PM hints at more action to unearth black money

New Delhi, Jun 13: About 56 per cent of children were found to have no access to smartphones which have emerged as essential tools for online learning during the coronavirus-induced lockdown, according to a new study that surveyed 42,831 students at various school levels.

The study ''Scenario amidst COVID 19 - Onground Situations and Possible Solutions'' was conducted by child rights NGO Smile Foundation with an aim of analysing the access to technology.

The findings of the study showed that 43.99 per cent of surveyed children have access to smartphones and another 43.99 per cent of students have access to basic phones while 12.02 per cent do not have access to either smartphones or basic phones.

A total of 56.01 per cent children were found to have no access to smartphones, the study said.

"Concerning television, it was noted that while 68.99 per cent have access to TV, a major chunk of 31.01 per cent does not. Hence suggesting that using smartphone interventions for enhancing learning outcomes is not the only solution," it said.

At the primary level of education (class 1 to 5) 19,576 children were surveyed while at upper primary level (class 6 to 8) 12,277 children were surveyed. At secondary level of education (class 9 to 10) 5,537 children were surveyed and at higher secondary level (class 11 to 12) 3,216 children were surveyed.

The survey based on which the study was conducted used two approaches - over the telephone wherein the NGO reached out to the children whose database it already had -- students enrolled in various education centres of the NGO -- and second was through community mobilization wherein community workers went door to door to get answers.

The survey was conducted in 23 states, including Delhi, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, over a period of 12 days from April 16 to April 28.

The lockdown induced by the COVID-19 pandemic in March prompted schools and colleges to move to the virtual world for teaching and learning activities. However, many experts say the digital divide in the country may turn online classes into an operational nightmare.

As per official statistics, there are over 35 crore students in the country. However, it is not clear as to how many of them have access to digital devices and Internet.

Santanu Mishra, co-founder and executive trustee, Smile Foundation, said the findings clearly show that the digital divide is a real challenge, and multiple approaches need to be implemented to cater to all across the nation.

"As an exercise before we start any programme, we do a baseline study to understand the on-ground challenges so that our programmes can bring in real work and real change. With the onset of the pandemic, following indefinite school closures, it is more important than ever to understand the situation and how can we ensure that children are given quality education. Through this, we understand that customized modules need to be built in accordance with the channel of communication," he said.  

Jun 9: Prime Minister Narendra Modi wants all 1.3 billion Indians to be “vocal for local” — meaning, to not just use domestically made products but also to promote them. As an overseas citizen living in Hong Kong, I’m doing my bit by very vocally demanding Indian mangoes on every trip to the grocery. But half the summer is gone, and not a single slice so far.

My loss is due to India’s COVID-19 lockdown, which has severely pinched logistics, a perennial challenge in the huge, infrastructure-starved country. But more worrying than the disruption is the fruity political response to it. Rather than being a wake-up call for fixing supply chains, the pandemic seems to be putting India on an isolationist course. Why?

Granted that the liberal view that trade is good and autarky bad isn’t exactly fashionable anywhere right now. What makes India’s lurch troublesome is that the pace and direction of economic nationalism may be set by domestic business interests. The Indian liberals, many of whom are Western-trained academics, authors and — at least until a few years ago — policy makers, want a more competitive economy. They will be powerless to prevent the slide.

Modi’s call for a self-reliant India has been echoed by Home Minister Amit Shah, the cabinet’s unofficial No. 2, in a television interview. If Indians don’t buy foreign-made goods, the economy will see a jump, he said. The strategy — although it’s too nebulous yet to call it that — has a geopolitical element. A military standoff with China is under way, apparently triggered by India’s completion of a road and bridge near the common border in the tense Himalayan region of Ladakh. It’s very expensive to fight even a limited war there. With India’s economy flattened by COVID, New Delhi may be looking for ways to restore the status quo and send Beijing a signal.

Economic boycotts, such as Chinese consumers’ rejection of Japanese goods over territorial disputes in the East China Sea, are well understood as statecraft. In these times, it’s not even necessary to name an enemy. An undercurrent of popular anger against China, the source of both the virus and India’s biggest bilateral trade deficit, is supposed to do the job. But is it ever that easy?

A hastily introduced policy to stock only local goods in police and paramilitary canteens became a farcical exercise after the list of banned items ended up including products by the local units of Colgate-Palmolive Co., Nestle SA, and Unilever NV, which have had significant Indian operations for between 60 and 90 years, as well as Dabur India Ltd., a New Delhi-based maker of Ayurveda brands. The since-withdrawn list demonstrates the practical difficulty of bureaucrats trying to find things in a globalized world that are 100% indigenous.

Free-trade champions fret that the prime minister, whom they saw as being on their side six years ago, is acting against their advice to dismantle statist controls on land, labor and capital to help make the country more competitive. Engage with the world more, not less, they caution. But Modi also has to satisfy the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the umbrella Hindu organisation that gets him votes. Its backbone of small traders, builders and businessmen — the RSS admits only men — was losing patience with the anemic economy even before the pandemic. Now, they’re in deep trouble, because India’s broken financial system won’t deliver even state-guaranteed loans to them.

The U.S.-China tensions — over trade, intellectual property, COVID responsibility and Hong Kong’s autonomy — offer a perfect backdrop. A dire domestic economy and trouble at the border provide the foreground. Big business will dial economic nationalism up and down to hit a trifecta of goals: Block competition from the People's Republic; make Western rivals fall in line and do joint ventures; and tap deep overseas capital markets. The first goal is being achieved with newly placed restrictions on investment from any country that shares a land border with India. The second aim is to be realized by corporate lobbying to influence India's whimsical economic policies. As for the third objective, with the regulatory environment becoming tougher for U.S.-listed Chinese companies like Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., an opportunity may open up for Indian firms.

All this may bring India Shenzhen-style enclaves of manufacturing and trade, but it will concentrate economic power in fewer hands, something that worries liberals. They’re moved by the suffering of India’s low-wage workers, who have borne the brunt of the COVID shutdown. But when their vision of a more just society and fairer income distribution prompts them to make common cause with the ideological Left, they’re quickly repelled by the Marxist voodoo that all cash, property, bonds and real estate held by citizens or within the nation “must be treated as national resources available during this crisis.” Who will invest in a country that does that instead of just printing money?

At the same time, when liberals look to the business class, they see a sudden swelling of support for ideas like a universal basic income. They wonder if this isn’t a ploy by industry to outsource part of the cost of labor to the taxpayer. Slogans like Modi’s vocal-for-local stir the pot and thicken the confusion. The value-conscious Indian consumer couldn’t give two hoots for calls to buy Indian, but large firms will know how to exploit economic nationalism. One day soon, I’ll get my mangoes — from them.

An Indian national was killed and four others injured in alleged firing by Nepal police personnel along the India-Nepal border in Bihar's Sitamarhi district today.

Sources said the firing took place after a clash between the Indians and personnel of Nepal police at the Lalbandi-Janki Nagar border in Pipra Parsain panchayat under Sonebarsha police station of the district.

Jitendra Kumar, the additional director general of police (headquarters), confirmed the death and injuries. The place of firing falls under Nepal jurisdiction.

Locals said Vikesh Kumar Rai, 25, died on the spot and Umesh Ram and Uday Thakur received bullet injuries when they were working in an agricultural field. Another person, Lagan Rai, is said to have been detained by the Nepali police.

Injured persons were rushed to Sitamarhi Sadar Hospital for better treatment.

Vikesh Kumar Rai’s father, Nageshwar Rai, said that his agriculture land falls under Narayanpur in Nepal where his son was working.

On May 17, Nepal police had fired blank rounds to disperse dozens of Indians trying to cross the border. It was not clear if they were also farmers.

The district magistrate and the superintendent of police of Sitamarhi have rushed to the spot.

Nepal shares a 1,850-kilometre (1,150-mile) open border with India and people travel across it for work and to visit family. It had closed its international borders on March 22 amid the coronavirus pandemic.