What then is the purpose of constituting the third such commission at the very end of the term of the government? Is it to merely meet a Constitutional obligation?
The government actually appears to be going on overdrive as the end of the term approaches. Issues that had been left unattended for years have suddenly been taken up. The constitution of the ‘Third State Finance Commission’ is an example. The Commission was due to be appointed in 2010, so the formation of the body comes a decade later than it should have been. The task of the Commission is to review the financial position of the panchayats in the State and then recommend the principles that should govern the distribution of tax proceeds – taxes, duties, levies, toll fee collected by the State between the State and the Panchayati Raj Institutions. The recommendations can include, taxes, levies and fees levied or appropriated by panchayats; grants-in-aid to Panchayati Raj Institutions from the State’s consolidated fund; ways to improve the financial position of the Panchayati Raj Institutions; measures for the overall improvement of panchayat finances.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
The Finance Commission, therefore, plays a crucial role in mapping out the manner in which funds are distributed to the local bodies from the State. While the Commission does its jobs and presents its report, it is very important that the recommendations are implemented. It serves no purpose if after the Commission has presented its report these are shelved to gather dust.
By constituting the Third Finance Commission the government is doing little beyond meeting a mandatory clause. But is the government serious in then implementing the recommendations of the commission? Not only has appointing the commission been delayed by a decade, one just has to go back to see how the reports of the two previous commissions were handled by the government after they have been presented. They were never implemented. The Second Finance Commission had recommended more powers to the Panchayati Raj Institutions in the State but its suggestions remained merely on paper. The report was submitted in 2007 but neither did the Digambar Kamat government nor did his successors thing it fit to implement the report. The Kamat government had constituted a group of ministers to study the recommendations, as had done the Manohar Parrikar government, but neither of the ministerial teams showed interest in taking forward the report and bestowing upon the local bodies more powers.
Panchayats in the State – the district bodies and the village bodies – have for long been demanding that they be allotted more powers and also finances. This was even the subject of a court matter and the outcome was the second group of ministers was appointed to study the Second Finance Commission report.
The Third Finance Commission that has been just constituted has a larger role to play than merely recommendatory. It has to critically examine just how powerless are the local governing bodies due to lack of funds and the manner in which this can be changed. It is a fact that the State is always reluctant to devolve more powers and finances to the local bodies as this makes the lower tiers of governance more powerful. Politicians at the State level also do not desire to see growth by grassroots leaders who could be a challenge in an election. It suits the State to keep the panchayats doing the minimum of work. This works against the principles of grassroots democracy that the 73rd and 74th Constitution Amendments envisaged. The constitution of the Third Finance Commission brings about the possibility of remedying the past, but can happen only if the government has the will.
