‘No surprises’ seems to be the hashtag for this year’s budget, as echoed by the giants of Indian industry on TV channels, as they heave sighs of relief and project hope for an economic recovery. No surprises – because the government proceeded on a mostly ‘business as usual’ plan, reiterating its commitment to privatisation (albeit more openly), focusing on incentives for corporates, including labour reforms, no COVID-19 cess and plenty of other platitudes amounting to little else. This was the first Union budget after a pandemic that devastated millions of lives – mostly poor lives, but human lives nonetheless. Dare they have expected some ‘surprises?’
Surprises in the form of relief and recovery to mitigate their huge losses – a targeted stimulus package perhaps (every other country has one), a plan for reopening and strengthening schools to make up for the learning gap and the pandemic’s trauma, recovery of small businesses or of unorganised labour that has found itself out in the cold for nearly a year, a plan to revitalise MSMEs? Or is it that, from this government, all this would be too much to expect? So yes, no surprises here. It is business as usual: neglect of the poor, of those on the margins of education and livelihood, of women and girls, of farmers – of most citizens, really. Does this in turn raise some serious questions of state legitimacy? Or would that be a surprise, too?
I comment on education, and in a piece last week had highlighted some of the challenges facing the sector due to the pandemic, and expressed hope that the government would care to address at least some of them. Instead, it has completely looked away, as though the education sector was bypassed by the pandemic – when in fact it was badly affected. Even the UN secretary-general has warned of an “education catastrophe” worldwide, despite many countries having prioritised education in their pandemic response.
But in India, schools have been closed for a year now, millions haven’t had access to remote learning, schools haven’t even begun to prepare for the return of children, many children may not even return, teachers are in short supply and not trained to handle remote-teaching or the diversity they will encounter when schools do open. The psychosocial impact and the nutritional impact are yet to be determined, but from all accounts they are likely to be monumental and long-lasting.
However, the budgetary allocation for the coming year for Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (Rs 31,050 crore) – the government’s flagship programme for school education – is much lower than it was even last year (Rs 38,751 crore). The allocation for midday meals is lower too (Rs 11,500 crore) than the revised estimates of last year (Rs 12,900 crore) and the total National Education Mission allocation, which includes teacher education as well, is also down from Rs 38,860.50 crore to Rs 31,300.16 crore. Further, there is no mention of making schools safe to return to, teacher-training to handle post-pandemic crises, bringing children back to school or addressing the potential nutritional crisis.
In fact, Union finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman had not a word for the vast number of students who have struggled to keep themselves going this past year.
This year also saw the passage of a new National Education Policy that called to double government expenditure over the next decade, starting from this year. But all the finance minister said was “strengthening of 15,000 schools” in line with the NEP. That is only about 1% of the schools in the country. Are the others not part of the NEP? And which 15,000 schools will these be?
While not expressly mentioned yet, a closer look at the budget document shows an increase in allocation to Kendriya Vidyalayas, from Rs 6,437.68 crore in 2020-2021 to Rs 6,800 crore this year, and Navodaya Vidyalayas, from Rs 3,480 crore to Rs 3,800 crore. So these are likely being targeted for the improvement to new NEP standards. However, these schools already receive preferential treatment with much higher expenditure per student, a full complement of teachers and good infrastructure. It is the lakhs of other schools that require the extra support. The government is offering to “handhold” them to help come up to standard. One is hard pressed to fathom the rationale here.
On the other hand, the minister has chosen to add 150 Sainik schools – but with private and NGO support! It is not clear why Sainik schools are a priority in a pandemic year. It would appear, then, that neither the rhetoric nor intention are even attempting to address the problems that exist. Instead, listening to Sitharaman’s speech and reading the budget documents, one gets the feeling that “minimum government maximum governance” – a slogan the government revived this year – really means “absent government and private governance”.
Relief is to be provided by communities and NGOs, public assets are to be privatised, public sector banks to be disinvested, public services are to be privatised, private individuals are expected to provide support to teachers, even Sainik schools are to be opened with private sector and NGOs support. Clearly, the government has no plans to contribute to an ‘Atmanirbhar Bharat’. For who or what is this budget, then?
It is becoming increasingly tiresome to comment on the education budget year after year: it is but a tale of woe. As the demand for education from all quarters has increased, the state’s commitment has correspondingly shrunk. Parents from the lower quintiles are spending larger and larger fractions of their household income on education, without a guarantee of quality as even private schools are unable to provide better quality uniformly and tens of millions are still out of school.
Teachers struggle with multi-grade teaching and poor academic support, and millions of first-generation learners are still being denied their right to education. An education catastrophe existed even before the pandemic, but it is clearly being exacerbated now. To ignore it so comprehensively defies all logic.
How long will this sector be ignored and at whose peril? Is it not amply clear that the fallout from such deep and persistent neglect of education is bound to create serious social and economic problems with long lasting effects for everyone? That economic recovery and growth cannot be based on a population whose human development has so consistently been neglected? That the social backlash can be (and is) devastating for everyone? That, the sector cannot be parcelled out to private and non-governmental largesse or philanthropy, which simply hasn’t the capacity to deal with the scale of the problem? That technology alone can’t save it? That serious physical, human and financial capacity gaps exist that require urgent redressal by the state? That none of this can be achieved by reducing financial allocations or not increasing them in line with requirements?
Yet every year, the Union education ministry allocation is whittled down to a fraction of its ask. This year, too, while the ministry asked for Rs 1,03,673.66 crore, it has received Rs 93,224 crore. How then do we expect India to be ‘atmanirbhar’? The fact that the government continues to turn a blind eye to the obvious links between education and all aspects of atmanirbharta has indeed failed to surprise.
Kiran Bhatty is a senior fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, and a founder member of the Forum for Deliberation on Education.