What is the new narrative to stop "criticism" or even "comment" ? Here's example 1..
Arvind Panagariya concluded his edit page article "Absolute Disaster Averted" in ET 11th June 2021 : "critics who consider themselves responsible need to do some soul searching.. they need to, minimally they need to come forward and acknowledge their error in attacking a policy that was working smoothly.." .. " it was.. a barrage of criticisms and pressure from State governments that forced the hand of the central government that forced the decentralisation of vaccination".
First this statement conflates all the criticism (and "suggestions" I may add,) to result in "abdication" of Centre's responsibility to the "States" and to the private sector to the tune of 50%.
(Alt News: India has 28 states and eight union territories. Out of the eight UTs, Delhi and Puducherry have elected assemblies and Kashmir is under the President’s rule. BJP governs 12 of these directly and six others in coalition governments....
Feb 24: West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee wrote a letter to PM Modi on February 24, requesting that the state be allowed to purchase vaccines for inoculation ahead of the assembly elections. .
March 30: Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik had written a letter to PM Modi on March 30, requesting that COVID vaccines be made available outside the government supply chain in open markets for those who can afford to buy...
On April 8, Maharashtra Health Minister Rajesh Tope accused the centre of “discrimination” in the distribution of vials of Covaxin and Covishield. He alleged that BJP-ruled states were provided more doses. .
( on Apr 18: before he was CM, Stalin urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to take a policy decision swiftly for universal vaccination.. it was equally important to allow independent procurement of drugs, vaccines and medical equipment by state governments...
Apr 19 - decentralisation was announced on April 19
After that: Chhattisgarh Health Minister said the next day that the availability of scarce resources like COVID-19 vaccines should not be decentralised. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan requested PM Modi to reconsider his decision and supply vaccines to states free of cost. Former Kerala Health Minister KK Shailaja said that the Left would have nationalised healthcare if it was in power at the centre.
May 8: .Thackeray wrote a letter to PM Modi on May 8 which said, “The State of Maharashtra is willing to procure the requisite stock of vaccines in a single procurement if possible, so as to safeguard our citizens and to give a boost to India’s vaccination program. However, the producers do not have enough stocks. If the States are allowed to procure from other manufacturers as well, we would be able to cover a larger population in a shorter time: https://www.altnews.in/had-states-demanded-decentralized-vaccine-procurement-as-claimed-by-pm-modi/ )
(opediindia counters Alt news: Alt News edits fake fact-check claiming states did not demand decentralisation of vaccine procurement, continues to obfuscate. Alt News now claims that even though non-NDA state govts demanded decentralised vaccine purchase, that does not matter and Modi is still lying. https://www.opindia.com/2021/06/alt-news-edits-its-fact-check-on-vaccine-decentralisation-continues-to-lie/ Op
ed says that It seems like requests from Mamata Banerjee, Rahul Gandhi, the Maharashtra government, and Stalin does not matter for Alt News. It goes on to declare that PM Modi was cherry-picking statements of some of the Chief Ministers to blame them for the decentralised process of vaccine procurement.
The question is why would a decisive PM, feel "pressure from the states". Is there no space for criticism by the press, the public, by political parties? Does a strong leader get swayed by criticism, or does he get strengthened by it by taking all views into account. Is there no space for joint responsibility or shared responsibility or genuine dialogue? Does independent procurement, mean that the Centre coudl not also do its part?
Perhaps the main reason is that the advisors to PM consists of the "laterally inserted" advisors and managers of public policy. It is the CEO mentality, and not Federal "leadership" that is dominating the current situation.
The centre was aware that Moderna and pFizer who perhaps had the capacity to fulfill this had a problem with the indemnity issue, and that only the "sovereign" could give that, which again does not mean, states cannot negotiate. It perhaps means that the centre which has even now not fully settled this issue, could assure that state that it the centre is willing to negotiate and give sovereign approval to the indemnity". I dont see any reason why Moderna and pFizer would have refused any state if they were in a position to assure centres sovereign indemnity. There was also no reason why centre could have have encouraged state to joint bid for better leverage.
So in my book, I put the extreme swings in vaccination policy to the Centres failure to work out a federal arrangement. Perhaps this is the meaning "One Nation One System" slogan!
My views and references here are "free". Use them if you agree in anyway you like, or critique them, if you dont..