. But I still I say and insist that Creation of small state is good for India. Let’s understand and know why creation of small states is good for India? Before Arrival of British people in India, there was no India. There were small kingdoms and big kingdoms. Today when we say India, there is feeling, My India, in olden times there was no such feeling, all those feelings were for there king or god.
I will fight for my king, my God. Today our army when fights it fights for the India, not for Prime Minister of India. If Prime Minister of India will try to sell the India I am sure our army will not hesitate to arrest the Prime Minister or any other leader. Today nothing is superior than India , Olden times everything was king, if he wanted to donate his kingdom to someone without asking anyone he donated that, and foolish population of that state accepted that willingly as their all feelings were for there king.
If you read the history carefully you will understand, and find that xyz warrior died for his king, today when any army man dies he dies for his mother land, for our India. After the arrival of British People in India, they started the real formation of India, Under there influence and rule, we got the feeling of oneness among us, one India. In olden times, before the arrival of British, for the people of small states for whom there king, there caste and religion was more important, everyone always obeyed the family of king.
Remember the battle of Plessey, Robert Clive with the help of just 300 white soldiers won the battle by giving bribe. And he won the battle by defeating more than 50000 Indian soldiers. They surrendered because there army head said that I surrender, today if in India one head says that he will surrender to small enemy , drop your weapons ,do you think Indian forces will drop the guns or they will arrest that head and will fight for the nation. In that times when outsiders came fought with the small states, that time neighboring states did not help that state, when Arab people looted the small kingdoms and become the rulers of that state.
Other kings kept enjoying there life and kingdom, they did not thought about the safety of neighbor state. Today if Pakistan attacks on Kargil, we hear the voice from every corner of India that destroy enemy. After 26/11 we heard voices from every corner of India to Punish Kasab,this never happend in old asian kingdoms. So now I think you got the point that today when we create the small state, the feeling of one India, oneness will not go. Creating small states will not take us back to the pre British era, as before the arrival of India there was no India.
Mere creation of small state will not destroy the feeling of one ness , the feeling of Indian on the contrary will increase this feeling and love towards India and will reduce the feeling of love towards there language or state. For small states love for India will grow. And also small state will be created from the big state so there will be 2 states or more states which will speak same language. In this way we will solve the problem of language also. On the contrary in the future when states will become rich, there is a possibility and chance that these big states will make there police force
very strong and will demand the independence from India. When we divided India on basis of language we made mistake, and today you may not agree with me, but when States will make progress and will make money and other states will not make money, these money making states will demand the independence and because of finance and big nature of state, they will do this very easily by purchasing arms from china. So remember big states will divide the India in future not the small states. A small state is the only one solution which can keep us integrated as India.
As India is divided on the basis of language, In one state all same language speaking population is staying which encourages more love for state than India the hatred is rising as few states are making progress and others come to this state, this gives rise to hatred. This is not gift of small state. And we do not see language problem in small states, if media will stop giving importance to this problem automatically this language problem will go to dustbin, Anyways after 25 or 30 years I am sure they will not find language problem takers...
Today power of knowledge is with Indian youth and no one can make them fool for a long time. Few Facts about our Indian states – 1. Uttar Pradesh with population of more than 167 million is bigger than Germany + France or Russia ,Pakistan 2. China, America, Brazil and Indonesia are the only few nations who are bigger than Uttar Pradesh. 3. TamilNadu (62. 2 million) is bigger than Britain and Italy, 4. Andhra Pradesh (76. 4 million) is little bigger than Germany and Vietnam 5. Bihar is bigger than Mexico 6.
Maharashtra with 92. 1 million is bigger state than Germany. Maharashtra has ten million more than Germany. 7. Bengal is bigger than the Philippines If the big states means progress then why India has not made progress like America, Germany, France or Hong Kong or England. America, Hong Kong both were ruled by England just like India. Do small states suffer? Not if one views Punjab , Haryana and Himachal Pradesh. This shows that there is no guarantee that big state will make progress or small state will make progress.
Remember it does not matter state is small or state is big, most important thing is who is our law maker and how honest he is with his job and nation. If law maker, politician is not good then small or big it does not matter, he will do the corruption and he will take the wrong decisions. When law maker, politician is corrupt no one can save the nation. But when law maker is good he can take the small state to such heights that the small nation can rule the world. Once England ruled the world and today we can see the progress made by the USA or Hong Kong or Taiwan.
Our democracy works like this - one head of the state, then other elected members, run the state with the help of IAS officers and bureaucrats. When the state is big, those officers and elected politicians, law makers are not able to watch carefully every project and how the money is utilized by everyone in every project. Today budget of Government is becoming so big that common people find it difficult to understand, and even studied accountants find it very difficult to understand and find out the mistakes.
If common man does not understand the budget How he can participate and keep watch on the politician to stop the frauds and mistakes done by politician When state is small, if any government employee or law maker or politician will do the fraud, immediately it will show the effect on the other projects as it will become very difficult for that chief minister to bring new funds or hide his black deeds. Just take the example of classroom of 100 students and classroom of 25 students, so in this case which classroom will be easy to manage and give the results.
Today as our states are big, many times villagers from remote places even find it difficult to reach the place of district court, forget about the High court of state. When small state will be created it will give easy access to high court. Small state means small government, small budget, and small departments, very less chance to show fingers on each other by saying that, that department is not doing the work so file is pending. Small states will create competition among each other; this competition will be with the same mother tongue speaking language population.
Because of big nature of states today indirectly the law maker, politician has become the king of that particular area. Because of this honest people will rarely get chance to rule the state or to get elected. Small states will not give chance to politician or law maker to hide his failure or fool the people by saying that this time we have given funds to west or north, as small state means the population will know in real what is happening in every part of his state.
Big states does not benefit towards saving money ,but the nature of big states help to waste the money as well as it gives unlimited scope to do corruption which benefits to the law maker or politician. In small state if any politician will amass wealth, the people of that state can easily notice that and will know how he is earning and making the money, this will help to expose the wrong contracts and his hidden property. Even Indian constitution has article 3 which favors and talks about the creation of new state. It states that - .
Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish, new States on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit. If party who support the creation of small state does not win the election this does not mean that the people of that district do not want separate state. The election is held to choose leader ,MP or MLA and they do not vote for the creation of state. Even if when there is not 100% voting how can it become the will of that district ? Our constitution of India does not have this provision, to get the peoples vote to decide regarding the creation of small state .
The ball is ,power is with the parliament. Again I will come to the point that Small states will divide India, one of the best parts of our Constitution is that the duties between state and central government are divided. Central government is in charge of our army, naval and air force. The heads of these forces do not report to the chief minister, further more brilliant clause, is that our forces do not have common one head of all the forces. This means we got 3 heads, Army head, Naval Head and Air Force Head, and all these 3 heads report to the Prime Minister and President.
We do not have one head of all these 3 forces, if there is one head then he will become so powerful that he can with the help of few states can form the new nation, but as we do not have one head, army forces will not obey the head of the naval force, each one has there own ranking. So when you say that small states will divide India, think again now? When there is no money, no big budget, no big police force, and no big coastal guards how can small state will become Independent and will think about waging war against India. USA is smaller than India but they got more than fifty states.
Remember big states are good for political parties and corrupt leaders or uneducated leaders. Big states are good for the government servants. Our complete Indian working system has become rotten and dirty and these corrupt people have become so rich and powerful that honest common man will not be able to fight with them and win We will need another civil war to repair this corrupt system or to repair this corrupt Indian system we need creation of small states which will help us to break this nexus, friendship of government servants and businessmen and politicians and political parties.
Today in India we got different political parties, but do we see any difference between there political vision. Every party has only one vision, win the election, get the chair and make money. Regarding our political situation in India I am not dreamer, No politician will make changes in this system, a system which makes them as well as there future generations the king of India. To change this we need civil war in India or reforms like creation of small states which will give chance to common Indian to know and understand how the chief minister and his office is working.
Small state will give chance to participate in the administration of government, we can monitor them. With small states there are unlimited benefits and with big states benefits are less and finally everything depends on Good law maker. When small state will get corrupt law maker or politician we can have satisfaction that the corruption amount is not big which will be also in millions. Let’s hope that in future States Reorganization Commission (SRC) will not give more importance to language when dividing or creating new states.
States should be created only after consultation with scientists, engineers and taking consideration of geographic area and advantages. Disadvantages of separate/smaller states (i) Limited powers for small states: Under the existing dispensation, the so-called States are toothless for all practical purposes with no powers to sanction either a small industrial or irrigation project. They can not even rename a place without the Centre's approval. All minerals and underground resources squarely belong to the Centre.
States can not grant permission even to start a newspaper or journal. No resolution passed by a State becomes an Act without the President's seal of approbation. All avenues of revenue were monopolized by the Centre long ago, leaving the States to fall back upon sales tax, octroi and registration fees only. Almost all subjects in the States list were gradually transferred to Concurrent list, thus enabling the Centre to poke a finger in all internal affairs of the States.
Given this ground situation, what additional progress can one expect from the new (small) States, without fighting for true federalism in our constitutional framework ? (ii) No real development for small states: Secondly, did all small States progress ? If they did, what could be the reason ? Orissa, a small State of approx. 1,55,000 sq. k. m. (half the size of Maharashtra), was formed way back in 1936 and is still rated as a backward State. Centrally sponsored irrigation projects and inflows of foreign exchange as also their proximity to the national capital.
From a global perspective too, not all small countries can be credited with progress. Well in our neighbourhood, we have under-developed small countries like Nepal, Bangladesh and Bhutan. (iii) Resources utilized for administrative machinery and not for development: New laws and systems are to be devised on a continuous basis. Thus, small States too are constrained to keep as many as departments as big ones. Can they financially afford it ? What surplus funds are they left with for development, if revenues are exhausted on the administrative machinery itself ?
Uttaranchal State is a case in point whose revenue receipts are well below Rs. 350 crores, but whose annual expenditure exceeds Rs. 1,500 crores. It is for this reason that it was recently accorded status of the Special category State, which means more grants and fewer loans. The plight of Chhattisgarh is no different too. Thus the concept of small States subjects the States to incremental dependence on the Centre and leads to regional jealousies, charges of favouritism and ultimate loss of faith in national integration.
(iv) Possibility of more disputes with no real resolution: The inter-State boundary and river water disputes between a number of States are still unresolved with many of them remaining perpetually sub-judice. For Instance, Karnataka alone has been in conflict with a couple of States over disputed territories (Kasargode and Belgaum) and with another couple of States on water-sharing (the Krishna and Cauvery). The disputes are so emotive that they turned not only governments against governments, but also the people of one State against those of another and sporadic trading of violence is not uncommon.
Given this record, more States means more disputes which will ultimately threaten to erode the very spirit of Indian nationalism. (v) Impetus to secessionist movements: This dangerous doctrine of small States gives a fillip to the secessionist outfits like the LTTE, ULFA. JKLF, and Khalistanis who might find in it a cloaked and implicit endorsement of their balkanization programme. "If small States are OK, why not small countries" they might ask. We have no answer.
(vi) Problems of determining optimum smallness: The parameters to determine the "optimum smallness" are vague. We can reorganize India into 88 Keralas, or 120 Nagalands or 250 Sikkims. This number could be endless. They will serve no loftier purpose than solving the political unemployment of a few. The argument that big States have grown unwieldy by virtue of their vastness and population is untenable and anachronistic for the simple fact that we live in the age of internet, video-conferences, cell phones, express highways, jet planes and superfast railways.
Will these "small advocates" agree to divide Andhra Pradesh into 2 more free and independent states because her population tripled since independence ? Advantages of small states • It will increase administrative efficiency leading to proper utilization of resources. • Development will take place and regional disparities will become narrow. • Small states are more effective for fiscal management. • The popular demands, needs and problems of thf; region may be addressed to efficiently. • There shall be greater competition among states for more development.
• Smaller states~wflThave more homogenous preferences. Disadvantages • It will open the Pandora's box creating demand for more states. • It will add to the burden of administrative expense, which could have been utilized for development work. • Smaller states do not necessarily show better economic performance, e. g. North eastern states. • It may increase inter-state conflicts e. g. water. • The disputes may lead to more and moro demand for special packages fojdjeyelojjment by the parent state.