Today’s Ministry of Planning is a “shell” ministry for the Planning Commission and the programs that the Planning Commission retains under its control. The Planning Commission was created in 1950 to establish how India would use its resources to meet its declared objectives, usually over five year periods. In 2011-12, the ministry housed and devoted most of its budget to a national identification program called the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) that is overseen by the Planning Commission.

The most important organization in terms of policy planning has never been the ministry, but the Planning Commission, which has existed since 1950. The commission issues five-year plans that set out how resources will be used in the economy. Planning as a practice was then widely prevalent in the developing world. 

From 1950 to the mid-1960s, a period known as the heyday of Nehruvian planning, the Planning Commission played a preeminent role in setting India’s economic priorities through five-year plans. For example, it directed public money to heavy industries such as state-owned steel factories. In the mid-1960s, for reasons that are still debated by scholars, the efficacy of the planning regime collapsed and India’s industrial growth stagnated. However, the Planning Commission continued to operate.   

By 1991, with the introduction of Liberalization, the series of policy changes that promoted more private sector and market-based solutions, the Planning Commission had taken on a new role. No longer the primary focal point of resource allocation in the Indian economy, the Planning Commission nonetheless continued to issue five-year plans that set political and economic priorities, albeit with a softer touch.  Today’s Planning Commission’s plans still involve government in the economy, but with far more emphasis on supporting growth through the private sector rather than through direct provision of goods and services by the government. The Planning Commission itself remains an immensely significant policymaking tool in Indian politics and overshadows the ministry to which it is attached, which does not even have an independent website. 

The Ministry of Planning is largely a “shell” ministry for the Planning Commission and programs that the Planning Commission retains under its control. Currently, the Ministry of Planning houses a relatively large program, the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), operating under the auspices of the Planning Commission. The UIDAI seeks to create a database of Indian residents’ biometric and other information and issue each resident a unique number that corresponds to their information. Its chairman has a post equivalent to that of a Union Cabinet minister.  The Minister of State for Planning will, for example, respond to Parliamentary questions regarding the UIDAI.

Attached Bodies or Autonomous Bodies

Planning Commission

The Planning Commission has created eleven 5-year plans, beginning in 1951. The commission was and remains a crucial component of India’s governance as a tool for long range budgeting and priority setting, though it is usually viewed as having lost power in the 1990s as a result of Liberalization. These changes involved an increased emphasis on using the market and the private sector, rather than planning, to undertake tasks such as resource allocation in the Indian economy. The Prime Minister traditionally serves as the chairperson of the Planning Commission, with the remainder of members generally high-profile experts. The deputy chairman of the Planning Commission has a post equivalent to a Union Cabinet minister.

Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI)

The Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) project was created in 2009 to issue ID numbers to every Indian for the purpose of better delivery on welfare schemes and to monitor the government’s performance. Indians have a large number of possible identity documents and fraudulent identity documents are not difficult to obtain; the UIDAI is designed to tackle both problems. Its goal is to provide numbers to 600 million by March 2014, some of whom have never had an ID before.

The Unique ID Authority of India program aims seeks to provide a twelve-digit national identification number, to be known as “Aadhaar,” to all residents of India, which will be linked with their biometric information. While the goal of the program is the facilitation of providing welfare services to Indian residents and the program is currently voluntary, some critics are concerned about the creation of a database that would retain biometric and other information on a large percentage of the Indian population. 

However, critics have raised privacy concerns alleging that the real purpose of the program is “to target and track people.” Concerns have also been raised about the security of the UIDAI’s database. Nandan Nilekani, former CEO of the company Infosys, is the chairman of the authority, a Union Cabinet-level post.

Rs. 1470 crore ($293.03 million USD), or 87.7% of the Ministry of Planning’s 2011-12 budget goes to the Unique ID Authority of India program.

Of what is left in the Ministry of Planning’s 2011-12 budget, Rs. 92.98 crore ($18.54 million USD), goes to the Planning Commission and the remainder goes to a number of small programs, such as the National Rainfed Area Authority and the Expert Group on Low Carbon Economy.

Is Big Brother Watching?

While the Unique Identity Authority of India project is justified in terms of socio-economic benefits for Indian residents, critics fear that the program is in reality meant for security purposes and will allow the government to harass citizens. Further, although enrollment the program is currently voluntary, critics argue that it will become de facto compulsory as government moves to link the UIDAI number with access to benefits or other government services. Others have raised concerns about whether the program can be effective at all in maintaining a secure database and issuing numbers safe from fraudulent duplication. The authority, however, maintains that it can safely house biometric information and issue unique identifications to Indian residents.

Why Indians Should Fear the UID (by Praful Bidwai, Rediff.com)

Data is Secure; Biometrics Ensure Uniqueness (by Rohini Mohan, Tehelka)

A Critical Primer on India’s UID (by Simi Chacko and Pratiksha Khanduri, Kafila.org)

The Foundations of Aadhaar (by Himanshu, Mint)

In India, How Poor Is Poor When It Comes to Accessing Government Aid?

With numerous social welfare programs, the Indian government is faced with the dilemma of whether or not to limit access among the poor to the programs according to benchmarks that are sometimes viewed as arbitrary. Through a Supreme Court affidavit, the Planning Commission set a de facto official poverty line at Rs. 32 ($0.61 USD) per day in cities and Rs. 26 ($0.49 USD) in rural areas. Those who are officially below the poverty line are officially entitled to receive a ‘Below Poverty Line’ card that entitles them to food and other benefits, although in practice it can be difficult to secure a so-called BPL card. By stating a relatively low poverty line, the Planning Commission appeared to be calling for restrictions on access to welfare schemes. Critics, including high-level Congress Party members on the National Advisory Council, were incensed at the perceived attempt to limit access by the poor to benefits. 

Pro-Planning Commission Poverty Line

Deputy Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia said the Planning Commission was “factually correct” and “not all that ridiculous in Indian conditions.” Ahluwalia further stated that if critics felt the poverty estimate was too low, there was nothing the Planning Commission could do but set up another committee to study the matter.  The Planning Commission’s affidavit to the Supreme Court is based on the Tendulkar Committee report, which the Planning Commission had requested to review how the poverty line is set.  The Ahluwalia has further suggested that the numbers stated in the affidavit are to be revised and that it was not its intention to limit access to aid with its statement to the court.

Whose Line is it Anyway? India Rethinks its Poverty Schemes (by Jyoti Thottam, Time.com)

Montek Defends Affidavit as “Factually Correct” (by Ananth Krishnan, The Hindu)

India’s Official Poverty Line Doesn’t Measure Up (by Jyoti Ghose, The Guardian)

Anti-Planning Commission Poverty Line

Opponents of using the poverty line to define who is poor in India argue that many poor and vulnerable people would be excluded by the Planning Commission’s statement in the Supreme Court affidavit. They argue that the number of poor in India is potentially much higher than those who earn, per day, less than Rs. 32 ($0.61 USD) in urban settings and Rs. 26 ($0.49 USD) in rural settings because the numbers artificially exclude large numbers of the poor. As a result, they argue that broader criteria than the Planning Commission’s statement on the poverty line should be used to determine eligibility for aid programs.

Right to Food Campaign’s Open Letter to Montek Singh Ahluwalia on the BPL Issue (by Right to Food Campaign, National Alliance of People’s Movements)

Live on Rs. 32 a day: Aruna Roy to Montek Ahluwalia (Times of India)

Struggling to enter the BPL Club (by Jean Dreze, The Hindu)

Delinking the Planning Commission’s Poverty Line from Access to Aid

The Planning Commission and the Rural Development Ministry came to a compromise that the figures derived from the Planning Commission’s estimate of poverty would not be used to determine who would receive “Below Poverty Line” cards and therefore government benefits. Rather, the Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC), scheduled to be completed in 2012, will determine who is eligible for government aid programs.