test
a:link { color:#fff; text-decoration:none;} a:visited { color:#fff; text-decoration:none;} a:hover { color:#fff; text-decoration: underline;} a:active { color:#fff; text-decoration:none;} #table { width:540px; height:634px; margin:auto;
a:link { color:#fff; text-decoration:none;} a:visited { color:#fff; text-decoration:none;} a:hover { color:#fff; text-decoration: underline;} a:active { color:#fff; text-decoration:none;} #table { width:540px; height:634px; margin:auto;
It can be said that Union budget, 2007, is high on symbolism and intent. Most people in and close to power acknowledge that something is spoiling booming India’s party: price rise, agricultural decay, poverty, mainly. This budget, says finance minister P Chidambaram, is the government’s way to fix these problems so that growth is inclusive. But will the words and allocated funds add up to coherence and content?
Sometimes, a fortnight can mirror a year. With the year-end approaching, a flashback is usually in order. But recent events have made completely clear to me where we are and where we are headed.
It was the mid-1980s. Environmentalist Anil Agarwal was on a mission: track down the person who had conceptualized the employment guarantee scheme in Maharashtra. His search—I tagged along—led him to a dusty, file-filled office in the secretariat. There we met V S Page. I remember a diminutive, soft-spoken man who explained to us why in 1972, when the state was hit with crippling drought and mass migration, it worked on a scheme under which professionals working in cities would pay for employment in villages.