How was the quality questions? How did you feel? Were you able to answer or answer at least? Were the questions from the areas which you are actually prepared or was it totally new to you or how was the questions? Sorry, few questions were tough. Tough in the sense like they are all from the syllabus. Which questions were tough? What was the general feel? See, totally I have asked seven questions from quality. So, how many questions were you able to attend satisfactorily? How many were known to you but still you could not do justice to it? How many questions you were not able to attend even a single point you would not have to write about it? So, what was the scene like? Okay, how many people felt the quality questions were easy? This will be the standard of questions when you write your actual main examinations. I have made it in such a way that at least one question you will not have any idea about it. Some of you will know six different, different set of six questions whereas some of you will know another different set of six questions, but at least one question people it will be there that you will not have at least two points to write about it. Let's see how you even manage those kind of questions also. Okay, so let's start with the discussion. First question is collective responsibility is a myth in the Indian cabinet system. Come in, you can take any stand. So, for those people who have taken collective responsibility is a myth. What are the points that you have used in support of your claim? Please start discussing what were the points. So, how many of you have written that collective responsibility is actually a myth? There is no such thing called as collective responsibility in Indian cabinet system. Yes, there is a lack of internal democracy. Okay, so is that a correct point to justify collective responsibility is a myth? What are the other views? Try it, try it, try it. Okay, prime minister's dominance, difference in opinion among the ministers. Okay, so you are saying council of ministers. Okay, what else? Okay, fear of getting ousted from the cabinet. So, that leads to what? Yes, yes, yes, in coalition governments, in coalition governments, you have partners who belong to different political ideologies. So, basically it's not expected of all of them to actually have a same line of thought. Basically, they might not even be made as a party to the process of decision making. Say, if a telecommunications minister during a coalition government time under Dr. Manmohan Singh, A. Raja was there as a telecommunication minister. And if somebody, if some policy making happens, basically, both of them feel that they are not in tune with each other, their political ideology, their thought process is not on similar wave in the Dabringmar field, they will not even be invited to the process of decision making. So, the cabinet committee meetings, he will not be invited as a participant. Basically, what happens is no collective work happens. Okay, no collective, there is no collectivity when it comes to decision making in such a kind of scenario. Coalition government actually undermines the sense of collective responsibility. Okay, anything else? That is for the purpose of convenience. Basically, you cannot have the entire council sitting together for each and every decision making. So, you take it in a smaller group and then you put it in front of the council of ministers. Quickly, see, all decisions pertain to one ministry or the maximum two or three ministries, not more than that. So, three ministers will be invited and even if those three ministers participate in decision making, that is also called as collective responsibility. Cases, many a times it happens that the unilateral decision which happens in the case of say demonetization, nobody was kept in loop. Even the finance minister did not know what is happening there. So, in that kind of scenario, that is when nothing happens, PMs dominance and things like that. Basically, these are the points which you can justify to say that collective responsibility is a myth in the Indian cabinet system. Is there any other point on the other hand which you can actually say to justify the stand that no, no, no cabinet collective responsibility still exists in Indian cabinet system. And another important fact which you can use to justify it is in terms of any scam, at least, present those scams. Say, when 2G scam was all spoken about in parliament, the other ministers, nobody resigned or anything. Even when a railway accident happens, when a lot of destruction to life happens, it is a single minister, railway minister who takes the moral responsibility and he tenders his resignation, not like as of the entire council of ministers tenders their resignation. So, virtually, practically speaking, the collective responsibility becomes absent here. Yes? Aspirations of few ministers. Sorry, what aspiration? Regional aspirations. Regional aspirations of few ministers. So, because of? Okay. Okay. Because he was not in tune with the policy of the government. Right? So, I was wearing a one-ditching leather. It has already figured in this. Friends of four people. Okay. So, this will be a good four points for supporting your claim that collective responsibility is actually a myth in Indian cabinet system. Is there anybody who has thought on the other side? Advisory role played by? Advisory role played by? Okay. Again, it depends upon, depends upon how you define collective responsibility. Do you mean to say that when everybody is involved in decision-making alone, that is called as collective responsibility? Or is it only about working as a team in the sense when there is an assault on the credibility of the council of ministers, all of them stick together and stand together and say that, no, no, no, we are working as a team. So, we tend to give our resignation. What is collective responsibility? Collective decision-making is different from collective responsibility. Collective responsibility is when one of your colleagues in the council of ministers makes a mistake, everybody equally shares the blame. That is called as collective responsibility. Collective responsibility doesn't mean that all of you work as a team. That is not the case. In all these instances, what is going to happen is, shows tendencies where if something happens, if some wrong result happens, the other ministers are not going to take responsibility. They are going to tie up from taking responsibility, saying that he is the person who has dominated the meeting, dominated. So, basically, we are not taking responsibility. So, what I am trying to portray by discussing about this is, it is not about PM alone as unilaterally taken decision. That is not the case. What I am trying to show is because of such unilateralism, what do you say? The way you function as a team when some accusation is leveled against you, collective responsibility, you basically have to tend the resignation as a team when something wrong happens in your policymaking. That is it. Whether that is happening or not is what is called as collective responsibility. It doesn't mean about collective decision-making is one of the small part of collective responsibility. Because I am not able to find any other point saying collective responsibility is a myth in the Indian cabinet system. The opposed panne, no, no, no, it still exists up in the shoulder. I am not actually having any kind of points. Do you actually have any points on the other side? What increases accountability? Okay. No. What you are saying is, because of everyone, you cannot take an independent decision. Accountability is actually towards the Lok Sabha, basically. Okay. You should have a majority supporting whatever decisions you take. That is the process of accountability. So, is there anybody else who has written anything in support of saying that there exists today collective responsibility in cabinet system? Is there any example in the recent days which can be shown to support such a kind of a claim? In case of no-confidence motion, if it is passed, then... Okay. Fine. Right. Right. Correct. Yes. But the issue is, during President's speech will not be subjected to vote at all. Okay. You cannot actually cause a motion for voting on President's speech. Even if there is no majority in the house, President's speech will just go on as usual. So, then you cannot say that because of having a majority, only President's speech has happened. So, President's speech is actually dealing from this. Maybe the point that he has mentioned in no-confidence motion, there is some... See, the question is not about... The question is about Indian cabinet system. Just think about cabinet alone. Anga wants the collective responsibility, whether it is there or not. Not various departments. That's again... You're talking about cabinet system alone. Yes. Three or four ministers involved. Information is required. That is all fine. That can be justified. I think another important point, which you can use here, is that, basically, when a bill or when a policy actually goes to the President, he has the right to actually ask the Prime Minister... He'll redirect the Prime Minister to put it before the council and get its approval and bring it back. Okay. A Prime Minister alone cannot take a decision and he can go to the President and ask him to give us signature on it. That instance, the President has the rightful powers under article I think 75 or 78, either of the two articles. 78. By 78, he can actually ask the Prime Minister to place the subject matter in purview of council of ministers, get their permission and then come back. How do you know that it reinforces the concept of collective responsibility? That can be used as a claim. Okay. Correct. Of course, they actually speak in a single voice. They're not supposed to criticize the policies of the government. Okay, fine. No matter your moona point, which you can take either of the stand. But it's all about how powerfully, how convincingly you're able to, at least if you can give some example, maybe like this can be used. They actually have to speak in a single voice. Say if some member actually speaks in a different voice, he will be asked by the Prime Minister to submit his resignation. And if at all such a recent incident has happened, if you can code that as an example, then it will be strengthening your claim. Okay. You have points. You can take it for both sides. The only thing is how powerful the point tends to be. If you have an example to use, then you can say it. Whereas for this side of the argument, I had ready examples. But as you said, these are also valid arguments. Moving on to the next question. Discuss how the Indian Constitution, though primarily modeled on British parliamentary system, had incorporated certain modifications to suit its federal requirements. Okay. Let's discuss about the modifications. What has happened? Yes? Vigidity? Republican. What is the question? Read the last three, four words. Suit its federal requirements. So this entire differentiation has to be viewed on the perspective of in what way this is different from the point of federalism. Okay. Council of states. The upper house actually becomes representative of the states. Because the upper house is something which is there in British Parliament also. Fine. Next. Return Constitution. Whereas, there is conventions. There is nothing called as unwritten constitution of being the only one. Okay. Division of subjects. It's a constitutional arrangement itself. That can be written here only. Division of subjects. Or, just a minute. Or the statement what you have said can be written in the form of limited government, the concept of limited government. Okay. The government cannot do anything and everything that it wishes. So, it actually has to follow abide by the constitution. Even it has to actually reduce the powers of states. So, basically, we are putting on a limitation to the power of the government, which is actually the concept of limited government. Yes. Anything else? Yeah. Modification is there. You don't have any representation. On the first of all, you don't have the concept of states as a separate units which have their own interest. I mean, the concept of an animal. So, that's why you don't have any state representative there. But whereas in India, we have, the house is fully filled and it really represents the interest of the state governments. So, that is the difference. Distinct to characteristics of, so now you are actually, the point that you are saying actually supports the claim that India is similar to UK. There you have a unitary tendency. The hallmark of our system is, we have actually reduced the unitary tendency in so and so limitations in the constitution. When you say that we have a strong center during the time of emergency, then it means that you are tilting to over the side of, if the question would have been, what is the difference between the unitary side of, if the question would have been, what are the similarities that would have been a better point, but not for this question. Constitutional independence of religion. More than enough, nothing is needed more than that. Only thing is, I don't know how many of you actually started discussing about anything, it's a republican that is monarchy, you have deviated and gone in the wrong direction. You can, you can. Just you cannot just say monarchy versus republicanism. You should mention this. So we have somebody who actually is actually, he is elected with a 50 percent equal proportion of the states also being represented. So because of which the federalism gets strengthened. He acts as a custodian of the federal setup. It all depends upon the way you justify it, just by differentiating it on republican and monarchical terms, you will not be doing justice, but if you write this also, then it is correct. Secularism, what are the distinct characteristics of Indian pressure groups and Indian constitutional primarily more around British parliamentary system. Okay. So the question here is, the question here is, though we have taken a lot of elements from British parliamentary system, we are differing in certain ways. So in that, how can you talk about secularism? Have we adopted secularism first of all? Have we borrowed secularism from the west and have we made certain changes? Maybe you can whatever you are saying is okay, but our secularism is just mentioned in the constitution based on our own needs. So that was not something which we have borrowed from the west, symmetric federalism. What is that? What is that? Special status to a few states. See there, the concept of states as a local unit itself is absent. Special category to a few states. Okay, fine. That's it. Some five or six points if you have, it is not at all about the number of points. This is only a 10-mark question. Any three, any combinations of these points, whatever you have written is fine. Just that, it all depends about how you have linked it and whether your direction in this question in your answer is correct or not. The federal requirement that's the key point here. So the third question, what are the distinctive characteristics of Indian pressure groups and how can elements of tradition and modernity in their political behavior. Very factual, I mean, there's no analysis or anything mentioned here. So, characteristics. What are the characteristics of Indian pressure groups in the pressure group? RSS is a pressure group that is much, much beyond bigger than a pressure group. So, their intention was not actually when the RSS was started, it was never used as a tool to lobby or political institution. That was not the objective. It was started with a with an objective. In a night, the worker when he wanted he wanted to unite the entire nation on a certain basis. So, that is the reason why RSS has come into existence. It was not to actually influence policymaking in British parliament or anything of that sort. So, RSS in current day can be viewed as a pressure group in certain areas, that's all. So, RSS by own objective, they don't call them pressure groups. See, what is the meaning of the word characteristic? Role of religion all on the you are addressing which part of the question and the tradition and modernity if you are mentioning it, if that is your claim, if whatever you are saying is used to support that part, then maybe it is correct, but till then demand of the question is first part address what are the characteristics of Indian pressure groups. That is another way of saying it is they tend to remain depoliticized in the Kachchi Central Kondhanu they will be giving their support because they don't want to actually antagonize any political party. Whoever comes to the power they actually get favors from them. So, that is why they tend to always have a neutral stance or you can write politically neutral. Okay. Yes. Yes. Yes. In U.S. Presidents win depending upon the pressure groups they and the gun association so many lobbies are there. It is about winning their support which actually makes the presidents in U.S. win elections. In India that is not the case. They are not dependent upon so small pressure groups. This is one of the main distinctive features of Indian pressure group. What else? Collective bargaining that is basically a complete U.S. concept. explain it further, just one word will not suffice for this. What are you trying to say? Collective bargaining, I am not sure. Why are you talking about the functions of pressure groups in India? What did I ask? The question is what is the distinctive feature of Indian pressure groups? But in a compared to certain other pressure groups around the world, in what way do you think is the Indian pressure group different? More? You mean to say one group itself is more diverse or you mean to say there are many groups working in so many areas? Do you mean to say in US there are, yes? In their objectives? In their objectives? Okay, okay. You have to give some example just by saying that they are more diverse. In US also there can be 100 groups. Maybe in India there can be 1000 groups. So on what basis this splintering happens? Maybe there are so many aspects about Indian life which actually divides people on the basis of different interests. For each caste there is a group and people are doing varied professions and for each profession there is a group. That is actually a reflection of Indian society itself. So maybe diversity in a number of groups is diverse. That will not be justified. Maybe if you can link it with the nature of society itself and then you say that it is because of this amount of diversity in pressure groups seen in India is also very wide. Then it is okay. I am sure there are much more relevant and better points to address this question. Anything else? They work based upon one ideology. Ideology in Sultangala, necessity in Sultangala, their domain expertise is in one area in Sultangala. Correct, exactly. Opportunistic, interest-based groups. During the time of policy making they really don't care about any other section of population's interest but that is the very objective. They always tend to take a very politically neutral stance because whenever there is an opportunistic moment available to them they can actually seize those moments irrespective of the political actors who are in power. Because what you are saying that they are based on self-interest. That is the function of any pressure group. Add-on in nature. Not everything. Distinctive features of in Sultangala. If you don't have points maybe those are there are other points also but this can also be written as a point. It depends upon the example that you have mentioned. You should also say why you are saying this because in so-and-so instances all of a sudden something has come after that is over they are actually dissolved totally of being M R L L. See basically another area of distinction is they are all very very weak institutionally. I'll tell you how. Look at Greenpeace, look at Beta. They are also pressure groups but look at the kind of funding that those organizations get and look at Indian pressure groups. Vicky, CM, they don't even have a actually they don't even have an office also. Basically they just meet at one of the members offices or when you will be designated and they will have their meetings there. But that is not the case with Western interest-based groups. For them they have proper structure, manpower and funding. Everything is proper. So that is why these people are weak institutionally in the sense both infrastructure wise as well as funding wise also. They are totally dependent upon the members to fund. Thikinandana who will actually fund them. It's only the members who are a part of that. But Greenpeace, Petaclan, Aprilankadev, world over they will be getting funding. So weak structures both financially as well as infrastructure wise. So that is one of the distinctive feature of Indian pressure groups. Yes, largely non-violent. So you mean to say in Western countries the groups are all violent. Example, is there any example that you have? You mean to say the protest which they organize and after some time it becomes violent. Was it organized under the umbrella of any particular pressure group? Was it totally a people's gathering? Sporadically people had different interests. All of them gathered at the same place and from there only suddenly suddenly some groups started coming up. Okay, this much is enough to write about characteristics. Then we discuss about the in what way do they combine both elements of traditionality and modernity in their political behavior. Traditionality, some of the points very easy. Political behavior. Yes. Their mobilization is based on caste, religion, language, region. On these basis they tend to mobilize people. One. Anything else? Anything else? Elements of traditionality or what else? When they are supporting against the band. Right. Okay. Okay. Okay. Which group, example? Okay. So they just think in one area point this is one. The other angle of it is they combine both traditionality and modernity. What can we mention here? Means of influence. They use the tools of modern world. You can use it. Darna, Garo. Okay. Protesting by mobilizing the people on the streets. These are primitive methodologies. So that comes under the traditional categories. Whereas here means which are using social media, creating an international pressure. Okay. Because they have contacts with various international organizations. So somehow they are able to make sure that that organization actually puts pressure on that country so that that country's political leadership puts pressure on this country's political leadership. In the Maree, they are able to use all these modern tools. So when we wrote about this, we can write about liberalism, liberal values. Like here the mobilization is based on liberal rights. Say for example, gay rights, homo-sexuality. This is used to mobilize people. So this comes under the political behavior using modern values, modern liberal values. Good enough. Good enough if you can bring all these points and any other issues. It's not asked here. Objectives also tend to get changed. Example, temple entry to temple entry to reservation. Yes, yes.  It's a modern day phenomenon. So their approach has. That is actually coming under the mobilization based on caste. Once again, you are mobilizing people based on caste. Only then you can do that. Maybe there is no extra point. Their demand is for a representation in a modern political system. But the energy that they use is actually based on primitive values of casteism. Okay question number 11. First came the nation, then the constituents, then the party. In the light of the above statement, examine the conditions of disqualification under anti-defection law and propose steps to enable the law to strike a balance between political stability and political responsibility. How did you approach this question? Statement putting law. Then the nation, then the constituents, then the party. What does this mean? Right. Clear up. Clear up. Because of anti-defection. Okay. Political stability is about the party. Okay. Political responsibility is towards the... What is the demand of the question? Is there any other people here who had problems in understanding the question? Because if that is the case, I have framed the question as wrong. So was it legible for... was it understandable at your end? Or was there a problem in understanding this question? Okay, then how would you answer it? What are you supposed to do for this question first? Talk about the conditions of disqualification and then in the light of the statement examine the conditions of disqualification under anti-defection law. Conditions of disqualification, you have some three or four conditions. The question here is examine the conditions. From the condition, you will have to actually bring out why those conditions were put in place. What was the use of that conditions? Only then you are actually addressing the question, examine the conditions. Otherwise they could have just asked in the light of the above statement, list out the conditions. That would have more than suffice, but demand of the question is examine the conditions. Basically when you mention those conditions, you will have to examine... you will have to highlight why the what of the question is those conditions. The why of those conditions. What is the reason for that? What do you put in words? Stable government. You are just saying the condition alone. I am not asking you. What is the objective of the condition? That is the demand of examine. You are supposed to make a study of the conditions. When you are supposed to make a study, you are supposed to bring out the reason for the condition. Why? How come? Sorry, sorry. Come again, come again. Right. Okay. That is actually when that can be written, when you address this part of the question. Second part of the question. The first part is examine the conditions of disqualification. See, all of you write yes. Yeah, so what is it? Because he was elected on party ticket. So what is happening here? Exactly, exactly. Examine the conditions. You have to bring out this word. Breach of trust of the electorate. Otherwise I could have just asked list out the conditions and that would have actually done. Since the question here is examine the conditions, it means that you will have to understand you will also have to bring out why was the condition put there in the first place. Because he has showed a different face to the public when he was campaigning for votes. He said that I represent this particular ideology in economics. I represent this particular ideology when it comes to culture. But after he gets elected it means that he is actually cheating the electorate. So there is a breach of trust. It is only to punish him, punishing a representative for the breach of trust of his action of voting for another party or resigning from the membership of the party. It is to prevent this, this tendencies. The condition is kept. That is the intention here. When you examine the conditions, there is no reason to just mention that and just be satisfied with that. You have to write something more about it. Anything else in that? Yeah, same logic applies. To maintain the sanctity of representation. See these are all different. You might think that it all looks like repeating the same thing again and again. But this is the trick here in the exams. This is the trick in getting the marks here. For half more extra, one mark extra it is about writing in these kinds of jargon, maintaining the sanctity of electoral representative process. There are only three conditions. One is by resigning from the membership of the party. One is going against the direction of the member. The other is when a nominated member joins within after the period of 6 months. So, the basic objective is only nothing more than that. To prevent this, maintaining the sanctity of electoral representation, how does it get violated by the process of hostry? So, that addresses the first part of the question. Examine the conditions of disqualification. You write the three conditions and you mention this is the reason why it has been put in place. When you write that, that means that because of anti-defection law, you are putting the party's interest above the selfish individual interest. Because of anti-defection law, you are able to put the party's interest somewhat at a higher pedestal than the individual interest. But at the same time, because of anti-defection law, the national interest also is actually put down underneath the party interest, whereas it should be the other way around as per this statement. That is the question here. First comes the nation, came the nation, then the constitution. This is a quote said by Winston Churchill. So, that is the ideal scenario where nation first then comes your party, then comes the individual. But because of anti-defection law this is ensured, but whereas this is not ensured. Because there are certain policies, there are certain piece of legislations or decisions of the government which the party members themselves feel like criticizing. But just because of anti-defection law, they lack that independence to criticize. So, what are these? So, what the other part of question is and propose steps to enable the law. So, what kind of steps can be brought out here? Right, right, right. Bring out, come out. Election promises given by the party that can be in other legislations there need not be. Election promises like I will reduce hunger. It is to achieve that they will come up with legislation. That would be money bills except for money bills and no confidence motion for other normal pieces of legislations the whip can be directed. Anything else? Which one? Anti-defection law. Advisory, then how will you actually hold them in check? They will actually breach the limits. So, that is why. So, this is one important step. The other one is maybe the power of disqualification of a member on grounds of anti-defection can be taken out from the hand of speaker. Probably it can be placed based on the recommendations of election commission and the disqualification can be done by a constitutional authority like president. So, this is not my idea. This is something given by a committee called as Dinesh Goswami committee on the form to propose for adult reforms. These two points are mentioned in that committee. If you have read it, you would have got those two points to write. Now, in the two points you address the demand of this question. Error of coalition is very, very easy to bring the coalition partners to the opposition side by bribing them. Anti-defection law does not apply. Political stability, you have a government here so that cannot be broken just like that because one member gets money and moves to the other side. Anti-defection law it is a mental pressure on him. When he does something like that, he will get disqualified of him. See, you can think about all these permutation combinations. Are you getting enough points to address this question or not?  Quality itself is totally grey area only. It is not like president overpoken on a complete power we give. At the same time, he is supposed to act in aid and advice of the council of ministers. What you are saying is also probable in a coalition that this cannot happen. Yes, it can happen. But what was the objective behind anti-defection law? It was to ensure stability. Was that the reason or not? One of the reasons, although only it is one of the reasons because in the 90s, totally governments came, government went or they were not in coalition government. That is why I think in 1980s, 85 or something they had actually brought out this. The intention of this law is to curb, it is to stop such kind of political defections. That was the intention. Our nominated members, yes, yes good point can be written as one of the proposed steps. You can mention this as the third point. The third point which she is saying is the nominated members should be totally barred from joining any political party. The time limit of 6 months should be actually done away with something. Can you say it again? Okay. Because of anti-defection law, you are saying that internal democracy is lost in the political party system. So I am the prime minister and these are the council of ministers. So I take a decision and I tell all of you to actually vote on this particular proposal. And if you do not quote what I give the direction that I give the whippers to disqualify somebody. The speaker will disqualify that person. So because of this process, you are saying that internal democracy in a party is actually coming down. So what does this have to do with the question here? Okay. So you mean to say that anti-defection law reinforces the responsibility. That is what you are trying to say. Is that what you are trying to say or is there some other direction I am missing out on this? So what is the consequence of internal democracy here? Internal democracy, when the political stability, it has a relationship with political stability in this political ring light, internal democracy has something to do with political responsibility. I have been linked from ring light. I am not getting that. Political responsibility is good governance is different from political responsibility. That is not good governance. Good governance is the existing government process should not be done just for the sake of the process itself. It should be done based on certain outcomes. That is the philosophy of good governance. Okay. Okay. Okay. So okay. Okay. But where argument which we are making, is it what in this question, which part of the question is this argument addressing? Which part? Hmm. Which law? Anti-defection law. Here the question is about anti-defection law. Whatever you are speaking about, vote of confidence, vote of no confidence. How are you linking it with this? We should not actually stop a debate like that. You please tell me. What are you actually trying to say? You said about the advantages of a confidence vote. No doubt. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thought about normal legislative process basically. Okay. Fine. So we will just move on to the next question. Establishment of a national tribunal commission as a right step towards ways to structurally improve the present system. Have you read anything about national tribunal commission? Not there. Okay. Basically this was actually one of the judgments given by Supreme Court I think in the month of May 2019 only. Supreme Court has actually directed the government to establish a national tribunal commission first because of various reasons. Okay. So what are the various issues with the present day tribunal system? Directly it goes to Supreme Court. No, no, no. High Court also has a jurisdiction. So in that. Okay. Executive interference in appointments. Okay. And who is that? Overlapping of jurisdiction. Separation of powers gets violated. Okay. Okay. The quality of justice which is delivered is not satisfactory basically. Creates an additional layer. Yes, yes, yes. Fendency looms large. And anything else? Okay. What other structures have actually got modernized? That we are talking about tribunal is not getting modernized. Specialists are or not made as a part of tribunals. So who do you mean as a specialist? Say for example, national green tribunal. Okay. So judges deal with a variety of cases. Veracrats also deal with a variety of ministries in their total posts. So where are the specialists? So we should only go for Ph.D. graduates and colleges to actually recruit. But that is not the concept of jurisprudence. So specialists maybe there might be a lack of specialist expertise in the initial phases. Say a member is posted for four years. The first one six months maybe. There will not be special advice. But still tribunals are multi-member bodies. Basically even if a judge is posted who has not dealt with a particular matter, he will always be advised by certain other members. There is something called as institutional memory. Okay. So he will always be a recipient of the advice. Basically specialist advices are always given. Maybe that person might not have specialized knowledge. That is not a right argument. Anything else? Delay, you know. National green tribunal, I think more than 60-70% posts are vacant here. Okay. Anything else? Yes? Regional benches. Okay. Less regional benches. But is there that much of demand first? Although demand tribunal can create. That government would have thought about it, right? If there would have been demand regionally, they would have come up with the establishment of a new bench. Non-compliance of orders. Okay. Non-compliance of orders of tribunals. Maybe you can bring out some statistics and prove it. Otherwise, okay, fine. Non-compliance. The recent example at least you should bring into focus. See, even tribunals are actually having contempt powers. Their orders are not followed. The members, the executive is subjected to punitive actions because there has been a breach of, I mean, there has been a contempt of the court. So you don't know whether it is actually, it's really there. Non-compliance of the orders of the tribunals, it's really there or not. Maybe it takes time to get things implemented. Doesn't get implemented faster. Which one? Cauvery water tribunal. Okay. This is what you would try to point out. Okay. Cauvery water tribunal to be realized. But if they have to go by a law, and if the law says that this is the quantum of money which has to be imposed, some calculation, some logic should have been applied. Right? That cannot be used as a logic here. This much is enough. Yes, you said something. Cauvery water tribunal is doing that. So these are the various issues. So how is the national tribunal commission going to address that? Okay. There is no such a bill as national tribunal commission or being in my bill or ordinance or there is nothing in pipeline. It is just that Supreme Court has said that you make a body with so and so feature which can be a national tribunal commission so that the problems of existing day tribunals can be solved out. That's all. So it is not that the government has actually proposed some body called as national tribunal commission or anything. Okay. The main problem of tribunals is that many tribunals do not have a judicial member there. Okay. So the proposal of national tribunal commission is the national tribunal commission shall be a body which will be headed by a retired Chief Justice of India or a High Court or any other retired justices of the Supreme Court and they will have a committee called as the search and appointment committee. Then there are other issues also. Other issues in the sense there is no standard of intake. For example in certain tribunals the retirement age is 70. For certain tribunals it is 67. There is no uniformity in the standard of in Carter management system. Okay. And say for example if a judge of a court has to take his place in tribunal naturally he can take his place only after getting retired from the court. So by the time he takes becomes a member of the tribunal it is already 65, 66 years whereas a bureaucrat after 60 years once he gets retired he becomes a member of tribunal. So in many instance what happens is the bureaucrat serves a longer period in the tribunal and finally shares the tribunal whereas the judge who is actually senior to him in age becomes just one of the member of the tribunal. This creates problem in seniority. Okay. So this is an issue which is proposed to be sorted out by NTC in the appointments committee what they have proposed is that they will have a pool of judges they will have a pool of bureaucrats whoever wishes to get post retirement options in tribunals. All of them it will be it will be maintained in the form of a database with them and they will select which person to be posted there. In all in now you can actually reduce this executive interference. Okay. You are creating another body which is actually parallel to the executive. You are not creating something under the executive either division of powers. The next thing is with respect to delay in appointments. So this problem also can be sorted out by national tribunal commission and non-compliance of orders I don't remember reading anything regarding this with respect to national tribunal commission but you just make your own research okay. In a national tribunal commission or in pathete just get some four more points so that you can use it if at all it comes in the examination. And the Chandrakumar case we have seen it right where the judiciary has given a verdict saying that any tribunal which is established should have the trappings of a court. Trappings of a court night should always have a judicial member in that they should follow a judicial process properly. So because of this NTC the problem of tribunals having only executive authorities. Tribunals are made to function like tribunals okay. They don't mention as a one more department of government like how dry functions. So basically national tribunal commission addresses these problems only division of powers and executive interference delay in appointments and there will be clear conditions of service. Say for example there will not be any more reappointment once the member retires. In many commissions what happens is the member is offered reappointment even after getting retired from 3 years 5 years 10 year will be there. So once he retires certain tribunals do not have explicit provisions of barring members from being reappointed. So basically he will start functioning in a politically biased manner. Those problems can be sorted out because of NTC. Just go through it NTC just half an hour you just browse and get to know about it. Next is explain briefly the constitutional amendments that are required as a part of electoral reforms in order to secure the independence of the election commission of India. How many of you have actually written for this answer? You have written? Okay. Electoral reforms published in 2019 proposed reforms. Okay. Okay. But you have written? Fine. Okay. So these kind of questions may be asked. What do you do? They are asking the constitutional amendments that are required. It is very tough to actually know which constitutional provision. But this is something which is there in the very first page of the proposed electoral reforms 2019 of election commission of India. Okay. So at least even if you do not know the provisions what all can be reformed. Just think generally with the perspective on what all disputes have recently happened in election commission and in what way things have turned out to be ugly. Good. Good. You want to bar that. No other constitutional authorities reappointment has been okay. Okay. Same what you have said EC and other EC plus EC and the chief election commission should be treated on par with each other with respect to conditions of service and removal financial autonomy. Good. What kind of constitutional amendment can be brought with respect to financial autonomy? Charged. Yes. Charged on and sort of kind of India like CAG, what else? Mode of appointment. Do you think all right now the mode of appointment is not independent enough? What more independence can be made in the mode of appointment? Okay. Selection panel. Okay. Since the question here is explain briefly the constitutional amendments that are required as a part of electoral reforms. Maybe I should have mentioned the date here. I need not include it. Since I have made that mistake, okay fine. Mode of appointment. The selection panel can be used comprising also on some members. Then the entire answer becomes very suggestive actually now. Since I have just missed out on the 2019. Now it's very, very open seeing the suggestions that you want. It should actually pertain to some amendments which you can bring out in the constitution. Then you will not actually have more points. Anything else? That cannot be added. The question is very clear. Constitution amendments in the state government is led by a different party and central government is led by a totally different party then. So you are actually questioning the integrity of state election commission then. That also has a that also has a very transparent manner of appointments. You cannot question one institution totally saying that that it tends to be more biased, it tends to be more politicized. So we should not have membership from that institution. ECI more federal. Okay. State election commission. We also have a state election commission. So what do you propose? The new mandate of the new state election commission shall be because who can actually modify election law? You see India is a unitary setup. We don't have such a division of powers where you can actually leave the entire state representatives to be chosen by a law which is made by them themselves. Since we have only one act which governs both MLAs and MPs, representation of people's act which is actually the sole purview of the union government, that cannot be done. So we can go for post retirement appointments. So you want to bar it. You want to restrict that. Yes, CAG? Barred for some cooling period. Bar or limitation on post retirement options. See what is there in the reforms is that one more point about independent secretariat. Because right now Article 325 clause, I think 6 says that all the officials, all the staffs of ECI shall be deputed by the central government. So that can be actually modified so that they can have their own secretariat like Lokpal, Konundar Kunlal from the mothery, they can have their own secretariat that will actually enhance their independence. Last question, explain briefly how recommendations of 14th finance commission diverged from the ones before it with respect to devolution of funds towards local bodies. See for this question, since it is asked in paper too it is not that you will have to bring out any economic statistics. This much amount of devolution has happened, that much has happened, that is not the objective. 14th finance commission was actually a redefining moment when it comes to devolution of powers. Till then it was only 32% of the divisible pool which was given to the states but from 14th finance commission onwards it was actually 42%. So you will have to consider these recommendations in that manner. At the end of the slide it has actually, it was actually a quantum jump from whatever was happening earlier. On the maripathu from 3 or 4 points you can give. Is there somebody who has actually attempted this question? Any points which you can give for this question? Basically till 13th finance commission what happens is the share of local self-governments, local bodies is basically given to the state governments. And then the state governments based on whether the local bodies are fulfilling certain criteria as set by them. Some criteria will be there. To what extent they are realizing the revenue from local sources. On the maripathu the criteria will be there. Own source of revenue mobilization. Now on the indexa use punitor, they will decide how much of the money has to be given to the local bodies. But 14th finance commission has actually totally done away with that. They have mandated that each panchayat will be treated similar. And each urban local body will be treated. They are treating only two categories of local bodies. Urban local bodies. I mean they are not differentiating between the panchayats of different states. They are treating all the panchayats of all the states as the same body. So say total panchayats of all states will be given X share and Y share of two ULBs. Directly you know, money they will sanction it and directly transfer it to the local self-government, local bodies. Only catch here is that the state government will be just used as a intermediary. States will not place any restriction. Just that they cannot actually transfer it to each and every bank account of over panchayat. They will place it to the state government and the state government without any conditions. Any restrictions on the local body should actually transfer the entire amount of money. First is direct transfer of funds to local self-governments without any specific criteria to be fulfilled by them. That was a change when it comes to 13th finance commission. Next is with respect to say indexation. Indexation is West Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu. These are one category of states which has actually devolved the maximum amount of functions to the local bodies because it is state government which will decide which all functions it will devolve to the local body because it falls under the state subject. Local bodies fall under the state subject. Say these governments have given many functions say 4550 functions. Whereas states like Bihar, UP, Charkhand, they have only devolved say 15 subjects. It means that their responsibilities are higher and their responsibilities are lower. So before 14th finance commission the commissions were actually taking this into consideration based on the amount of functions which has been devolved by the state governments to the local self-governments. On that basis some 2 or 3 broad categories of states are made and which all states fit into those criteria that much percentage of money will be transferred to the states. So they understood that the intention behind this was progressively these states will also actually slowly slowly take reform so that more amount of subjects will be given to them and finally they will also catch up with the states so that all states have equal amount of subjects being devolved but that is not happening. So we should not punish the local self-governments unnecessarily because of states failure. What the 14th finance commission recommended was we will make a uniform category. There is not going to be any differentiation between any panchayats because of the only reason that these panchayats come under Bihar government and these panchayats come under West Bengal government. Let us not differentiate between them. We will just transfer the entire funds. They are treating the 90% weightage is given to population, 10% weightage to area, leave that that is not relevant here. So the same fund is getting transferred. Karnataka our village ku, Bihar our village ku is the Kram Panchayatku. It is the same money which is transferred because of which a moral pressure is created on the state government now. Now the government feels that you have so many funds so maybe I will give you more functions. Now you take those functions and start working on them. So this way actually pays way for more devolution. No, no, no. See we have totally increased the share of divisible pool from 32% to 42%. You cannot say that these states are getting affected. Of course there is a deprivation. All finance commission has an element of deprivation in it but there has to be some start to these states also. In all finance commission there is always an affected party but you have increased the pool. You are not taking it from their share and giving it here. You have just increased the pool and that increase is actually going to these states. So that is one and the other one is with respect to there is a concept called as performance grants. Performance grants now you put in additional conditionalities. Say basic services on Allah kudu thing if you focus more on roads and every year some target will be given to each gram panchayat. In this year these much of MGM roads have to be constructed. If you are able to meet that then we will be giving you certain amount of money. Say 5% of the total funds will be given as performance grants so as to appreciate your initiative working in money. What 14th finance commission has done is and to measure these earlier finance commissions also have a component of performance grants. But only thing is no proper bookkeeping no office procedures are properly followed. So there is no clarity on data. That is the reason why those performance grants were not utilized at all. So 14th finance commission incentivized proper record keeping and if you see in present day at least audit has started in urban local bodies. You know GPs are not actually being audited. GP accounts are not getting audited but urban local bodies are actually being audited in the last 3-4 years till then it is a rampant loot which is happening there. In the last 3-4 years suddenly audit has started coming. They take the books of account they are doing something. It is because of 14th finance commission's recommendations. Because it incentivizes proper bookkeeping and proper audit. As in Allah pannu ablina the rate gets another whatever percentage, performance grant, how much percentage they will be getting that much. These are all some transitions from previous finance commissions. Next is previous finance commissions, central finance commissions. You have CFC's and SFC's and the GPs have two kinds of expenditures. One is for their salary, TA, DA, basic services, sanitation and market complexes, development development works which will be taken and water connections, new connections as we call on the LB spending. Till earlier commissions were actually giving money for both the activities but finance commission I do not know whether that was actually accepted or not but the commission has recommended, 14th finance commission has recommended that the entire fund which is going to be devolved to the local bodies will be used only for basic services. So for meeting out their own expenditures they will have to mobilize their own resources. Urukla tax protocol and Anurbanikla usage charges protocol, they have to mobilize their own resources. This was one of the very very important recommendations of 14th finance commission but just check whether it was actually implemented or not. These are all recommendations. I do not know whether all these recommendations were accepted or not. The question here is how recommendations of 14th finance commission diverged from the ones before it. Ok. I am done with discussing all the quality questions. I do not think we will be meeting again. Is there any other discussion after this? Nothing. Ok. So for people who are going to give you a first name this time, do not be scared of people who have given many attempts. They are also be writing with you. They are not scared at all. You are all equal only when you write the examination. The paper is going to be new for everybody and since you have come till the stage just focus on writing, giving your best for each and every answer. When you write each and every answer make sure that you do not exceed the time limit for people who are writing their first name. For others you would have already got some experience about it. But for first timers that the consciousness alone is very very important. Ok. Completing the paper, not exceeding the 8 minutes or 10 minutes time limit for each and every question. And since it is going to be a long process, take care of what you eat and what you drink. Ok. So that also can actually cause a lot of disruption in the time of writing exams. And when you go to the exam center, do not go very early to the center. Not more than half an hour before you can go. If you are sitting on top of it, you will be unnecessarily getting distracted and you will be chatting, chatting. So unnecessary stress might also happen to you. So limit your conversations which happens during the time of examination. When you finish writing, you will have a long break, say 2-1.5-3 or something like that. If you have your lunch, just come back to the hall and sit in your place. Do not talk much. Because you will have already been very very exhausted. When you finish the first paper, you feel exhausted. Then you chat, chat, chat. Mentally you feel very exhausted by the time you go for the second sitting. Do not do all that. And take a bottle of water with you. Now and then half an hour once, 45 minutes once. Have something to energize yourself. Use the washroom just before entering the hall. Because there will be people getting up and going and all, but do not do like that. Time is very, very scarce. Entire time has to be due only for writing and do not have to use many colors, decorations etc. Do not do that. One pen, maximum 2 pens, more than enough. Nothing more is required. And for those people who study night, night, 2-3, 4-5, 5-6, 7-8, 8 o'clock sleep habit, change it. Okay? Start changing it. Because later on, go there and sleep in the exam. That will not change in one day. So start resetting your biological clock from now itself. That's it. Where are the doubts? We will wind it up. Okay. Thank you. So test 2. So the first question regarding this is UNSC. So what is the question number? Question number 9. No 9. Okay. So Indian foreign policy today is facing enormous problem in dealing with our neighbors. We all know this. And in other strategies, other issues. Okay? So this is a statement. So now you see as India is going to be represented in UNSC as a non-permanent member, how India must leverage this latest opportunity to solve our problems and project ourselves as a responsibility. So India is going to become a non-permanent member in UNSC. So how India can make this opportunity in favor of our, okay, to solve the problem and to improve our status. So this is the question. Okay? So first what we can do is part 1, we can list it out, the problems of Indian foreign policy. So these are all the problems India is facing. So like that we can list it out. So for example problems in East Asia, West Asia, in South Asia itself and terrorism. So like that we can list it out the problem. These are all the problems we are facing. Like that we can give a list. And then we have to go for what India have, what should be India's objective? What is the aim of India? Like that we have to go. Okay? So these are all the problems. With this problem now we are going to enter into UNSC. In UNSC what we have to work for, that we have to find out. So we have to work for, you write like this, India should promote our people's prosperity. All are general only. We have to promote our people's prosperity number one. And regional and global security and then growth and most importantly, rule based world order. So India have to work for rule based world orders, rule based world order. Okay? So this is in general as a member, as a responsible member in UNSC we have to work for this world problem. Okay? So our prosperity, regional and global security, prosperity growth and then rule based world order. And then we should, India can emerge as a partner of choice for both developing and developed countries. Because India is now in a stage, India is not underdeveloped country. At the same time India is not a developed country also. So in either side also India can be that. Okay? So still after taking certain futures India can still maintain that we are still developing nation. In certain parameters we can say that India has already become developed. So what we can do is we are in the mid-place, somewhere in the mid okay? So in the UNSC we should work not only for the developing nations but also for the developed nations. Because why we have to support certain developed nations ideas means because then only we can come up. This non-permanent member seat should become a permanent member seat. Okay? Permanent seat with VTOP over. So that is our objective. Okay? So then we have to find out what is the use of being a member in the UNSC. So if we are a member in UNSC, because the presidency of the UNSC is given in terms of alphabetical order. So India is coming in I know. So in the two years we will be there. So two times we will become the president of UNSC. For two months. Okay? First round and second round also India mostly will become a member. See if India become the president, as a member and president of UNSC then we can bring agenda. That is the main thing. Okay? So what are the issues we have to take it in the discussion in UNSC? The president country only will determine. Okay? So obviously if India becomes a member meant two times we will become a president. So two chance we are having for full two months in this next two year we are going to be the president of UNSC. So we can bring agenda which is in favor of India and also in favor of our friends. That means in the interest of India we can bring resolution. So this is the main thing we are going to get it from the membership from UNSC. Ultimately by doing this we should promote ourselves to become a permanent member. Okay? So how we can improve our status in UNSC? General things we can write. Number one we have to increase the financial contribution. Even you see among the G4 countries Germany, Japan are providing better finance than India. If India is aspiring for the hot seat means India also should contribute more. See nowadays we all know that Indian government is giving a lot of money to a lot of needy countries. So we can we should also but you have to know that India have properly paid out all our dues in United Nation. In United Nation the United Nation is financed based upon the financial capacity of the country. So Indian financial capacity is in the medium level. So medium level amount only we are paying. So what we have to do is in order to upgrade ourselves we have to contribute more. By showing that we have to show to the world that we can also contribute. That means we are also a big country. So this we can do. Number two India is one of the leading peacekeepers. United Nation peacekeepers. But you have to know that we can earlier we were number one now we are number three contributor. Bangladesh, Pakistan then only India comes. Okay? So in peacekeeping missions India is doing good job no doubt in that but we can improve that. And then we have to know that we have to guide the United Nation Security Council regarding the humanitarian interventions particularly responsibility to protect. The United Nation Security Council is having a role called responsibility to protect. If in any region any part of the world some problem is going on means the responsibility to protect the innocent population civil population lies with the United Nation Security Council. But United Nation Security Council is not acting swiftly and firmly because unless there is a direct interest to the power centers in United Nations Security Council particularly the P5 the action has been taken.  Okay? So what we have to do is we have to moot that issues. Okay? So whenever the people need protection means India if becomes a member and as a non permanent member we have to immediately raise the voice and we have to help the people or the country who are in need. Okay? So we must guide the council to invoke the principles of humanitarian intervention or responsibility to protect. Okay? So already they are having it but they are not properly doing it we have to improve that. And then we should become a consensus builder. Okay? So within United Nation Security Council you have to note that see in these two years we have to do all these things because the all the P5 countries you have to note that China, Russia on one side and other three countries on other side always in all issues they are having problems. Okay? So what we have to do is when we enter there we are maintaining good relation with all the power centers including China. So what we can do? So we have to become a consensus builder. We have to mediate. We have to bring all the people together. If you are doing like that means then whenever there is a problem they look for India to build some kind of common understanding consensus. Okay? So we should become a consensus builder. Okay? And then and then note this on another one in United Nation Security Council there is one committee is there UNSC staff committee. Okay? So for peacekeeping missions for taking actions this committee is there but it is not functioning. It is not that means people are not there. The committee setup is there but committee is not there. Can understand people are not appointed. So what India can do is so this United Nations Security Council military staff committee is very very important for stressing our United Nations as a collective security organization. United Nations Security Council is collective is based on collective security organization. So it is not working properly. So India if India enters that into the councilmen's India should make this military staff committee a live committee. This is all some of the recommendation. And finally you have to note that a multipolar I mean unipolar world or a polarity a polarity means no polarity or unipolar or bipolar United Nations Security Council is not good for India. So India have to work for multipolar or we can say we have to embrace polycentrism. Polycentrism means multiple power centers. United Nations Security Council means only two people are determining everything. Russia or US. So now we have to make it a polycentre organization. That means we have to enter United Nations Security Council and we have to bring an idea in the minds of all the people and including the members of United Nations Security Council that we need to expand this council. We have to make this council more relevant to this this period. And apart from all these things if India wanted to go for this global stage level workmen's first we have to sort out all our problems with our neighbors. That is very very important. We cannot straight the global stage in the absence of stable relationship with our neighbors. So stable relationship with our neighbors is very very important. When we are all our India is fighting with our neighbor India cannot become a global player. So this should be the conclusion. So this is question number one. So next question is regarding Indo-Pacific 10th question. The prevailing and emerging international order characterized by a new form of internationalism and hazy geopolitics finds centrality in Indo-Pacific region. Statement is very simple. Now the global politics center of attraction is Indo-Pacific region. So identify the challenges and find out how India can play a key role in claiming the Indo-Pacific region. So we are a leader in India. I mean Indian ocean. So Indo-Pacific region means directly India is associated with that. And already we know that earlier they call this as Asia-Pacific region. Now they call it as Indo-Pacific region giving more stress to India. So in the circumstances when Indo-Pacific region becomes the center of attraction for world politics, India is a direct party to this politics. What India have to do that we have to find out. So first we have to write about the importance and why Indo-Pacific region is the center of attraction that we have to write. So number one, 75% of the world trade is happening through this region and world busiest sea ports are there in Indo-Pacific regions only. And this contributes 60% of GDP, world GDP and not only that this is an area of strategic rivalry. So because you see the rise of China bracket, Belt and Road initiative, BRI and then US global strategy. This is also based on Indo-Pacific region only. So China, US, India, Japan. India, Japan is also having some initiative. And then Asia, India, Asia and then France and also India with other key players. So we are having understanding with all these players to have a key role, to play a key role in Indo-Pacific region. So all these countries, the extra territorial powers like Japan, France, US and even China, they are showing much interest in Indo-Pacific region. In Pacific region, South China, China is a direct party. But in Indian Ocean, India is the direct party. But other global vital players they are also showing interest in this region. So this now, when all the players are showing interest in one particular region, that particular region becomes the hot politics area. So what India have to do, we have to write it. First number one, one of the initiative is the SAGAR initiative. That is regarding security and growth for all in the region. That is called SAGAR. So now what we have to do is, using SAGAR, we are going to develop this region. We have to involve bilateral relationship, trilateral, quadrilateral and multilateral relationship. So we should not completely depend upon one particular entity to have a foothold in this particular region. Bilaterally, we have to develop relationship with all the partners who are in the Indo-Pacific region. And then trilateral, quadrilateral, already we know Australia, India, Japan, we are having it. And we should also go for multilateral relationship. Multilateral relationship means either if we two parties are very strong here in this region. US, US camp and China's camp. And you have to note that China is a big rival for India. That doesn't mean that India have to join with US and put pressure on China. That is not a good idea because China is our neighbor. And US's administration, we all know constantly the administration changes its policy immediately without reason. They are taking quick decisions which affects India's relationship with US and also with other countries. So at the same, that means what we have to do is to counter China, US is not the only chance for India. So what we have to do is, we have to seek friendship with other nations. See what happened is in Indo-Pacific region India have joined this quad to counter China. At the same time India also have signed some of the military agreements. So that means military and developmental agreements with China, Russia, India. This orca is also there. That means what India is going to try to do is India is trying to have a multilateral approach to have a foothold in Indo-Pacific region. So India is having relationship with US and its partners. And India is also having relationship with China and its partners. So in order to have foothold. So India is everywhere because that only is good for India. That means bilaterally we can handle all the countries. But with respect to China, bilaterally it will be difficult for India to handle the country. So we have to go for the US camp. US camp means we can counter China. Then China will become our enemy. So what we have to do, what India have done is, India also deals with China, Russia also. So multilateral approach is required for India. And then the next one is we have to play a leadership role regarding freedom of navigation in coming for bringing a common understanding regarding freedom of navigation. Because if Asia-Pacific region goes in the hands of China nor US it is not good for India. We want this region to be an open region international region, international waterway. So that everybody can access. So we are working for freedom of navigation over sea and air in this region. And then we should also increase our operational reach. That means our connection, that means everywhere Indian presence should be there. For example, bilateral logistics support agreements. And India should help other countries and also help ourselves improve our infrastructure, manufacturing, trade, tourism, etc., maritime in maritime area. So that we have to do. And then finally our project Sagar Mala. So that is also another initiative. So we can focus on port development, connectivity and port led industrialization. Port based industrial agencies etc., etc., and coastal community developments. So national disaster management etc., these things are there. Not only that, India is also showing interest in cooperation in the blue economy regarding beam state. So with respect to the Bay of Bengal RIM countries, India is having a negotiation with all the countries. India is an active partner in beam state. So we have to, we can develop. And finally what we can do is in Andaman we can develop a center for Indo-Pacific studies. So a center to develop public-private model. Because government alone cannot invest everything and develop our maritime route. At the same time we cannot rely on China or any other country. So what we have to do is, India should contribute along with that other people also should contribute. So we have to pull in the private players. So for that we can have an Indo-Pacific study center in Andaman, which will be very, very relevant. Because that is the junction of Indo-Pacific region. So based on public-private model we can develop the regions, ports etc. And then finally Asia Africa growth corridor. At that point also we can develop. So along with Japan we are developing this strategy. So this is the answer for second one, some hints. And then the third question, the next question, the India-U.S. trade based. So what is the question number? 18, question number 18. So India-U.S. discard over trade stems from a deep-seated dessert of U.S. business to have a bigger footprint in Indian economy. And to achieve this goal, the administration is stepping beyond legitimate means. That means U.S. is using, see U.S. India, how the economic relation is that means U.S. is very offensive. U.S. want its business people. That means their business to become success. It doesn't care about the second party. So this is the problem. So we are having some business problem. But what U.S. is trying to do is, U.S. in order to get crude profit is moving in unilaterally. Unilaterally it is taking some actions which affects the other party, the second party particularly in India's case it is India. So now we all know that U.S. have waged trade war with all the countries, China, Russia, European countries, even its ally Canada. And not only that, now U.S. have also put sanction against India also. This affects India-U.S. relationship. U.S. is acting unilaterally. So this is the question. So now we have to analyze this. First number one, U.S. have taken unilateral action against India's exports. Unilaterally they have increased the tax and tariff over Indian products. So this is a fact. And in return what India have done. India have also in retaliation. We have also increased the tax and tariff of 28 U.S. product. Okay so now where this problem starts you have to know. We have to find out. And what U.S. is doing is U.S. is targeting India's policies disregarding the rule of law. So India is taking certain economic trade policies. And U.S. is not considering why India is taking this. Whether India's move is in lines with the WTO or with international economics. U.S. doesn't care. U.S. is just because U.S. is placing U.S. as number one. U.S. to first policy. America first policy. If something affects U.S. then it is bad. Something is good for U.S. then that only is correct. Like that attitude U.S. is having. It is completely wrong. India you are regarding trade. We are always following the international norms only. Particularly WTO norms. Okay. And then note this U.S. have decided to undermine the WTO dispute settlement mechanism also. So suppose U.S. is breaching the trade agreements or going against WTO amendments. Then the option for India is to go and file a suit in WTO dispute settlement mechanism. But what U.S. have done now is U.S. did not appoint the judges for the WTO settlement mechanism. So now see we can go to a court for solving our problem. But U.S. using its might. It is not appointing the judges means then how we can, who will adjudicate our problem. So like that U.S. is now blocking the WTO. So this is a serious problem. What should be our focus is, India should focus on two things. Number one, we should remain engaged with our big partner. U.S. is one of the top trade partner to India. We should remain engaged with the largest trade partner. That means we have to maintain our relationship trade relationship with U.S. We should maintain that because U.S. is an important country we are getting benefits. So this is focus number one and focus number two. We should also engage actively with the global community to make U.S. understand the rule based trading system. Two things. One regarding India U.S. India is a beneficiary from U.S. In order to get the beneficiary from U.S. we have to maintain India U.S. relation particularly the trade relation. We have to maintain that. Second U.S. is harming India. So what we have to do using the global community we have to put pressure on U.S. to go according to the rule based trading system. That means one side we have to be friendly with U.S. other side we have to put pressure on U.S. that's all. How we are going to do we have to wait because China, Russia they are all putting pressure on India to join this camp to put an alternative center pressure center to put pressure on U.S. So India is not openly joining openly joining means then we will lose all the benefits we are getting from China. So how we are going to handle this that is a big task. So what happened is actually this U.S. two commissions are there. United States trade representative U.S. TR and another one is U.S. side T.C. United States international trade commission these two are U.S. based institution. United States trade representative U.S. TR. This is one U.S. commission and second commission is U.S. side T.C. United States international trade commission. So these two U.S. based commission what they have done is they began to investigate India's policies which is completely illegal. Illegal means illegal means in the sense not warranted. They should not come and investigate that but because they wanted to find that whether the Indian policies Indian economic policies are in favor of the American model. So further they investigated that and then they said that the Indian policies not in lines with America's benefits. So what they did is now they are putting pressure on India. So this is completely wrong. So what they are telling is this investigation is deeply flawed investigation like that India is telling. Why means because they doesn't have an authority or warranted to come and investigate this and not only that they have given a report that the Indian policies are completely against U.S. interests. But they discarded one important point that Indian policies are in lines with WTO norms and international norms. So we are going according to the international norms but the thing is it is not favoring U.S. So the two things they have investigated and then submitted a report to U.S. government that Indian policies are against U.S. Indian policies are not beneficial to U.S. So what U.S. have to do is U.S. have to pressurize India to change our policies in lines with U.S. policy that so that U.S. companies will get lot of benefits. So this is completely not acceptable because if unilaterally we are doing something means U.S. can do that but we are going according to international norms and according to WTO norms. Since U.S. is going against WTO U.S. is also putting pressure against India and saying that we have to favor U.S. only which is not acceptable. And the Indian policies are consistent with WTO commitments that is the point. And then not only that India is putting high tariff on some products U.S. products but you have to know that this high tariff is in lines with the Uruguay round of negotiation. During that we have negotiated during that particular period world countries have accepted that India have to put high tariff on foreign countries product. So after that no big discussion has been happened in this area. So according to the commitment India given in the Uruguay round of negotiation India is continuing. Now U.S. is telling that you are putting too much tariff on my product which is not acceptable like that U.S. is telling. So this is not acceptable. And not only that India have completely lowered the tariff for many agriculture products and industrial products. So we are putting high tariff that is in lines with the negotiation we have done with the world countries in Uruguay round. And not only that we have also reduced the some of the tariff of many products agriculture product and industrial product. U.S. is not taking this into account. And finally in regarding agriculture products U.S. itself is putting too much tax. For example in Tobago U.S. is putting 350 percentage tax in peanuts, peanuts means this ground nut U.S. is putting 164 percentage tax. And also in dairy products 118 percentage. So U.S. itself is breaching what U.S. is telling some rules U.S. itself is breaching it. But U.S. is not considering that all U.S. want is it wanted to favor its business community. So that is why it is asking India to reduce all our tariff. So what we have to do we have to put pressure on U.S. through WTO. Next WTO meeting is going to be there. So last WTO meeting in Buenos Aires itself all the countries the meeting was between U.S. versus the world countries. So that is going to be continued in the next meeting also. And in between that we also wanted our agriculture problems to be solved. So how India is going to bring those agenda how we are going to make U.S. to accept that. Now Trump is going to pull out of this WTO itself fully. So how we have to handle this. So without U.S. can we have an international trade organization that and all is coming under question. But what we have to do is now the friends of U.S. itself are against U.S. The enemies of U.S. the trade rivals. China is also against U.S. Russia is also against U.S. India is also affected. So this is the best chance all the other countries against U.S. have to come together and then we have to put pressure. And anyway next year there is going to be an election in U.S. So after that if there is a change in administration we can see. We can see some change. Expect some change. The next question regarding this European Union trade. While European firms complained about the difficulty of doing business in India. You realize that Indians feel exactly the same about Europe. That means Europe and you see India and European Union are negotiating free trade agreement. Nearly for more than a decade we are negotiating till now. The negotiation did not end positively. It is dragging. So India tend to approach Europe through bilateral relationship with each member state rather than treating it as a whole. That means India is a lot important trade partners of India or in Europe. So bilateral we are having good relationship with them. Bilaterally the trade relations between the two countries are very good. And these countries are members of European Union. But as a whole India versus India and European Union that trade negotiation is darling. Similar to India WTO. See this is the problem with India. India bilaterally handles all the issues very effectively. But whenever India is going in a multilateral forum India is facing trouble. Because multilateral forum means multiple interest will be there. That is harming India's interest. Because in India we have a varied interest. So if you are signing some agreement some people will be happy some people will not be happy. If you are not signing an agreement it will be vice versa. So in either way India is getting into trouble. So now we have to find out here we have to answer about India, EU, free trade agreement. How it is going? What is the trajectory? In future how it is going to be handled? That we have to write. And we have to list out the concerns of EU and we have to list out the concerns of India. And how to move forward like that we have to answer. So we have to note that European Union is the largest trade partner of India. In terms of region China is number one but European Union is the largest trade partner. Because 20% of our total trade is with European Union only. Which amounts more than 80 billion dollars. And equal amount of FDI is also there from Europe it is coming to India. So that is why our trade that free trade agreement is called BTIA agreement. Bilateral trade and investment agreement. Bilateral trade same amount investment BTIA bilateral trade and investment agreement. The free trade agreement between negotiation which is going on between India and Europe. And we have to write that both European countries and India are facing problems in settling the issues regarding FTIA agreement. So what are the concerns of European Union? I will list it out just to you write it. One the India's generic drugs issue generic drugs issue. So European Union pharmaceutical companies India is giving companies licensing to our pharmaceutical companies. So we are copying that and then we are selling it. So this is a problem and not only that Indian generic medicines when it is when we are trying to access European market they are banning it. And then the human rights violations in India. So this is also a big problem between European countries. Human rights violation and capital punishment. So in India capital punishment is there but European Union doesn't recognize capital punishment. And then the India's large scale central government projects and state government projects is not in lines with European business model. So Indian model of development is not in lines with European model. So this is a big problem. So that means India takes everything in our control. So they want this projects to be developed by European companies in their own standards. India is not letting them. And then this Hindu nationalism in India which bans beef consumption is a problem with European countries. They are complaining this. Hindu nationalism and state ban of beef consumption. So in India they are doing it. So that is a problem. This idea is not in lines with European countries. And then the NGO financing. So India is creating problem. India is targeting NGOs and asking the NGOs to show the source. So European Union base the NGOs are getting into trouble. And then India's use of BRICS and BASICS as defensive mechanism against western. It is a problem. BRICS and BASIC in climate change. BRICS in world finance and world polity. And then India's protectionism in automobile sector. So now automobile sector, it is a global, globally the sector is coming down. Maybe because of the change in technology or something. India is also affected. Now Germany wanted, particularly Germany, France, Sweden all these companies are automobile gens. They wanted access to our market. We are putting taxes. We are asking those companies to under making India program to produce automobile in India. And then sell it in India without tax. Those countries are not accepting. And then the domestic source obligation for multi-brand retail. For multi-brand retail showrooms we are asking for domestic source obligation. Labor and some of the raw materials, some of the materials should be bought from India and using India labor you have to do it. Like that India is putting certain conditions. Domestic source obligation with respect to multi-brand retail. And finally duty and tariff protection in wine, spritz and dairy products. So India is putting too much duties and taxes on for European Union alcohol and dairy products. So these are all the concerns of European Union. And then India's concern is Europe's heavily subsidized agriculture. So in agreement on agriculture we are asking the western country not to give subsidies to the rich farmers. So European Union is giving heavy subsidy to their agriculture industry. So that is a big concern for India. And two, the European import restriction using non-tariff mechanisms, non-tariff mechanism. For example, using health as a norm and then quality, quantity, that means labelling. So using this European Union countries are not allowing our product to enter into their market. So this is a big issue. And then visa issue. Then transfer of technology. And finally we are asking European Union to give data security status for our IT companies. So unless we get the data security status they won't share their data. We won't get the projects from European Union. So these are all the concerns of India and in concerns of European Union. Last question is, US decision to pit Afghanistan seems to have emboldened Pakistan to ramp up pressure on cashmere. So now Pakistan is pressurizing India in United Nations Security Council and with international community because US is now pulling out of this region. Because US was there Pakistan did not create much problem. Now US is trying to pull out. Even US is now negotiating with Taliban to come for a settlement. US came to Afghans region to fight Taliban. Now US is now going for a settlement with Taliban. So US doesn't want to be here in this Afghans region. It wanted to go. So US is not there. Then terrorist it will become an advantage for the terrorist people. So Pakistan again may put pressure on India regarding cashmere issue. So question is, analyze the support and challenges India gets from international community. So what is the, so particularly regarding this cashmere issue Pakistan is internationalizing that particular issue. So who are all the parties who are supporting India and opposing India that we have to find out. Support and challenges India gets from international community. And how India's strategy for internal security, territorial defense and diplomacy will have to act. How India have to prepare for that? That we have to find out. First we have to list this US quitting Afghanistan, US Taliban talks. We have to give it as an introduction. And then we have to go to Pakistan is now politically offensive against India with the international community. They are putting pressure on India by complaining this issue in United Nations Security Council and then with other big nations. And now India is responding diplomatically. So this is the factor. So now how we have to handle this issue. Number one, we have to use the legal dimension. Legal dimension means, see Pakistan may use proxy war against India. That is not legal. So Pakistan is putting pressure on India. Means diplomatically we should again put pressure on Pakistan. So this is the legal dimension. So we have to build, because the internationally, particularly among the western countries, there is a very little understanding about the complex Kashmir issue. Because you have to note that this Kashmir issue is the creation of Britain people. Britain only. You all know that. And in regarding India Pakistan, always this Britain is supporting Pakistan. And you have to note that due to the western media they all project that India is a trouble maker. Like that they are projecting. And that too Pakistan had the complete support of US. And we had the support of Russia. So that is why the entire world, world means the western world was supporting Pakistan only. But successfully what we have done is we have isolated Pakistan from US. And US is now supporting India. So this is the best thing which has happened to India in the last 6-7 decades. Okay. So now what we have to do is now we have to mobilize opinion in favour of India among the big countries. Particularly what Pakistan is doing is Pakistan is using Britain to project this particular idea. So recently Trump, Imran Khan they had a meeting. Earlier it was Trump who cut off all the relationship with Pakistan with the direct and indirect pressure of India. And not only that the western countries they have also put pressure on Pakistan regarding this financial action task force. Okay. Now we have to note that Imran Khan is now negotiating with Trump. So what is the thing behind that? Who facilitated this meeting? So India suspects that it is Britain. Britain only did that. Britain is having good relationship with the Therasame government and the new government. They are having good relationship with Pakistan. From the starting they are maintaining good relationship. They only mediated and facilitated the discussion between US and Pakistan. And not only that US is negotiating with Taliban and the talks are not going well. So Britain persuaded US to open talks with Pakistan and ask Pakistan's help to facilitate this US-Taliban deal to end in a good way. Okay. So now US again understands the importance of Pakistan in handling Taliban. Which is completely against our interest. So Britain is playing the foil sport. Not only Britain and some of the European countries are also doing this. Europe and Britain is with Pakistan. But US is now with us. Okay. And what is India's achievement is we have outsmarted Pakistan by separating Pakistan from US. The US-Pakistan relation is bad. But US-Pakistan-Europe relation is very, very good. So this is the problem. With respect to US we have handled US and US will not openly support Pakistan. Whether it is supporting India or not but openly it will not support Pakistan here afterwards. But European country particularly Britain is a problem for India. And not only that, how India dealt with US and made US a friend of India moving away from Pakistan. How we did is we used our Indian diaspora. Our Indian diaspora made a, I mean they have contributed a great role in putting pressure on US and US Congress, the senate members, other members. The US Congress now feels that Indian community which is living in US are a vital community for US. So that's why US began to develop good relationship with India. Similarly what now Pakistan is doing is Pakistan is now mobilizing its insignificant Pakistan diaspora in US like India. You can understand how we did. Now Pakistan is trying to do it in US. Using our diaspora we pulled US from Pakistan camp to our camp. Like that now again Pakistan is again trying to pull US into its camp using its diaspora in Pakistan. Okay. So India only got that. Now Pakistan is going in lines in the way India did. Okay. So we have to be very careful with this. Okay. And then the next one is legal dimension. Legally we have to mobilize our support from international community using all the old agreement, similar agreements, et cetera, and not involving in terrorism and projecting Pakistan that Pakistan is using terrorism. So legally we have to mobilize our support. Second one is regarding the internationalization of the issue. See whenever there is a problem Pakistan likes to internationalize that particular issue that we know. Immediately Pakistan will rise this issue in Kashmir and also with other countries. Okay. But so far particularly what happened in United Nations Security Council there was a closed meeting was there. In that closed meeting all the countries finally they, the standard they have taken is this Kashmir issue is an internal issue or it is a bilateral issue like that they said. What India did regarding the constitution 1770 is an internal issue like that many countries have acknowledged it. And this Kashmir issue is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan both the countries bilateral have to sort out this problem like that they have taken a decision. Okay. So and you have to note that if they are internationalizing this issue it is a trouble for India. But at the same time India also by internationalizing this Kashmir based issue India also found certain success. For example this FATF Pakistan internationally international community is putting pressure on Pakistan that Pakistan is sponsoring terrorism by financing terrorism and by through money laundering. So we are putting pressure so it is by Pakistan only internationalize that particular issue and it is going against Pakistan itself. And second one is this Azhar Muhammad issue. So because using this FATF now we were able to list that terrorist name in UN terrorist list. Earlier Pakistan used China to block that particular move. But now Pakistan did not do this because Pakistan only internationalize the particular issue. Now terrorism become an international issue international community are putting pressure on Pakistan itself. So the point is internationalizing the Pakistan Pakistan is doing that no it is making this problem a world problem. So this is going against Pakistan also okay it is not helping Pakistan. So India should be careful. And third one third party mediation that also we have to. So Pakistan always wanted third party mediation. But according to Shimla agreement 1972 Pakistan has given in writing that third party mediation is not allowed the problem have to be sorted out bilaterally. Even what happened after the Imran con meeting Trump said that Modi asked me to mediate like that he gave a statement. India denied that statement. And again Trump again said that US is ready to mediate. And India clearly said that India is not going to allow the third party. So now in United Nations Security Council US also said that it is a bilateral move. Bilateral issue like that they said. So what Pakistan has now done is Pakistan is literally pulling China into this camp. So now Kashmir although according to Shimla agreement it is a bilateral agreement bilateral issue it literally became a trilateral issue. Because China's interest is there. China is investing heavily CPC. So China's interest is there. So obviously what happens is Kashmir issue whether India wants it or doesn't want it it is a trilateral issue. And not only that earlier Pakistan during the Kargil war period they tried to pull US to come and intervene in the Kargil war issue and wanted to mediate it. But when US came instead of supporting Pakistan US began to support India only. So the third party mediation only the third party is China then only it will favor Pakistan. Otherwise it is going to favor India only like the situation is there. And then we have to list it out what are all the major posts what are all they are doing regarding this Kashmir issue. First one is regarding China. So regarding China China literally became the third party in Kashmir that we have to write and then we directly have a dispute with China regarding Ladakh. That also we have to regarding Kashmir, Kashmir Ladakh. In other sectors also we are having problem. In Ladakh we have exchange problem is there. And then China cannot openly support Pakistan in this Kashmir issue because that means China is supporting Pakistan means China is trying to get in the Indian part of Kashmir to give it to Pakistan. But China cannot openly work for that because China itself is under trouble regarding Hong Kong and regarding the Xinjiang region. So one side it is supporting other country to that means other it want the country to get separated. In its own country it is not allowing means it do else and cannot, that means US cannot, I mean China cannot maintain this in international community. So this is going to be a big problem. So easily we can put pressure on China not to directly involve in this particular problem. So this is regarding China. Because China itself is under trouble. And then second country is regarding Russia. See Russia is a friend of India regarding all Kashmir issue Russia supported India. But what happened now is Russia is now drawn very close towards China. So because of US. US and Russia are against each other US and China are against each other. So enemies automatically they become from to retaliate US. Now Russia is maintaining close relationship with China. How this affects India means China is now persuading Russia to go neutral with India Pakistan. So whenever India Pakistan problem is there means India Russia always supports India. But now China is persuading Russia to be neutral between India and Pakistan. But despite all these things 10 days before Moscow that means Russia said that Russia is supporting India regarding Kashmir. That means Russia said that the constitutional that reforms was there no it was purely an internal problem like that. So Russia is reiterating its support. So we have to maintain see whenever Kashmir problem is there the consistent supporter to India is Russia only. We should not allow Russia to move away from India. And then third is France. France is another P5 country. Today France is a reliable strategic partner to India. Even in the Indo-Pacific region we have signed an agreement regarding freedom of navigation with France. And we are going to jointly we are going to develop some infrastructure activity particularly Indo-Pacific region. And now they are telling that it is a new Russia for India like that people are commenting. So how Russia USSR was there for India. Like that who is now supporting India who can support India in the hot table is France. Now France is called new Russia for India like that they are using the word. So India can and why means because now Pakistan is under heavy pressure regarding this FATF. That is because of France only. France only put pressure. So France in order to see France India are having military relationship this Dasalta all this is Rafale. So we are having good relationship. Not only that consistently from day one France is supporting India's nuclear program. France never went against India's nuclear program. So always France from the backside it was a supporter of India. Now it is coming front. So now France has the capacity to support India that is how USS are supported India. Russia is also supporting us. So in addition to that France also will openly support India. Particularly it played a key role in FATF in putting pressure on Pakistan that we have to mention. So we can politically bank on this France support and then Britain. So Britain is the problematic country for India. So Britain is always a suspect in the eyes of India because always Britain only moves against India in international community and also in United International Security Council and even when US came out of Pakistan support and it is supporting India it is Britain only is mending the ties between Pakistan and US. Now Britain is the troublemaker for India. So it is now resetting the relationship between US and Pakistan. So how we are going to handle Britain that is the big challenge for India. Now not even China. China will not openly do it because China have its own problem. So Britain is supporting here and then finally US and we all know that US now is maintaining good relationship with India and US is very very important to India in shaping the international reaction or how US reacts that is international reaction. This is the general trend. So maintaining our good relationship with US is very very vital. And US only is putting pressure on Pakistan to not to support terrorism. Pakistan should not support terrorism. Who can tell to Pakistan? Only US. So we have to maintain our good relationship with US. Regarding terrorism we are having good understanding with US but now the problem is US is negotiating with Taliban that issue only is a problem for India. So now this Kashmir issue Pakistan this Britain what Britain is doing and how we have to maintain our relationship with US and also Russia and not allow China to support Pakistan and maintaining our relationship with France and how to stop Britain. So this is a big diplomatic test for India. How India is going to handle we have to wait and see. So for that we have to fortify our capacities. So internal security, territorial defence and diplomacy have to act together. Then only we can solve the problem. So this is regarding 2019 and analyse why and how the successful implementation of post co-build depends need the support of all stakeholders. The point is what should be the majority of focus of the answer is regarding second part. First part what the question is they are asking highlighting highlighting what is the reason amendment to the bill is. One is regarding death penalty. Next one is regarding general neutrality and third one is regarding child pornography. For this these are the new things added in this particular amendment bill. These are three provisions one is for death sentences. Next is gender neutrality and child pornography. So these are being added in this particular bill. You doesn't need to explain all this things just need to highlight these things. Next part of the question is how successful implementation depends upon the stakeholders and who are the stakeholders here? Who are the stakeholders here? If you want to have a very good implementation of the bill who are the stakeholders here? First one is stakeholders you just listed all the stakeholders so that you can find the points. One is Polis. Next is judiciary. Next is government institutions need to play the role government institution is a stakeholder. We will see how they are lacking in this. One is Polis. One is judiciary government institutions. Then apart from this the next is family members family members next is schools also play a role in that schools correct and victim all comes into picture when you take all these things how they are important is for example take Polis. What Polis need to focus here is what is Polis need to focus here because successful implementation depends upon the police. What is that importance of the Polis is I think but time bound investigation that they need to focus on time bound investigation for this particular crimes they need to focus on then what about judicial aspect is what judiciary need to do here is judiciary judiciary need to focus on conviction rate they need to increase the conviction rate quick justice need to be focus on the judiciary side that they need to focus on next on government side one important aspect regarding government side is that any funds created by government for this safety aspects safety aspects and all those things where government can also use that money for effective implementation correct for example you also related Nirbaya fund Nirbaya fund is for women but you can also let girl child protection you can also focus on it that they can need effectively use then apart from this when you say government institution means what other institution need to focus here is it not a child care homes there are some institutional mechanism is there for regarding child and all the rights one is national commission protection of child rights national commission for protection of child rights that need to be strengthened also another biggest problem right now in another institution is national crime records bureau what a problem in national crimes record bureau any idea from 2016 they doesn't have any data they need to focus on it they need to have data for this type of crime that they need to focus on apart from this what other things they need to focus this for example take school system what in schools they need to focus this awareness awareness they need to focus on technology CCTV installations on important locations that need to be focused on in school systems where you can relate with Bangalore incident to all three years before you can see that correct especially in kinder gardens where children are being exploited by the teachers there especially a lower level of the workers there that you can say it and also we need to focus on awareness aspect good touch bad touch aspects that need to be focused on so ultimately you can say that all these factors results in successful implementation okay next is question number five consumer protection bill 2019 is instrument upon consumer protection at 1986 in consumer environment examine so what you need to do is there are two aspects one is 1986 act with reasonable and if you're not aware of all these provisions and all those things sometimes you can also write a manageable answers here for example consumer protection why this comes into pictures that can be introduction why can't consumer protection is important here why consumer protection is important here right now in modern day world why consumer protection is important here that is nothing but there are technological based services and apart from this right now we can see that private players are playing a major role in service providing okay and also technology is coming into picture so ultimately we need to focus on consumer protection here the important aspect is we need to know what is the 1996 act which is different from our modern day so one important aspect is from consumer protection council they are creating consumer protection authority from consumer protection council they are creating consumer protection authority this is in 2019 amendment will consume a protection authority so what is the difference here is this authority have enforcement they can enforce their orders previously it was only advisory role right now it's enforcement of order by this authority consumer protection authority so that is one major difference here second is alternate dispute resolution mechanism that is created by this new bill alternate dispute resolution mechanism so this reduces the time of justice there is another new one being added based on this bill and third one is it's related to personalities who are endosing some brands or services okay they are also being given a provision for this but that thing is if someone is promoting some brands or some services which is not good to the system maximum punishment they can get this any idea even gone through that provision it's around 1 to 3 years imprisonment 1 to 3 years imprisonment and 10 to 15 lakhs of fine for celebrities endosing a ban which is not good for the society that is also a provision added into this then along with this what the other thing is they also enhance what is services and products which includes tele shopping online sales tele shopping online sales multi-level marketing all are added into the new definition of services and products and along with this they also included unfair contracts unfair contracts along with unfair trade practices unfair contract and unfair trade practices which we can relate with real estate sector which is added in this particular bill so there is nothing but enhancement of previous act into the new arena so these are all the things what they have done in that particular bill okay next question number 6 the ending all discrimination against women and girls is not only a basic human right it's crucial for sustainable future in the light of the statement discuss the actions taken by government of India for achieving sustainable goal on gender equality okay so there is a very lengthy question the first part of the question you need to say how ending discrimination is important some statistical information can be given for example how women is important for a system okay what is statistical information we can quote here is that is okay GDP growth is one apart from this what other ways we can say that women is important for a system is from basic statistical information that is 50 percentage of population is women population that you can give us a introduction and also their contribution especially which is not economically valued for example what they do in home and all those things and the question is gender equality when you say gender equality means the general term we can divide into different dimensions one is economic equality. So gender economic equality what are things don't in our system for gender economic equities what are some things done for economic equality for women gender economic equality high self help group one you Can relate with self help group okay that you can write us a points self Help group apart from self help group you can also relate with the gender budgeting right now we have this idea of gender budgeting regarding economic equality and political equality what we are doing for political equalities for women gender that is reservations especially where we can reservation is related to local self-governance 33% reservation local self-governance that you can relate it for political equality. Next administrative equality how are administration is equating women or equal to men and what sense administrative equality where you can relate with DCP direct cash benefit transfer given in the name of women beneficiaries that is we are promoting that administrative equality also cultural equality can also say reason Supreme Court verdicts such cultural equality temple entry and all those things triple the lack you relate with all those things so this how our system is focusing on gender equality. Next is question number seven India reflects interstate disparities in regional and human development which are reflected by state level HDI's regard to their both statement analyze the reason for such disparities they are saying how regional and human development is in India and this is based on our economic survey and you can give an introduction on basis on which states are being developed and underdeveloped logically which are the developed states that we can relate with southern India and underdeveloped states we can relate to eastern India or north eastern states right and the question is why that is a despair disparity and what base we can give the reasons for this why there is a huge disparities we can put in a different domain first you can relate with political reasons what may their political reasons for this is political reasons for disparity political reason for disparity there's not only for these states it's common for every state but you can write as a point here criminalization of politics is the biggest reason criminalization of politics next is can next is that put cultural aspects ineffective local self-governance local self-governance are very not it's not very effective in those areas and what will be the social reasons for this social reasons there is regarding political reason what is social reason for a disparity social reasons one has cast cast very dominant there cast is the biggest thing apart from this illiteracy population you can check about literacy rate in these states with compared with other states that is one of the biggest thing next is male dominated system patriarchal system that is a social reasons next we can go for economic reasons for the economic reason for disparities economic reasons care what are biggest economic reasons for example north eastern states or eastern India why that is lack of development economic reasons first and foremost thing is poor private investments private investment never happens there then agriculture domination all the states are dominated by agriculture and what type of agriculture is happening that that is also another reason where people doesn't have money to move towards development what that type of agriculture is happening there what you called as subsistence agriculture subsistence agriculture is another major reason and ultimately finally good for administrative reasons why it's not happening there in those states first one is corruption corruption level is very high there corruption is problem for entire India but lower level corruption is very high there lower level corruption and next is poor training that doesn't know how to implement the programs that is also another problem and lack of capabilities they are not embracing embracing modern technologies all those things lack of capabilities all this results in disparities okay if you are able to find some example from case studies that will be good or you just quoting the sponsors enough okay and question number eight in June 2013 a full bench of central Information Commission ruled that national parties are public authorities and a section two of RTA act and respond to RTA applications in six years since that ruling parties have refused to comply in the light of the statement critically examine the causes and consequence of such noncompliance what are the crux of the question is right now political parties are form of public authority that's for central Information Commission you got me given introduction on what basis being done anyone have an idea on what basis central Information Commission says that political parties comes under public authorities what are the reason behind it substantial funding who is funding here known is funding here okay so what are the reason for this why they are identified as a public authorities you just need to identify first one is to relate with tax exemptions they're given taxes exemptions that is one reason why they need to be a public authority next is they have resource control especially properties are held by them and they are able to have free airtime as you said free airtime in the medias and third is they are registered and election Commission of India registered and Election Commission of India again there's a constitutional link here and also they have bigger impact in public life as a political parties once they come into part they have bigger impact in political people's life so all these reasons election Central Information Commission says that they should be part of public authority but the point is why they are not ready to accept that what are the causes for the many idea why political parties are not ready to accept that they say that they are not part of public authority what are the reason behind it funding is not substantial apart from this there are some other reasons they say that okay we can't be part of public authority is first one is that strategies they say that they have political strategy which cannot be under RTI that is one political strategies next is internal discussions and decisions internal discussions and decisions which cannot be in public domain that's the stand on which they say that they can't be under RTI but if they are not part of RTI what are the consequences what are the impact is what are the biggest impact is what are the biggest impact is a transparency in political parties especially impact you just I don't impact transparency in political parties especially funding no one knows where they get the money that is the biggest problem next is in a party democracy cannot be promoted in a party democracy no one knows on what basis people is being elected to the position next is we can't control money power in election you want to control money power in election political parties need to be transparent that will not be there and another serious impact is when you say political parties out of RTI not only this national party is going to enjoy the benefit lot of other parties also going to enjoy the benefit what are the other parties here means not about state parties we have non-serious political parties and most of the time what are the idea of creating this non-serious political parties are non-serious political parties means they are not part of election process itself but they have a political party because nothing but to enjoy the taxes tax benefits. So there is a cover for non-serious political parties all these are consequences and ultimately people lose the trust in political system is a consequence of this particular non-compliance. Okay next is question number 15. Yeah data data is a public good has potential benefits to government private sector and citizens explain and this is in our economic survey right now all the informations are coming at a data dimension or nothing but big data you say what is big data means and the point is you need to split the answer in the three level potential benefit for the government. What are the benefit for the government in this you're creating a big data. What are the benefit for the government is? Yeah, one has one has data driven policies. You can focus on data driven policies that is on benefit for the government data driven policies. And okay next is better responsive public services better responsive public services. Next increased efficiency increased efficiency increased efficiency of government that can be improved then we go for private sector. What are the benefit in private sector is what are private sector how they can use big data private sector. Strengthening of market what in other ways when you say private sector how they effectively they can use this big data's so what are the benefit of this Tegra creators Ubers and what are the benefit for the system? Demand supply then customer consumer what are outcome of this consumer behavior that is given by data what what you are going to use with the consumer behavior is can design products and services. Okay demand driven products and services demand driven products and services and focus on unserved areas unserved areas where they can focus on. Unserved areas and what are the benefit for the citizen since what are the benefit for citizens with data driven what are the benefit for biggest benefit for the citizeness that is innovative services innovative services the greatest benefit for the citizen in this innovative services. For all these things you are able to find some examples that would be good okay innovative public service for citizens and also accountable services. Accountable services next is question number 16 question number 16 with with India having demographic advantage improving education standards filling the youth reducing disease burden empowering women will help in realizing the potential of beyond economy in the future with regard to the above statement as as the initiative is taken by the state. What are the importance of the term assess here? Import the term assess here what are the assess here means evaluation what can be done for this question as you can do SWAT analysis what is what is strength weakness opportunities and threat and what are the initiators taken by government in all these areas that should be a major focus take one of the one or two programs or schemes and do the SWAT analysis for example we take educational standards what are being done in educational standards is how we are focusing on educational standards. Education policy is there apart from education policy what other things we are doing apart from this education policies Institute of Eminence. Okay then read on on us any National Education Policy Institute of Eminence National Knowledge Network. Okay and apart from this we are also creating performance grading index performance grading index we are doing it next is we are also going for sharnash all these things just have an idea I'll just fill it SA SA RA NSH SA RA NS NHS and Shalash the SHAA LA SHAA LA SID HI so you just you need to do SWAT analysis for these initiators what are strength and weakness and threats and when you go for skill India what are the important program for skill India right now in I by a union government is Kaushal Vikas Yojana Kaushal Vikas Yojana and Sangal Sangal is another one and health initiative you can go for Ashman Bharat Ashman Bharat and women empowerment which we already discussed we relate with all these things and please understand all this contents are given in our economic survey if you go for box items in economic survey all this contents are given just go through those contents that can be a point for answer writing correct all these initiatives are given in a box item economic survey okay what are new initiators where we are focusing just need to focus on it or you give the examples and do SWAT analysis for education sector health sector and all those things for a strength weakness opportunities and threat okay and finally last question question number 17 civil service must brace up with the tempers of the changing times and meet the requirements of the citizens with regard to the above statement elaborate on the skills required for civil services and the question is how are changing times what is changing times in modern-day India's changing times and what they're referring here changing times means one is technology we are under technology globalization is happening a lot technology globalization is happening a lot and population growth and aspirations of the people all these are changing times because why this question comes in the picture is civil service were created by British is right now we are in modern-day era where people are driven by technology the increasing aspiration all those things what type of new skill set is required for a civil servant anyone have an idea what a new type of skill set is required for a servant they want to meet all these recent changes in a system first is digital skills they should be very good in digital skills right now we know that we are focusing on big data artificial intelligence a civil servant need to have aware of all these things okay next apart from this they also need to have very good innovative skills they need to focus on innovative public services innovative skills is required next is project management skills as most of the programs are mission modes what is mission modes is what is mission mode programs means with precise targets so they are able to finish of the project in a stipulated time project management skills is required next is domain skills though there may be a civil servant a generalist nature is they should be a domain expert they should be expert in health agriculture similar that domain expert skills finally last one interpersonal skills interpersonal skills that is they are better in working as a team all these are the new skills required right now for our civil services okay any clarification in this questions any clarifications any clarification other centers please Bangalore Center any clarification Bangalore Center Vandram any clarification here okay then thank you any clarification other centers please