Indian Express Editorial Analysis
04 September 2020

1) Masking the question-

GS 2- Important aspects of governance, transparency and accountability


CONTEXT:

  1. Parliament will meet on September 14, but the Monsoon session, which will be a truncated(short) one, will not have Question Hour, and only a curtailed Zero Hour.
  2. Admittedly, the pandemic is taking a toll, across sectors and arenas, on life and work as usual.

 

 

DOWNPLAYING ITS ROLE:

  1. It is neither unusual nor unexpected that Parliament should also be affected.
  2. And yet, the problem is this. The modification in its functioning seems informed by a view of Parliament as a forum of transaction of government business.
  3. It is downplaying its role as a platform for the people’s representatives to ask questions and the Opposition to hold the government to account.
  4. On paper, Question Hour provides space for MPs from both the ruling and opposition parties to ask questions.
  5. Zero Hour, an Indian parliamentary innovation, is also a space open to all MPs to raise matters of urgent public importance.
  6. But in practice, both Question Hour and Zero Hour are far more important for Opposition MPs than those from the ruling party.
  7. For the Opposition especially cramped in a House in which the ruling party enjoys a large majority, these are precious spaces and opportunities.
  8. And amid a pandemic in which the executive is appropriating more powers, and when there is a greater tendency to short-circuit debate and deliberation, it is the Opposition’s spaces that need to be specially and specifically protected, even extended.

 

ADAPTATION:

  1. Parliaments the world over have had to adapt to the COVID outbreak.
  2. But the timetables of other major Parliaments meeting during the pandemic, be it in UK or New Zealand, have remained largely unchanged even as there have been alterations(changes) in the modalities.
  3. For instance, questions to the Prime Minister in the British parliament were posed both by members in the chamber and remotely.
  4. Even within the country, Question Hour has not been done away with by all state assemblies that have met during the pandemic — while Rajasthan and UP did not have a Question Hour, others like Chhattisgarh and Arunachal Pradesh did.
  5. Amid a crisis, therefore, leaders of government and Opposition must put their heads together to come up with ideas to ensure that India’s Parliament can perform its full and vital role in exceptional circumstances.

 

DISQUIETING PORTENT:

  1. In a letter to chairpersons of Standing Committees a few days ago, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha directed them to avoid taking up subjects that are sub judice(judicial consideration).
  2. The rule of sub judice has always been more a self-imposed restriction in Parliament, which is supreme.
  3. Its scope is also in need of redefinition in times of public interest litigation.
  4. And then, deliberations of standing committees are confidential, the possibilities of their influencing ongoing cases much lower.
  5. Be it the cancelling of Question Hour, the curtailment of Zero Hour or the Speaker’s stern reiteration(repetition) of the sub judice rule — these are disquieting(worrying) portents(sign) for an institution that needs to make its presence felt more in a crisis, not less.

 

CONCLUSION:

There are exigencies(emergency) of pandemic but MPs need precious space in Parliament to ask questions on behalf of those they represent.

 

 

2) Science of armour-

GS 2- Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health


CONTEXT:

Phase 3 trials of the COVID-19 vaccine developed by researchers from the Oxford University and the British-Swedish pharma major AstraZeneca began in the US on Wednesday.

 

 

EVOLVED REGULATORY MECHANISMS:

  1. With tests on the vaccine candidate also underway in India — they began last week — and Brazil, the three worst COVID-19 affected countries are now participants in the Oxford Astra-Zeneca project.
  2. The vaccine had shown promising results in the preliminary trials in which it was tested for safety and immune responses. But these studies were conducted on a few thousand people.
  3. The final trials, involving about 50,000 volunteers, will offer critical insights on how the vaccine will fare amongst people living in varying demographic conditions and belonging to diverse ethnicities and socioeconomic strata.
  4. There is no clear idea so far about when the vaccine will be available for mass administration.
  5. There are, however, indications that a shield(protection) against the coronavirus could be developed at a pace unprecedented in the history of humankind’s struggle against mysterious microbes.
  6. Researchers have drawn lessons from the development of a vaccine against other diseases of the coronavirus family — SARS and MERS.
  7. Studies indicate that the Oxford vaccine can counter the most notorious characteristic of a virus, its ability to mutate.
  8. The world has also evolved regulatory mechanisms that allow the approval of vaccines in emergency situations.
  9. Virologist Gagandeep Kang, pointed out, “these are first-generation vaccines. If we understand how they work, we can work on improving them… to see if they increase the proportion of people who are protected, or the duration of protection”.

 

EFFICACY:

  1. The US FDA has set 50 per cent efficacy in the final trials as the benchmark to approve the vaccine.
  2. Indian regulatory authorities have not set any such yardstick but they have reportedly indicated that a high efficacy rate, say of 90 per cent, could be difficult to achieve.
  3. Experts reason that given the health crisis, a 40 to 50 per cent efficacy rate could be a workable beginning for an inoculation(vaccination) drive.
  4. That’s why they also emphasise the importance of working simultaneously on a number of vaccine candidates — to explore the possibility of mixing vaccines.
  5. It’s salutary, therefore, that India is not pinning(depending) all its hopes on the Oxford vaccine.
  6. Two other candidates are in different stages of trials and the country is also negotiating collaborations with research bodies in other parts of the world.

 

CONCLUSION:

Mass trials will show if Oxford vaccine for COVID-19 works among diverse groups of people. More vaccines will be needed.

 

 

3) Open Campus Challenge-

GS2- Issues relating to development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Education


CONTEXT:

  1. The National Education Policy 2020 (NEP), announced by the government in the last week of July, is a product of prolonged consultations and deliberations.
  2. The debates and discussions on the policy are likely to be much richer.
  3. In the coming weeks and months, the section on the internationalisation of higher education in India could be the focus of much scholarly attention. For good reasons.
  4. With more than 1.5 million schools, over 40,000 colleges and close to 720 universities, India has the second-largest education system in the world after China.
  5. India has entered into the stage of massification of higher education with a gross enrollment ratio of 26.3 per cent, which is fast increasing.
  6. This could make it a lucrative(attractive) destination for foreign universities.

 

 

INTERNATIONALISATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION:

  1. The idea of internationalisation of higher education is based on the mobility of students, faculty members, programmes, and institutions across countries.
  2. Before the NEP, two types of mobility were in vogue, that of faculty members and students.
  3. This movement of students and faculty has informed the NEP’s section on internationalisation.
  4. The attempt to attract foreign universities can also be seen in the context of earlier collaborations with institutions outside the country.
  5. In 2015, the Ministry of Human Resource Development implemented the Global Initiative of Academic Network (GIAN) to enable the country’s higher education institutions to invite world-class scholars, scientists and researchers.
  6. More than 1,500 courses have been completed at Indian higher education institutions in collaboration with international faculty members.
  7. In 2018, the Scheme for Promotion of Academic and Research Collaboration was launched to promote joint research and collaboration with top 500 QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) ranking institutions.
  8. The same year, the Study in India programme identified 30 Asian and African countries (now 42) from where meritorious students would be drawn to study in top 100 NIRF ranked institutions.

 

OPENING FOREIGN CAMPUSES:

  1. The NEP aims to attract top 100 QS World Ranking universities to open offshore campuses in India.
  2. The foreign universities would bring in programme and institution mobility.
  3. There are two views on opening foreign campuses in India.
  4. Those in favour argue that first, it would reduce the migration of Indian students and give those who cannot afford to go abroad an opportunity to study in foreign universities at home.
  5. Second, foreign campuses would bring knowledge, technology and innovative pedagogy(teaching) to the country and set new standards in higher education, spurring Indian institutions to improve.
  6. Those cautious about the move argue that it would increase the cost of education and widen the already existing disparities in matters of accessing quality and affordable higher education.
  7. This, in turn, could accentuate(emphasize) the existing hierarchies in the country, and have a bearing on the diversity on campuses.
  8. There could be a scramble for meritorious students with the lion’s(major) share going to foreign campuses.

 

LOOKING BEYOND BINARIES:

  1. There is no doubt that the increase in the gross enrolment ratio in higher education institutions calls for more such institutions.
  2. The invitation to foreign universities in the top 100 QS world rankings could ensure the entry of quality institutions to meet this demand.
  3. The collaboration between Indian and foreign higher educational institutions would enhance India’s exposure to global intellectual resources.
  4. Nearly 30 years after the move to open up the economy, a policy to attract foreign universities in the country was, perhaps, inevitable(unavoidable).
  5. Moreover, some Indian higher education institutions do have offshore campuses in places such as Dubai.

 

CHALLENGES:

  1. However, the ideas outlined in the NEP require fine-tuning.
  2. The first challenge will be to widen the scope of internationalisation. Several world-class institutions such as the Max Planck Institute could fall through the policy’s cracks because they do not participate in any world rankings, let alone the QS World Ranking.
  3. Second, there is a growing body of literature critiquing the world rankings.
  4. Third, STEM and professional courses have greater market value compared to social sciences and humanities. There is thus a possibility of foreign campuses turning their back on disciplines in these streams.
  5. Fourth, vocational and skill education — on which the NEP lays much importance — cannot be internationalised in the same manner as academic education.
  6. Finally, we do not know if the foreign varsities actually agree with the overall vision of NEP.