Belgelendirme | Yönetmelik | Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği | Yetkin Teknik Eleman Kanunu Tasarısı | Yetkin Mühendislik | Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği | Yetkili Mühendislik | yetki | TMMOB | Profeyonel Mühendislik | planlama | Oda | Mühendislik | Mühendis | Mimarlık | Mimar | Meslek İçi Eğitim | ivme dergisi | İvme | İsmail Ozan Demirel | İMO | Hizmet Ticareti | GATS | Ercan Atalay | Devrimci | Demokrat | Danıştay | Danışma kurulu | Belgelendirme | Akreditasyon | ABD | 3458 | 2547

İMO’nun Danıştay kararıyla durdurulan Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’nin ardından hazırladığı Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği de +İVME Dergisi’nin açtığı davayla durduruldu.

1990’lı yıllardan bu yana mühendis-mimarların ve TMMOB’nin gündeminde olan, özellikle 1999 Marmara Depremi’ndeki yıkımları ve can kayıplarını yalnızca mühendis-mimarların sırtına yükleyen bir çarpıtmayla gerekçelendirilerek hazırlıklarına hız verilen yetkin-yetkili mühendislik uygulamasıyla ilgili olarak, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası 2006’da Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’ni yayınlamış ve ilk yetkin mühendislik belgelerini dağıtmaya başlamıştı. ABD’deki profesyonel mühendislik (professional engineering) uygulamasından kopya edilerek oluşturulmuş bu yönetmelik, bir mühendisin imza yetkisi alabilmek için 5 yıl boyunca bir yetkin mühendisin gözetiminde çalışması, Oda tarafından belli bir ücret karşılığında yapılacak sınavdan geçmesi gibi kriterler getiriyordu.

Haziran 2006’da Yetkin Mühendislik başlığıyla yayınlanan ilk sayısından itibaren İvme Dergisi, meslektaşlarımızı, özellikle de yeni mezun meslektaşlarımızı sermayeye ucuz işgücü olarak sunan bu uygulamaya karşı çıkmıştır.

Öte yandan 1995 yılında imzalanan Hizmet Ticareti Genel Sözleşmesi (GATS) ile Avrupa Birliği uyum süreci de hizmetlerin serbest dolaşımı için mesleki yeterliliklerin karşılıklı tanınması kapsamında benzer bir belgelendirme sürecini öngörmektedir. Kısacası yetkin mühendislik ve belgelendirme, ülkemize gelecek olan uluslararası hizmet tekellerine de ucuz işgücü yarattığı gibi, ayrıca ulusal mühendislik gücümüzün önüne de bir “belge duvarı” çekilerek tasfiyesine yol açacaktır.

Mesleki demokratik kitle örgütü olarak üyelerinin çıkarlarını savunması gereken TMMOB ve bazı Odalar etkin yönetim anlayışları ise, üyelerini, mesleklerini icra etme yetkilerini de ellerinden alarak sermayenin sömürüsüne eli kolu bağlı terk eden yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını bizzat hayata geçirmeye çalışmışlar, 2005’te Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı’nın siparişiyle “Yetkili Mühendis, Mimar ve Şehir Plancılarının Belirlenmesi ve Belgelendirilmesine İlişkin Kanun Tasarısı Taslağı”nı hazırlamışlardır.

Mayıs 2004’teki TMMOB GK’da “TMMOB Meslek İçi Eğitim ve Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği” kabul edilirken, yetkinlik uygulaması ise İMO tarafından 2006’da hazırlanan bir yönetmelikle hayata geçirilmiştir. Bu yönetmeliğe +İvme Dergisi yayın kurulu üyesi İnş. Müh. Ercan Atalay tarafından açılan davada Danıştay 8. Dairesi 6 Kasım 2007’de yürütmeyi durdurma, 18 Kasım 2008’de ise iptal kararı vermiştir.

İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası ise mahkeme kararını ciddiye almak yerine, yetkin mühendisliği uygulama konusundaki ısrarını sürdürmüş ve kararın etrafından dolanma çabasıyla yeni bir yönetmelik hazırlamıştır. Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği adındaki bu “yeni yetkin mühendislik yönetmeliği”, bir öncekinden yalnızca isim bakımından farklıdır. Üstelik bu yalnızca bizim iddiamız da değildir; 12 Eylül 2008’de yapılan İMO 41. Dönem Danışma Kurulu’nda söz konusu yönetmelik tartışılırken bizzat yetkin mühendislik kurulu başkanı tarafından söylenen “Biz zaten daha önceden benimsediğimiz bir yönetmeliği allayıp pullayıp yeniden yürürlüğe koymak için burdayız. Herkes bu danışma kurulunun bir oyun olduğunu biliyor zaten” sözleri, iki yönetmeliğin içerik olarak birbirinden farksız olduğunun en yetkili ağızdan doğrulanmasıdır.

15 Şubat 2009’da Resmi Gazete’de yayınlanarak yürürlüğe giren bu yeni yönetmeliğe de +İvme Dergisi adına yayın kurulu üyemiz İnş. Müh. İsmail Ozan Demirel tarafından 16 Nisan 2009 tarihinde dava açılmıştır. Danıştay 8. Dairesi ise 8 Temmuz 2009 tarihinde oybirliğiyle Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği’nin yürütmesini durdurma kararı almıştır. Böylece +İvme Dergisi, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası’nın yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını ikinci kez durdurmuştur.

Kararın gerekçesi “(…) mühendislik mesleğinin niteliği, mühendis ve yüksek mühendis gibi unvanların neler olduğu ve bunların kimler tarafından kullanılacağı, ayrıca meslek alanında lisans eğitimi sonrasındaki yüksek lisans, doktora, doçentlik, profesörlük gibi aşamalar ilgili düzenlemelerin yukarıda açıklanan 3458 ve 2547 sayılı Yasalarda düzenlenmiş olması karşısında, anılan Yasa hükümlerinin verdiği açık bir yetkiye dayanmayan ve anılan yasal düzenlemelerde yer alan tanımları aşar bir şekilde yeni tanımlar ve düzenleme getiren dava konusu Yönetmelikte yetki yönünden hukuka uyarlık bulunmamaktadır” şeklinde ifade edilmiştir. Bu karar da, bir önceki yürütmeyi durdurma kararında olduğu gibi, İvme’nin savunduğu “mühendislik eğitiminde belgelendirmeyi üniversiteler yapmalı; odaların yapması gereken ise, kimin neyi bildiğini ölçmek yerine üretilen mühendislik hizmetlerini ya da bu hizmetleri denetlemesi gereken kurumları denetlemek olmalı” görüşünün haklılığını bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur.

Son olarak şunu da eklemek isteriz; bir süredir TMMOB içinde, dün yetkin mühendisliği savunanların bugün İMO’nun yetkinlik uygulamasına kendilerinin de karşı olduklarını söyledikleri duyulmaktadır. Bu kişiler bugün belgelendirmeyi savunuyor, yetkin mühendislik tartışmasının ise artık bittiğini, tüketildiğini hemen sözlerine eklemeyi unutmuyorlar. Bu durum, yetkin mühendisliğe karşı ideolojik mücadelenin kazanıldığını gösterdiği gibi, kavramlar üzerinde yeni bir bulanıklık yaratma çabasına da işaret etmektedir: Bugün birçok Odanın belgelendirme uygulamasının, mühendis emeğinin değersizleştirilmesine yol açma anlamında yetkin mühendislikten özde bir farkı yoktur.

İvme Dergisi yetkin-yetkili mühendislik başta olmak üzere meslektaşlarımızı sermayenin ucuz işgücü haline getirecek tüm uygulamalara karşı mücadelesini kararlılıkla sürdürecektir.

Mühendislik Mimarlık ve Planlamada +İVME

Belgelendirme | Yönetmelik | Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği | Yetkin Teknik Eleman Kanunu Tasarısı | Yetkin Mühendislik | Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği | Yetkili Mühendislik | yetki | TMMOB | Profeyonel Mühendislik | planlama | Oda | Mühendislik | Mühendis | Mimarlık | Mimar | Meslek İçi Eğitim | ivme dergisi | İvme | İsmail Ozan Demirel | İMO | Hizmet Ticareti | GATS | Ercan Atalay | Devrimci | Demokrat | Danıştay | Danışma kurulu | Belgelendirme | Akreditasyon | ABD | 3458 | 2547

İMO’nun Danıştay kararıyla durdurulan Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’nin ardından hazırladığı Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği de +İVME Dergisi’nin açtığı davayla durduruldu.

1990’lı yıllardan bu yana mühendis-mimarların ve TMMOB’nin gündeminde olan, özellikle 1999 Marmara Depremi’ndeki yıkımları ve can kayıplarını yalnızca mühendis-mimarların sırtına yükleyen bir çarpıtmayla gerekçelendirilerek hazırlıklarına hız verilen yetkin-yetkili mühendislik uygulamasıyla ilgili olarak, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası 2006’da Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’ni yayınlamış ve ilk yetkin mühendislik belgelerini dağıtmaya başlamıştı. ABD’deki profesyonel mühendislik (professional engineering) uygulamasından kopya edilerek oluşturulmuş bu yönetmelik, bir mühendisin imza yetkisi alabilmek için 5 yıl boyunca bir yetkin mühendisin gözetiminde çalışması, Oda tarafından belli bir ücret karşılığında yapılacak sınavdan geçmesi gibi kriterler getiriyordu.

Haziran 2006’da Yetkin Mühendislik başlığıyla yayınlanan ilk sayısından itibaren İvme Dergisi, meslektaşlarımızı, özellikle de yeni mezun meslektaşlarımızı sermayeye ucuz işgücü olarak sunan bu uygulamaya karşı çıkmıştır.

Öte yandan 1995 yılında imzalanan Hizmet Ticareti Genel Sözleşmesi (GATS) ile Avrupa Birliği uyum süreci de hizmetlerin serbest dolaşımı için mesleki yeterliliklerin karşılıklı tanınması kapsamında benzer bir belgelendirme sürecini öngörmektedir. Kısacası yetkin mühendislik ve belgelendirme, ülkemize gelecek olan uluslararası hizmet tekellerine de ucuz işgücü yarattığı gibi, ayrıca ulusal mühendislik gücümüzün önüne de bir “belge duvarı” çekilerek tasfiyesine yol açacaktır.

Mesleki demokratik kitle örgütü olarak üyelerinin çıkarlarını savunması gereken TMMOB ve bazı Odalar etkin yönetim anlayışları ise, üyelerini, mesleklerini icra etme yetkilerini de ellerinden alarak sermayenin sömürüsüne eli kolu bağlı terk eden yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını bizzat hayata geçirmeye çalışmışlar, 2005’te Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı’nın siparişiyle “Yetkili Mühendis, Mimar ve Şehir Plancılarının Belirlenmesi ve Belgelendirilmesine İlişkin Kanun Tasarısı Taslağı”nı hazırlamışlardır.

Mayıs 2004’teki TMMOB GK’da “TMMOB Meslek İçi Eğitim ve Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği” kabul edilirken, yetkinlik uygulaması ise İMO tarafından 2006’da hazırlanan bir yönetmelikle hayata geçirilmiştir. Bu yönetmeliğe +İvme Dergisi yayın kurulu üyesi İnş. Müh. Ercan Atalay tarafından açılan davada Danıştay 8. Dairesi 6 Kasım 2007’de yürütmeyi durdurma, 18 Kasım 2008’de ise iptal kararı vermiştir.

İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası ise mahkeme kararını ciddiye almak yerine, yetkin mühendisliği uygulama konusundaki ısrarını sürdürmüş ve kararın etrafından dolanma çabasıyla yeni bir yönetmelik hazırlamıştır. Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği adındaki bu “yeni yetkin mühendislik yönetmeliği”, bir öncekinden yalnızca isim bakımından farklıdır. Üstelik bu yalnızca bizim iddiamız da değildir; 12 Eylül 2008’de yapılan İMO 41. Dönem Danışma Kurulu’nda söz konusu yönetmelik tartışılırken bizzat yetkin mühendislik kurulu başkanı tarafından söylenen “Biz zaten daha önceden benimsediğimiz bir yönetmeliği allayıp pullayıp yeniden yürürlüğe koymak için burdayız. Herkes bu danışma kurulunun bir oyun olduğunu biliyor zaten” sözleri, iki yönetmeliğin içerik olarak birbirinden farksız olduğunun en yetkili ağızdan doğrulanmasıdır.

15 Şubat 2009’da Resmi Gazete’de yayınlanarak yürürlüğe giren bu yeni yönetmeliğe de +İvme Dergisi adına yayın kurulu üyemiz İnş. Müh. İsmail Ozan Demirel tarafından 16 Nisan 2009 tarihinde dava açılmıştır. Danıştay 8. Dairesi ise 8 Temmuz 2009 tarihinde oybirliğiyle Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği’nin yürütmesini durdurma kararı almıştır. Böylece +İvme Dergisi, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası’nın yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını ikinci kez durdurmuştur.

Kararın gerekçesi “(…) mühendislik mesleğinin niteliği, mühendis ve yüksek mühendis gibi unvanların neler olduğu ve bunların kimler tarafından kullanılacağı, ayrıca meslek alanında lisans eğitimi sonrasındaki yüksek lisans, doktora, doçentlik, profesörlük gibi aşamalar ilgili düzenlemelerin yukarıda açıklanan 3458 ve 2547 sayılı Yasalarda düzenlenmiş olması karşısında, anılan Yasa hükümlerinin verdiği açık bir yetkiye dayanmayan ve anılan yasal düzenlemelerde yer alan tanımları aşar bir şekilde yeni tanımlar ve düzenleme getiren dava konusu Yönetmelikte yetki yönünden hukuka uyarlık bulunmamaktadır” şeklinde ifade edilmiştir. Bu karar da, bir önceki yürütmeyi durdurma kararında olduğu gibi, İvme’nin savunduğu “mühendislik eğitiminde belgelendirmeyi üniversiteler yapmalı; odaların yapması gereken ise, kimin neyi bildiğini ölçmek yerine üretilen mühendislik hizmetlerini ya da bu hizmetleri denetlemesi gereken kurumları denetlemek olmalı” görüşünün haklılığını bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur.

Son olarak şunu da eklemek isteriz; bir süredir TMMOB içinde, dün yetkin mühendisliği savunanların bugün İMO’nun yetkinlik uygulamasına kendilerinin de karşı olduklarını söyledikleri duyulmaktadır. Bu kişiler bugün belgelendirmeyi savunuyor, yetkin mühendislik tartışmasının ise artık bittiğini, tüketildiğini hemen sözlerine eklemeyi unutmuyorlar. Bu durum, yetkin mühendisliğe karşı ideolojik mücadelenin kazanıldığını gösterdiği gibi, kavramlar üzerinde yeni bir bulanıklık yaratma çabasına da işaret etmektedir: Bugün birçok Odanın belgelendirme uygulamasının, mühendis emeğinin değersizleştirilmesine yol açma anlamında yetkin mühendislikten özde bir farkı yoktur.

İvme Dergisi yetkin-yetkili mühendislik başta olmak üzere meslektaşlarımızı sermayenin ucuz işgücü haline getirecek tüm uygulamalara karşı mücadelesini kararlılıkla sürdürecektir.

Mühendislik Mimarlık ve Planlamada +İVME

Belgelendirme | Yönetmelik | Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği | Yetkin Teknik Eleman Kanunu Tasarısı | Yetkin Mühendislik | Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği | Yetkili Mühendislik | yetki | TMMOB | Profeyonel Mühendislik | planlama | Oda | Mühendislik | Mühendis | Mimarlık | Mimar | Meslek İçi Eğitim | ivme dergisi | İvme | İsmail Ozan Demirel | İMO | Hizmet Ticareti | GATS | Ercan Atalay | Devrimci | Demokrat | Danıştay | Danışma kurulu | Belgelendirme | Akreditasyon | ABD | 3458 | 2547

İMO’nun Danıştay kararıyla durdurulan Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’nin ardından hazırladığı Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği de +İVME Dergisi’nin açtığı davayla durduruldu.

1990’lı yıllardan bu yana mühendis-mimarların ve TMMOB’nin gündeminde olan, özellikle 1999 Marmara Depremi’ndeki yıkımları ve can kayıplarını yalnızca mühendis-mimarların sırtına yükleyen bir çarpıtmayla gerekçelendirilerek hazırlıklarına hız verilen yetkin-yetkili mühendislik uygulamasıyla ilgili olarak, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası 2006’da Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’ni yayınlamış ve ilk yetkin mühendislik belgelerini dağıtmaya başlamıştı. ABD’deki profesyonel mühendislik (professional engineering) uygulamasından kopya edilerek oluşturulmuş bu yönetmelik, bir mühendisin imza yetkisi alabilmek için 5 yıl boyunca bir yetkin mühendisin gözetiminde çalışması, Oda tarafından belli bir ücret karşılığında yapılacak sınavdan geçmesi gibi kriterler getiriyordu.

Haziran 2006’da Yetkin Mühendislik başlığıyla yayınlanan ilk sayısından itibaren İvme Dergisi, meslektaşlarımızı, özellikle de yeni mezun meslektaşlarımızı sermayeye ucuz işgücü olarak sunan bu uygulamaya karşı çıkmıştır.

Öte yandan 1995 yılında imzalanan Hizmet Ticareti Genel Sözleşmesi (GATS) ile Avrupa Birliği uyum süreci de hizmetlerin serbest dolaşımı için mesleki yeterliliklerin karşılıklı tanınması kapsamında benzer bir belgelendirme sürecini öngörmektedir. Kısacası yetkin mühendislik ve belgelendirme, ülkemize gelecek olan uluslararası hizmet tekellerine de ucuz işgücü yarattığı gibi, ayrıca ulusal mühendislik gücümüzün önüne de bir “belge duvarı” çekilerek tasfiyesine yol açacaktır.

Mesleki demokratik kitle örgütü olarak üyelerinin çıkarlarını savunması gereken TMMOB ve bazı Odalar etkin yönetim anlayışları ise, üyelerini, mesleklerini icra etme yetkilerini de ellerinden alarak sermayenin sömürüsüne eli kolu bağlı terk eden yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını bizzat hayata geçirmeye çalışmışlar, 2005’te Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı’nın siparişiyle “Yetkili Mühendis, Mimar ve Şehir Plancılarının Belirlenmesi ve Belgelendirilmesine İlişkin Kanun Tasarısı Taslağı”nı hazırlamışlardır.

Mayıs 2004’teki TMMOB GK’da “TMMOB Meslek İçi Eğitim ve Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği” kabul edilirken, yetkinlik uygulaması ise İMO tarafından 2006’da hazırlanan bir yönetmelikle hayata geçirilmiştir. Bu yönetmeliğe +İvme Dergisi yayın kurulu üyesi İnş. Müh. Ercan Atalay tarafından açılan davada Danıştay 8. Dairesi 6 Kasım 2007’de yürütmeyi durdurma, 18 Kasım 2008’de ise iptal kararı vermiştir.

İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası ise mahkeme kararını ciddiye almak yerine, yetkin mühendisliği uygulama konusundaki ısrarını sürdürmüş ve kararın etrafından dolanma çabasıyla yeni bir yönetmelik hazırlamıştır. Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği adındaki bu “yeni yetkin mühendislik yönetmeliği”, bir öncekinden yalnızca isim bakımından farklıdır. Üstelik bu yalnızca bizim iddiamız da değildir; 12 Eylül 2008’de yapılan İMO 41. Dönem Danışma Kurulu’nda söz konusu yönetmelik tartışılırken bizzat yetkin mühendislik kurulu başkanı tarafından söylenen “Biz zaten daha önceden benimsediğimiz bir yönetmeliği allayıp pullayıp yeniden yürürlüğe koymak için burdayız. Herkes bu danışma kurulunun bir oyun olduğunu biliyor zaten” sözleri, iki yönetmeliğin içerik olarak birbirinden farksız olduğunun en yetkili ağızdan doğrulanmasıdır.

15 Şubat 2009’da Resmi Gazete’de yayınlanarak yürürlüğe giren bu yeni yönetmeliğe de +İvme Dergisi adına yayın kurulu üyemiz İnş. Müh. İsmail Ozan Demirel tarafından 16 Nisan 2009 tarihinde dava açılmıştır. Danıştay 8. Dairesi ise 8 Temmuz 2009 tarihinde oybirliğiyle Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği’nin yürütmesini durdurma kararı almıştır. Böylece +İvme Dergisi, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası’nın yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını ikinci kez durdurmuştur.

Kararın gerekçesi “(…) mühendislik mesleğinin niteliği, mühendis ve yüksek mühendis gibi unvanların neler olduğu ve bunların kimler tarafından kullanılacağı, ayrıca meslek alanında lisans eğitimi sonrasındaki yüksek lisans, doktora, doçentlik, profesörlük gibi aşamalar ilgili düzenlemelerin yukarıda açıklanan 3458 ve 2547 sayılı Yasalarda düzenlenmiş olması karşısında, anılan Yasa hükümlerinin verdiği açık bir yetkiye dayanmayan ve anılan yasal düzenlemelerde yer alan tanımları aşar bir şekilde yeni tanımlar ve düzenleme getiren dava konusu Yönetmelikte yetki yönünden hukuka uyarlık bulunmamaktadır” şeklinde ifade edilmiştir. Bu karar da, bir önceki yürütmeyi durdurma kararında olduğu gibi, İvme’nin savunduğu “mühendislik eğitiminde belgelendirmeyi üniversiteler yapmalı; odaların yapması gereken ise, kimin neyi bildiğini ölçmek yerine üretilen mühendislik hizmetlerini ya da bu hizmetleri denetlemesi gereken kurumları denetlemek olmalı” görüşünün haklılığını bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur.

Son olarak şunu da eklemek isteriz; bir süredir TMMOB içinde, dün yetkin mühendisliği savunanların bugün İMO’nun yetkinlik uygulamasına kendilerinin de karşı olduklarını söyledikleri duyulmaktadır. Bu kişiler bugün belgelendirmeyi savunuyor, yetkin mühendislik tartışmasının ise artık bittiğini, tüketildiğini hemen sözlerine eklemeyi unutmuyorlar. Bu durum, yetkin mühendisliğe karşı ideolojik mücadelenin kazanıldığını gösterdiği gibi, kavramlar üzerinde yeni bir bulanıklık yaratma çabasına da işaret etmektedir: Bugün birçok Odanın belgelendirme uygulamasının, mühendis emeğinin değersizleştirilmesine yol açma anlamında yetkin mühendislikten özde bir farkı yoktur.

İvme Dergisi yetkin-yetkili mühendislik başta olmak üzere meslektaşlarımızı sermayenin ucuz işgücü haline getirecek tüm uygulamalara karşı mücadelesini kararlılıkla sürdürecektir.

Mühendislik Mimarlık ve Planlamada +İVME

Belgelendirme | Yönetmelik | Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği | Yetkin Teknik Eleman Kanunu Tasarısı | Yetkin Mühendislik | Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği | Yetkili Mühendislik | yetki | TMMOB | Profeyonel Mühendislik | planlama | Oda | Mühendislik | Mühendis | Mimarlık | Mimar | Meslek İçi Eğitim | ivme dergisi | İvme | İsmail Ozan Demirel | İMO | Hizmet Ticareti | GATS | Ercan Atalay | Devrimci | Demokrat | Danıştay | Danışma kurulu | Belgelendirme | Akreditasyon | ABD | 3458 | 2547

İMO’nun Danıştay kararıyla durdurulan Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’nin ardından hazırladığı Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği de +İVME Dergisi’nin açtığı davayla durduruldu.

1990’lı yıllardan bu yana mühendis-mimarların ve TMMOB’nin gündeminde olan, özellikle 1999 Marmara Depremi’ndeki yıkımları ve can kayıplarını yalnızca mühendis-mimarların sırtına yükleyen bir çarpıtmayla gerekçelendirilerek hazırlıklarına hız verilen yetkin-yetkili mühendislik uygulamasıyla ilgili olarak, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası 2006’da Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’ni yayınlamış ve ilk yetkin mühendislik belgelerini dağıtmaya başlamıştı. ABD’deki profesyonel mühendislik (professional engineering) uygulamasından kopya edilerek oluşturulmuş bu yönetmelik, bir mühendisin imza yetkisi alabilmek için 5 yıl boyunca bir yetkin mühendisin gözetiminde çalışması, Oda tarafından belli bir ücret karşılığında yapılacak sınavdan geçmesi gibi kriterler getiriyordu.

Haziran 2006’da Yetkin Mühendislik başlığıyla yayınlanan ilk sayısından itibaren İvme Dergisi, meslektaşlarımızı, özellikle de yeni mezun meslektaşlarımızı sermayeye ucuz işgücü olarak sunan bu uygulamaya karşı çıkmıştır.

Öte yandan 1995 yılında imzalanan Hizmet Ticareti Genel Sözleşmesi (GATS) ile Avrupa Birliği uyum süreci de hizmetlerin serbest dolaşımı için mesleki yeterliliklerin karşılıklı tanınması kapsamında benzer bir belgelendirme sürecini öngörmektedir. Kısacası yetkin mühendislik ve belgelendirme, ülkemize gelecek olan uluslararası hizmet tekellerine de ucuz işgücü yarattığı gibi, ayrıca ulusal mühendislik gücümüzün önüne de bir “belge duvarı” çekilerek tasfiyesine yol açacaktır.

Mesleki demokratik kitle örgütü olarak üyelerinin çıkarlarını savunması gereken TMMOB ve bazı Odalar etkin yönetim anlayışları ise, üyelerini, mesleklerini icra etme yetkilerini de ellerinden alarak sermayenin sömürüsüne eli kolu bağlı terk eden yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını bizzat hayata geçirmeye çalışmışlar, 2005’te Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı’nın siparişiyle “Yetkili Mühendis, Mimar ve Şehir Plancılarının Belirlenmesi ve Belgelendirilmesine İlişkin Kanun Tasarısı Taslağı”nı hazırlamışlardır.

Mayıs 2004’teki TMMOB GK’da “TMMOB Meslek İçi Eğitim ve Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği” kabul edilirken, yetkinlik uygulaması ise İMO tarafından 2006’da hazırlanan bir yönetmelikle hayata geçirilmiştir. Bu yönetmeliğe +İvme Dergisi yayın kurulu üyesi İnş. Müh. Ercan Atalay tarafından açılan davada Danıştay 8. Dairesi 6 Kasım 2007’de yürütmeyi durdurma, 18 Kasım 2008’de ise iptal kararı vermiştir.

İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası ise mahkeme kararını ciddiye almak yerine, yetkin mühendisliği uygulama konusundaki ısrarını sürdürmüş ve kararın etrafından dolanma çabasıyla yeni bir yönetmelik hazırlamıştır. Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği adındaki bu “yeni yetkin mühendislik yönetmeliği”, bir öncekinden yalnızca isim bakımından farklıdır. Üstelik bu yalnızca bizim iddiamız da değildir; 12 Eylül 2008’de yapılan İMO 41. Dönem Danışma Kurulu’nda söz konusu yönetmelik tartışılırken bizzat yetkin mühendislik kurulu başkanı tarafından söylenen “Biz zaten daha önceden benimsediğimiz bir yönetmeliği allayıp pullayıp yeniden yürürlüğe koymak için burdayız. Herkes bu danışma kurulunun bir oyun olduğunu biliyor zaten” sözleri, iki yönetmeliğin içerik olarak birbirinden farksız olduğunun en yetkili ağızdan doğrulanmasıdır.

15 Şubat 2009’da Resmi Gazete’de yayınlanarak yürürlüğe giren bu yeni yönetmeliğe de +İvme Dergisi adına yayın kurulu üyemiz İnş. Müh. İsmail Ozan Demirel tarafından 16 Nisan 2009 tarihinde dava açılmıştır. Danıştay 8. Dairesi ise 8 Temmuz 2009 tarihinde oybirliğiyle Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği’nin yürütmesini durdurma kararı almıştır. Böylece +İvme Dergisi, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası’nın yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını ikinci kez durdurmuştur.

Kararın gerekçesi “(…) mühendislik mesleğinin niteliği, mühendis ve yüksek mühendis gibi unvanların neler olduğu ve bunların kimler tarafından kullanılacağı, ayrıca meslek alanında lisans eğitimi sonrasındaki yüksek lisans, doktora, doçentlik, profesörlük gibi aşamalar ilgili düzenlemelerin yukarıda açıklanan 3458 ve 2547 sayılı Yasalarda düzenlenmiş olması karşısında, anılan Yasa hükümlerinin verdiği açık bir yetkiye dayanmayan ve anılan yasal düzenlemelerde yer alan tanımları aşar bir şekilde yeni tanımlar ve düzenleme getiren dava konusu Yönetmelikte yetki yönünden hukuka uyarlık bulunmamaktadır” şeklinde ifade edilmiştir. Bu karar da, bir önceki yürütmeyi durdurma kararında olduğu gibi, İvme’nin savunduğu “mühendislik eğitiminde belgelendirmeyi üniversiteler yapmalı; odaların yapması gereken ise, kimin neyi bildiğini ölçmek yerine üretilen mühendislik hizmetlerini ya da bu hizmetleri denetlemesi gereken kurumları denetlemek olmalı” görüşünün haklılığını bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur.

Son olarak şunu da eklemek isteriz; bir süredir TMMOB içinde, dün yetkin mühendisliği savunanların bugün İMO’nun yetkinlik uygulamasına kendilerinin de karşı olduklarını söyledikleri duyulmaktadır. Bu kişiler bugün belgelendirmeyi savunuyor, yetkin mühendislik tartışmasının ise artık bittiğini, tüketildiğini hemen sözlerine eklemeyi unutmuyorlar. Bu durum, yetkin mühendisliğe karşı ideolojik mücadelenin kazanıldığını gösterdiği gibi, kavramlar üzerinde yeni bir bulanıklık yaratma çabasına da işaret etmektedir: Bugün birçok Odanın belgelendirme uygulamasının, mühendis emeğinin değersizleştirilmesine yol açma anlamında yetkin mühendislikten özde bir farkı yoktur.

İvme Dergisi yetkin-yetkili mühendislik başta olmak üzere meslektaşlarımızı sermayenin ucuz işgücü haline getirecek tüm uygulamalara karşı mücadelesini kararlılıkla sürdürecektir.

Mühendislik Mimarlık ve Planlamada +İVME

Belgelendirme | Yönetmelik | Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği | Yetkin Teknik Eleman Kanunu Tasarısı | Yetkin Mühendislik | Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği | Yetkili Mühendislik | yetki | TMMOB | Profeyonel Mühendislik | planlama | Oda | Mühendislik | Mühendis | Mimarlık | Mimar | Meslek İçi Eğitim | ivme dergisi | İvme | İsmail Ozan Demirel | İMO | Hizmet Ticareti | GATS | Ercan Atalay | Devrimci | Demokrat | Danıştay | Danışma kurulu | Belgelendirme | Akreditasyon | ABD | 3458 | 2547

İMO’nun Danıştay kararıyla durdurulan Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’nin ardından hazırladığı Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği de +İVME Dergisi’nin açtığı davayla durduruldu.

1990’lı yıllardan bu yana mühendis-mimarların ve TMMOB’nin gündeminde olan, özellikle 1999 Marmara Depremi’ndeki yıkımları ve can kayıplarını yalnızca mühendis-mimarların sırtına yükleyen bir çarpıtmayla gerekçelendirilerek hazırlıklarına hız verilen yetkin-yetkili mühendislik uygulamasıyla ilgili olarak, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası 2006’da Yetkin İnşaat Mühendisliği Yönetmeliği’ni yayınlamış ve ilk yetkin mühendislik belgelerini dağıtmaya başlamıştı. ABD’deki profesyonel mühendislik (professional engineering) uygulamasından kopya edilerek oluşturulmuş bu yönetmelik, bir mühendisin imza yetkisi alabilmek için 5 yıl boyunca bir yetkin mühendisin gözetiminde çalışması, Oda tarafından belli bir ücret karşılığında yapılacak sınavdan geçmesi gibi kriterler getiriyordu.

Haziran 2006’da Yetkin Mühendislik başlığıyla yayınlanan ilk sayısından itibaren İvme Dergisi, meslektaşlarımızı, özellikle de yeni mezun meslektaşlarımızı sermayeye ucuz işgücü olarak sunan bu uygulamaya karşı çıkmıştır.

Öte yandan 1995 yılında imzalanan Hizmet Ticareti Genel Sözleşmesi (GATS) ile Avrupa Birliği uyum süreci de hizmetlerin serbest dolaşımı için mesleki yeterliliklerin karşılıklı tanınması kapsamında benzer bir belgelendirme sürecini öngörmektedir. Kısacası yetkin mühendislik ve belgelendirme, ülkemize gelecek olan uluslararası hizmet tekellerine de ucuz işgücü yarattığı gibi, ayrıca ulusal mühendislik gücümüzün önüne de bir “belge duvarı” çekilerek tasfiyesine yol açacaktır.

Mesleki demokratik kitle örgütü olarak üyelerinin çıkarlarını savunması gereken TMMOB ve bazı Odalar etkin yönetim anlayışları ise, üyelerini, mesleklerini icra etme yetkilerini de ellerinden alarak sermayenin sömürüsüne eli kolu bağlı terk eden yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını bizzat hayata geçirmeye çalışmışlar, 2005’te Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı’nın siparişiyle “Yetkili Mühendis, Mimar ve Şehir Plancılarının Belirlenmesi ve Belgelendirilmesine İlişkin Kanun Tasarısı Taslağı”nı hazırlamışlardır.

Mayıs 2004’teki TMMOB GK’da “TMMOB Meslek İçi Eğitim ve Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği” kabul edilirken, yetkinlik uygulaması ise İMO tarafından 2006’da hazırlanan bir yönetmelikle hayata geçirilmiştir. Bu yönetmeliğe +İvme Dergisi yayın kurulu üyesi İnş. Müh. Ercan Atalay tarafından açılan davada Danıştay 8. Dairesi 6 Kasım 2007’de yürütmeyi durdurma, 18 Kasım 2008’de ise iptal kararı vermiştir.

İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası ise mahkeme kararını ciddiye almak yerine, yetkin mühendisliği uygulama konusundaki ısrarını sürdürmüş ve kararın etrafından dolanma çabasıyla yeni bir yönetmelik hazırlamıştır. Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği adındaki bu “yeni yetkin mühendislik yönetmeliği”, bir öncekinden yalnızca isim bakımından farklıdır. Üstelik bu yalnızca bizim iddiamız da değildir; 12 Eylül 2008’de yapılan İMO 41. Dönem Danışma Kurulu’nda söz konusu yönetmelik tartışılırken bizzat yetkin mühendislik kurulu başkanı tarafından söylenen “Biz zaten daha önceden benimsediğimiz bir yönetmeliği allayıp pullayıp yeniden yürürlüğe koymak için burdayız. Herkes bu danışma kurulunun bir oyun olduğunu biliyor zaten” sözleri, iki yönetmeliğin içerik olarak birbirinden farksız olduğunun en yetkili ağızdan doğrulanmasıdır.

15 Şubat 2009’da Resmi Gazete’de yayınlanarak yürürlüğe giren bu yeni yönetmeliğe de +İvme Dergisi adına yayın kurulu üyemiz İnş. Müh. İsmail Ozan Demirel tarafından 16 Nisan 2009 tarihinde dava açılmıştır. Danıştay 8. Dairesi ise 8 Temmuz 2009 tarihinde oybirliğiyle Yetkinlik Belgelendirme Yönetmeliği’nin yürütmesini durdurma kararı almıştır. Böylece +İvme Dergisi, İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası’nın yetkin mühendislik uygulamasını ikinci kez durdurmuştur.

Kararın gerekçesi “(…) mühendislik mesleğinin niteliği, mühendis ve yüksek mühendis gibi unvanların neler olduğu ve bunların kimler tarafından kullanılacağı, ayrıca meslek alanında lisans eğitimi sonrasındaki yüksek lisans, doktora, doçentlik, profesörlük gibi aşamalar ilgili düzenlemelerin yukarıda açıklanan 3458 ve 2547 sayılı Yasalarda düzenlenmiş olması karşısında, anılan Yasa hükümlerinin verdiği açık bir yetkiye dayanmayan ve anılan yasal düzenlemelerde yer alan tanımları aşar bir şekilde yeni tanımlar ve düzenleme getiren dava konusu Yönetmelikte yetki yönünden hukuka uyarlık bulunmamaktadır” şeklinde ifade edilmiştir. Bu karar da, bir önceki yürütmeyi durdurma kararında olduğu gibi, İvme’nin savunduğu “mühendislik eğitiminde belgelendirmeyi üniversiteler yapmalı; odaların yapması gereken ise, kimin neyi bildiğini ölçmek yerine üretilen mühendislik hizmetlerini ya da bu hizmetleri denetlemesi gereken kurumları denetlemek olmalı” görüşünün haklılığını bir kez daha ortaya koymuştur.

Son olarak şunu da eklemek isteriz; bir süredir TMMOB içinde, dün yetkin mühendisliği savunanların bugün İMO’nun yetkinlik uygulamasına kendilerinin de karşı olduklarını söyledikleri duyulmaktadır. Bu kişiler bugün belgelendirmeyi savunuyor, yetkin mühendislik tartışmasının ise artık bittiğini, tüketildiğini hemen sözlerine eklemeyi unutmuyorlar. Bu durum, yetkin mühendisliğe karşı ideolojik mücadelenin kazanıldığını gösterdiği gibi, kavramlar üzerinde yeni bir bulanıklık yaratma çabasına da işaret etmektedir: Bugün birçok Odanın belgelendirme uygulamasının, mühendis emeğinin değersizleştirilmesine yol açma anlamında yetkin mühendislikten özde bir farkı yoktur.

İvme Dergisi yetkin-yetkili mühendislik başta olmak üzere meslektaşlarımızı sermayenin ucuz işgücü haline getirecek tüm uygulamalara karşı mücadelesini kararlılıkla sürdürecektir.

Mühendislik Mimarlık ve Planlamada +İVME

If you are at all interested in finance for development, check this out.

Post courtesy Choike.org

Statement of the WOMEN’S WORKING GROUP ON FINANCING FOR DEVELOPMENT * for the G20 Summit in Pittsburgh, September 2009

The current G20 meeting in Pittsburgh takes place a year after the outbreak of the worst financial crisis in recent history. That moment left us astonished as we watched powerful governments and the International Financial Institutions scramble to plug a hemorrhaging financial bubble burst in the system of the global market but the crisis quickly spread as a global contagion and soon entire economies were placed at risk. Everywhere the crisis led to destabilizing impacts on the real economy threatening the livelihoods of men and women.

WE believe that G20 leaders’ declarations have committed three essential mistakes: First, the declarations fail to diagnose the crisis as a symptom of something deeper: the unsustainability of an economic and financial system based on profit; the over concentration of capital, overproduction, rampant speculation; and the reckless consumerism that is guided by free market principles. The decoupling of the real economy and financial markets was accompanied by yet another fundamental artificial separation: the productive economy and the sphere of social reproduction.

From a gender perspective, it is also necessary to consider that the aggregate contribution of female labor in the productive economy is concentrated differently than that of male labor. This implies that the impacts of the crisis on women will vary according to sectors of the economy and work conditions. In general, female labor is more vulnerable than male labor with a highest concentration in the informal sector. Therefore, the trend is that women also suffer the most in the productive economy during a crisis. However, the G20 has not approached or attempted to provide answers to any of these elements and analysis of the gendered aspects of the crisis.

Second, the G20 statements presented some of the same elements that caused the crisis as a solution to it.

The emphasis on the conclusion of the WTO Doha Round is a fallacy that ignores the fact that precisely the deregulation of financial services under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and trade liberalization of goods, services and investment were factors that led to financial speculation and made the South more vulnerable to competition and financial crashes in the North.

Third, the G20 and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) statements come from an illegitimate and inappropriate space for a globally coordinated set of responses to the crisis. When the crisis erupted, the United Nations (UN) was in the midst of preparing for a Follow Up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus. The majority of the UN member states saw this as the appropriate global platform for addressing the financial, economic, monetary and trade issues, along with their global governance architecture. However, the big governments of the G8, unwilling to expose their grave errors, moved quickly to retain dominance by resurrecting the IMF. Their only concession has been to expand representation to a few emerging developing countries into their global financial governance institution and regulatory mechanisms, hence, the G20.

To date, the struggle over the location for coordinated responses to the crisis continues. The UN, with its Group of 192 countries (G192), had since convened the UN Conference on the World Economic and Financial Crisis and Its Impact on Development, which is now being followed up by an Ad Hoc Open Ended Working Group and has supported the work of the Commission of Experts of the President of the General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System (also known as the Stiglitz Commission). All these took place while the G8 maneuvered to weaken outcomes of the UN processes, including boycotting the Conference in June, an act that clearly signals a lack of openness to dialogue.

We are also deeply concerned about how funds are actually being disbursed, which is linked to the issues of transparency and conditionalities.

In April at the London Summit, the G20 directed their financial commitments through the IMF. It provided $500 billion in resources for the New Arrangements to Borrow (NAB) which is open to all countries. In addition, there was a general allocation for Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) amounting to $250 billion and another special allocation of SDRs of about $33 billion. The SDRs are allocated on the basis of equity shares which means that most of this money will go in turn to the G8. On the issue of social protection, a $50 billion commitment to social protection was made in April, however little is known about how these monies are being allocated and spent other than the written promise.

Another major question is about the content of the IMF’s newly “streamlined” conditionalities.

There is serious doubt that these will lead away from previous prescriptions of the Washington Consensus. Meanwhile, countries continue to face serious financial gaps and bear the harsh impacts of the financial and economic crisis.

The Women’s Working Group believes that the current situation of severe economic crisis affecting the livelihoods of women and men in the whole world cannot be resolved with cosmetic changes designed from an informal group of powerful countries such as the G20. So we call governments’ leaders from the entire world to urgently make efforts to:

1. Integrate a gender perspective in a new financial and economic architecture, which means promoting structural changes to establish a balance between the production system and non-profit oriented activities, which cares for the environment and in which the financial market is subordinated to the productive economy, social reproduction and the reproduction of nature.

2. Bring the G20 and the IMF under the mandate and authority of the United Nations. The existing relationship between the UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions will need to be reviewed and revised in support of a new deal for a sustainable future while the G20 must immediately take its rightful place among, not outside of, the G192.

3. Stop WTO Doha Round negotiations. Trade negotiations must be done in transparent and democratic spaces and on the terms of Special and Differential Treatment, people’s livelihoods, gender equality and environmental sustainability.

4. Remove conditionalities for traditional Official Development Assistance and new financing including on the basis of gender, environment and human rights and ensure transparency over money allocation and disbursement.

—————————————————

*The Women’s Working Group on Financing for Development (WWG on FfD) is an alliance of women’s organizations and networks that advocates for the advancement of gender equality, women’s empowerment and human rights in UN processes related to FfD and the global financial and economic crises. For more information, see http://www.ffdngo.org/gender-financing-development

Thursday news:

• A nice discussion on whether the LPO boom is good or bad for India over at Merinews.com.  A nice reference to GATS and how this factored into the governments decision to loosen its stance on letting outside firms set-up shop.
•  A few weeks ago, Integreon released eView 3.0 for its e-discovery operations.  Its intent is to offer everything a client needs from one provider.  Some of its offerings include: concept searches, central and secure document protection, and priv log streamlining.  Seems like a swell idea to me.
• And I can’t forget to include the “Young Entrepreneur of the Year” Award that was given to Rohit Kochhar, Chairman of Kochhar & Co.  It was presented to him last month at the 12th Annual Rajiv Gandhi Awards.  Having started five different companies involved in five different business segments, makes him one of the most interesting businessmen not only in India, but in the world. (Thanks to MyBangalore.com).
• Kian Gantz at Legally India discusses the new corporate law forum started by students of ILS Pune.  It’s goal is to increase awareness of the changing legal industry, share experiences and add to graduate employability.  I think we’ll see this more and more throughout law schools world-wide.

“Mai no somiava a les migdiades perquè no les allargava més enllà dels vint minuts. Però aquesta vegada a Borràs el va importunar un somni (la seva néta seia al mateix sofà on ell ara dormia i una cucaratxa li pujava a la sabata i se li colava pantaló amunt, fins que al cap de no res apareixia pel coll de la samarreta. L’insecte aconseguia remuntar fins el llavi sense que la nena s’immutés i al final es ficava pel forat del nas. En sortia un fil de sang. Borràs no podia impedir-ho perquè no estava inclòs en el seu somni; més aviat s’ho mirava de lluny).

En desvetllar-se es va treure aquella mala sensació del cos amb un caramel de mel i, del cap, autorrenyant-se perquè feia tard. Tan ràpid com va poder va anar a buscar la nena a la sortida de música i la va dur al parc, on ella el va buscar a ell per a mostrar-li què havia trobat: a la vora del tobogan hi havia un gat ratllat (brut de pols pels dies que duia allà mort sense que ningú no el recollís i el llancés a les escombraries). Va fer que la nena se n’allunyés i jugués als gronxadors mentre ell s’escoltava les mares i les àvies discutint les aptituds de la socorrista rodanxona de la piscina…

Passada una hora tornaven, de la maneta, cap a casa, ben distrets per la coreografia que s’organitza al barri mitja hora abans no tanquin les botigues. Borràs es va fixar en un mulato amb bigoti: sortia del queviures pakistanès del xamfrà per a entrar un Seat León que l’esperava amb els warnings marcant un ritme senzill. La nena va imitar-lo a la seva manera:
- Tic-tac, tic-tac…
I passada la cantonada va dir:
- Aquell cotxe tenia cara de gat.”

Fragment de Twistanschauung, de Víctor García Tur.

Uns llibres que val la pena tenir en compte a tots aquells que us agrada la pintura i la història de l’art en general, i en especial als amants dels animals son els que ha editat ja fa uns anys el segell Taschen (amb el nom aqui de Evergreen) i també publicats amb edició de Crown publishing. Els que viviu a Barcelona els podreu trobar a les llibreries actualment a molt bon preu i en diferents idiomes, seguint la política de l’editorial que ja em vam comentar un dels seus fons l’any passat I-II.

Cada monografia esta dedicada a una espècie animal: gos, gat i cavall en les diferents varietats que poden oferir des d’un punt de vista força ampli. Es a dir, els cànids, fèlids i èquids que s’han representat a la pintura al llarg de la història. No son llibres de gran format, com solen ser les obres d’art, ans el contrari, es tracten de llibres que caben en una bossa de ma en format apaïsat i que són de fàcil lectura ja que la major part de les seves pàgines estan il.lustrades amb les imatges pictòriques que es van comentant.

De l´obra del gos n‘és autor Iain Zaczek assagista i historiador de l´art es centra en l’art del XIX i la relació amb la representació dels animals. En l’obra “Perros y otros canidos” hi trobarem com el mes antic amic de l’home ha estat objecte de l’art i la literatura dels humans al llarg de tots els temps. Des d’escultures assíries, passant pels tapissos medievals i les miniatures dels llibres d’hores com el Duc de Berry i fins les obres de pintors com Bruegel, Durer, David Hockney i altres pintors contemporanis, el gos es objecte permanent de les representacions artístiques. Els capítols en que està distribuït el llibres son: Introducción – Perros de caza y competición – El mejor amigo del hombre – Perros salvajes – Una vida de perros – Perros trabajadores – Perros holgazanes – Perros  simbólicos – Antropomorfismo – índice de artistas.

Del gat n’és autor Andrew Edney. Un veterinari format al Royal Veterinary College, el qual després d’exercir deu anys la seva professió la va abandonar per dedicar se a l’escriptura i al mon editorial. També dona xerrades sobre la representació dels animals en l’art. L’obra es titula “Gatos y otros felidos”. A l’igual que el llibre anterior es tracta d’una mixtura d’aspectes relacionats amb l’animal objecte del llibre. Hi trobarem tant aspectes purament artístics com reflexions, cites de Fragonard, Klimt, Rubens, Rembrandt. En fi, un homenatge al gat –i també de la resta de felins- i, per extensió, a tots els amants dels animals de companyia.. El sumari de llibre consta dels següents capítols: Introducció – Gatos jugando – Gatos durmiendo – Gatos cazando – Gatos solitarios – Gatos curiosos – Gatos con cria – Gatos piratas – Gatos sociables – Gatos salvajes – Gatos simbólicos – Indice de artistas.

Lorraine Harrison te la formació d’arts gràfiques i historiadora de l’art , ha treballat en la il.lustració de llibres. Una apassionada per l’art i pels animals ens exposa l’art pictòric en relació amb els cavalls. El títol de llibre, seguint la pauta dels altres dos, es “Caballos y otros equinos”. Ens adonem com n’ha estat d’important la companyia del cavall al costat de l’home al llarg de tota la història. Les diferents representacions artístiques en donen fe. Des de les pintures de Lascaux 15.000 anys enrere fins els dibuixos de Leonardo, Picasso; com les cites de Chaucer, Shakespeare,  o Keats hem vist com es representava la força i les virtuts dels equins tant en pintura, prosa com en vers. Els continguts d’aquesta obra es distribueixen en: Introducción – Las emociones de la caza – Bestias de carga – Caballos salvajes – Buenos compañeros – Caballos de guerra – Caballos míticos – Caballos de fuerza – Caballos actores – Indice de artistas.

Son llibres que serveixen alhora per introduir-nos en l’art, com identificar de forma amena dades concretes en uns estudis de grau, així com per passar una bona estona contemplant les imatges que guarden en les seves pàgines. Cada capítol d’aquesta sèrie es introduït amb un petit assaig que el documenta. I cada imatge que il.lustra els tres llibres es acompanyada per una informació clau amb el nom de l’artista, l’estil, o la matèria de la peça. Frases i cites d’escriptors i poetes enriqueixen els continguts.

El que es diu actualment com a “coffe table book”, el llibre il.lustrat que “decora” i il.lustra les sales d’espera o les oficines amb estil però no es pot deixar escapar a tothom que li interessi tant l’art com els animals de companyia.

Les dades de les obres objecte d’aquesta notícia són:

Zaczeck, Iain.- Perros y otros canidos.-  Koln : Taschen : Evergreen, 2000.- 400 p.- isbn: 978-3-8228-6556-9 (versió anglesa: Dog: A Dog’s Life in Art and Literature ). En biblioteques catalanes: si/no.

Edney, Andrew.- Gatos y otros felinos.-  .-  Koln : Taschen : Evergreen, 2000.- 400 p.- isbn: 978-3-8228-6556-9 (versió anglesa:  Cat: Wild Cats and Pampered Pets ). En biblioteques catalanes: si/no.

Harrison, Lorraine.- Caballos y otros equinos.-  Koln : Taschen : Evergreen, 2000.- 400 p.- isbn: 978-3-8228-6207-9 (versió anglesa:  Horse: From Noble Steeds to Beasts of Burden ). En biblioteques catalanes: si/no.

És una mica vell, però sempre m’ha fet gràcia.

Unusual Pussus

ENGAGING PETER McLAREN AND THE NEW MARXISM IN EDUCATION

David Geoffrey Smith

Interchange, Vol.40/1, pp.93-117 (2009) 

David Geoffrey Smith has written a very interesting and useful article in the latest issue of Interchange. Not only does he review Peter McLaren’s Rage + Hope: Interviews with Peter McLaren on War, Imperialism, & Critical Pedagogy (Peter Lang Publishing, 2006), but he also explores the New Marxism in Education, or the New Marxist Educational Theory (as it is sometimes called). Thus, he examines the impact of McLaren’s work along with other writers on the New Marxism in Education: Paula Allman, Glenn Rikowski, Mike Cole and Dave Hill.

He does spell my name wrong, though: having ‘Glen’ rather than ‘Glenn’ Rikowski. But that’s easily forgivable as Smith has produced an enlightening article. 

You can view the article at: http://www.springerlink.com/content/858j592687nt2554/fulltext.pdf

Posted here by Glenn Rikowski

The Flow of Ideas: http://www.flowideas.co.uk

Vijender Sharma

KAPIL Sibal, the new minister for Human Resource Development, immediately after assuming office on May 29, 2009 declared that bringing in the pending Foreign Education Institutions (FEI) Bill would be his top priority. The prime minister’s office  has been backing the bill. The Foreign Educational Institutions (regulation of entry and operation, maintenance of quality and prevention of commercialisation) Bill, 2007 was planned to be introduced in the parliament (Rajya Sabha), in the first week of May 2007. But due to the opposition of the CPI(M), it was withdrawn at the last moment.

Kapil Sibal, who was then (June 2007) minister for Science and Technology, had been pushing for this bill. After the bill was withdrawn, he had stated, “We are going to open up our educational sector to the foreign universities and it is going to be one of the largest FDI earners.”

No wonder that the Wall Street Journal (USA) in its June 11, 2009 issue wrote that the “most recent effort by Indian politicians to ease restrictions on foreign colleges was stalled by Leftist parties, who said the poor would be left behind as the cost of education rises. But India’s new coalition government, which took power last month, doesn’t rely on the Leftists, improving the chances of Mr Sibal’s effort to succeed.” (Emphasis added) The Journal quoted Sibal saying, “I would hope that come 2010, universities around the world will be sprinting to come to India.” He said he wants to open the market because India, despite its 1.1 billion-plus population, has an acute shortage of educated workers that threatens to inhibit economic expansion.

 LEFT SAVED PEOPLE’S MONEY

It seems that Sibal did not know then, and does not know even now that Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in education, including higher education, is allowed in India under the automatic route, without any sectoral cap, since February 2000. It seems also that the minister does not know that despite this automatic route for the FDI in higher education, no foreign university or educational institution sprinted to India and established its offshore campus.

No, it is wrong to assume this. Sibal knows everything. It is due to the neo-liberal policies of the UPA government and its refusal to learn lessons from the recent economic meltdown that the people of the like of Sibal are hell bent to throw our higher education system to the predatory elements. People should recall that it was the opposition of the Left to raising the cap on FDI in banking and insurance sectors that saved their hard earned money. Otherwise, their savings would have been wiped out as it happened in the USA and elsewhere.

The Commerce ministry had, in September 2006, circulated a consultation paper on trade in education services. It argued that with a multi-billion dollar industry involving foreign education providers, distance learning and franchisees, “GATS could provide an opportunity to put together a mechanism whereby private and foreign investment in higher education can be encouraged.”

It even recommended striking “a balance” between “domestic regulation and providing adequate flexibility to foreign universities in setting syllabus, hiring teachers, screening students and setting fee levels.”

NO REGULATION OF PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS

In order to strengthen the case of commercialisation of higher education in India as demanded by the big business, the Commerce ministry even questioned the Indian higher education system. It stated, “While India is endowed with a large and growing base of skill professionals (21.4 million graduate workers in 2000), there are conflicting views about the quality of its endowment. According to McKinsey (2005), only 25 per cent of Indian engineers, 15 per cent of its finance and accounting professionals and 10 per cent of Indian professionals with general degrees are suitable to work for multinational companies.”

If the McKinsey report was true, what was done by the UPA government to raise the quality of professional and general higher education so far? Most of the professional colleges in engineering, IT, medicine, dentistry, business administration, etc. are in private sector. The CPI(M) and other Left parties have been demanding a central legislation to regulate these institutions in relation to fees, course content, infrastructure, academic standards, examinations, etc. The draft of such legislation, though very weak in its purpose, was issued in 2005. Despite repeated demands of the Left, the UPA refused to take it up.

The UPA government, due to its policy of privatisation and commercialisation of higher education, deliberately failed itself in regulating such institutions through a central legislation that could ensure quality. Now the new HRD minister cries that our youth do not get jobs because they lack in skills. And the key for overcoming this ‘lack’ has been found by him in allowing foreign educational institutions to establish their shops in India and loot our people in the name of quality and skills.

 There are, however, many foreign universities and education service providers operating in India through twinning programmes. An advertisement number AICTE/Legal/03(01)/2006-07 retrieved from the website of All India Council for Technical Education on June 10, 2009, cautions the students as follows:

 ”As per the information available till date, 169 institutions are found to be conducting courses in the field of technical education without obtaining AICTE approval. 104 institutions are conducting technical education programmes in collaboration with foreign universities without AICTE approval. 

 Students are advised not to take admission in technical education courses run by any institution which has not been approved by AICTE. They are cautioned that joining unapproved programmes can have serious consequences in terms of eligibility for employment, higher studies etc.”

At the foot of this advertisement, two web-links are given which give the lists of such unapproved institutions and their programmes. What is shocking is that the lists include institutions like ICFAI, IIPM, Ansal Institute of technology and G D Geonka World Institute which regularly issue front page and full page advertisements in national dailies about their programmes and also their tie-ups with foreign universities. These advertisements must have been noticed by the HRD ministry. I visited the website of IIPM on June 12, 2009 and asked it using its online enquiry, “Are your degrees, particularly BBA, MBA and MBE, recognised by the AICTE and/or UGC?” Quickly came the online reply that “IIPM is not affiliated to any university; neither does it seek any kind of affiliation from any such institution in future. It is an autonomous institute and offers its own courses and hence does not come under the purview of any university system / UGC etc.” This reply is the worst form of arrogance of private institutions. They know that the government will not take any action against them because they have patronage from within the government. No wonder that several ministers and members of parliament are associated with such institutions and looting the people.

Mr Sibal, your ministry, the AICTE and other law enforcement authorities have been keeping their eyes shut. The AICTE regulation of 2005 provides that “In case it comes to the notice of the council, that a Foreign University is running diploma or/and degree at undergraduate, postgraduate and research level in technical education in India directly or in collaboration with an Indian partner without obtaining a certificate of registration, council shall take immediate steps to initiate action under the Indian Penal Code for Criminal breach of trust, misconduct, fraud and cheating and under other relevant Indian laws.” You owe an explanation to the people of this country about what action you have taken against such institutions! 

In this context, note some of the comments of American educational tycoons in the same write up in the Wall Street Journal – “some for-profit schools are already bypassing the bureaucratic roadblocks”, “given the US economy and shrinking endowments, (US) colleges may need incentives from the government of India to be able to afford to open”. In the US, “college tuitions have risen faster than inflation.” The FEIs violating local laws is thus known to all. Given the eagerness of Sibal and UPA government, the aggressive FEIs will bargain hard to get more ‘incentives’ than even suggested by the Commerce ministry and loot the students and their families.

SUBPRIME EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

A noted educationist, Philip Altbach, notes that the subprime mortgage crisis represents a certain analogy regarding higher education. Many of the sellers, including academic institutions and for-profit education providers, are themselves subprime institutions -  sleazy recruiters, degree packagers, low-end private institutions seeking to stave off bankruptcy through the export market and even a few respectable universities forced by government funding cutbacks to enter foreign markets for profit making. Buyers, such as students but also including some academic institutions in developing countries, are similarly unregulated, sometimes ill-informed and often naive.  

Uninformed or simply avaricious institutions in developing countries may partner with low-quality colleges and universities in, for example, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom and receive substandard teaching or degree courses. Regulatory agencies may be entirely missing or inappropriate, thus making quality assurance impossible to achieve. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure that national interests are served and students and their families are not subjected to shoddy business practices by unscrupulous education providers. What is needed, he cautions, is to avoid succumbing to subprime practices and the inevitable crisis that will ensue. In India, despite regulatory bodies like AICTE, sub-standard institutions are flourishing without any quality assurance.

UNCONTROLLED BUSINESS

According to the FEI Bill, 2007, which was withdrawn, if a foreign educational institution wants to start an educational institution independently, it will come under the ambit of this Act. And, if it instead makes a joint arrangement with any recognised institution, the provisions of this Act shall not apply.

This is the provision which would have been actually used by FEIs to enter India in the field of higher education as it is now happening illegally. This provision would have also been used by any unscrupulous recognised private institution of higher education to have joint programmes with FEIs and be outside the purview of this Act and make high profits. Moreover, given the definition of ‘twinning programme’, the FEI is not obliged to offer part of the programme in its country of origin. It can offer part of its programme in “any other institution situated outside India.” Using this provision any predatory FEI might offer part of its programme in a country which suits them better for making more profits.

This provision would have also encouraged public funded colleges and universities, starved of funds, to enter into joint arrangements (collaboration, partnership or twinning programme) with FEIs to start self-financing courses in frontier areas of science, technology and other professions with high fee charges in order to raise resources. Thus, this was the provision for keeping those students who cannot afford high fees away from enrolling in such courses. This provision was for a drive towards commercialisation of public funded institutions as well.

The FEIs were required to submit at the time of application its accreditation status in the country of origin if accreditation is applicable there. If accreditation is not applicable in a country, then which accrediting agency will assess, accredit or assure quality and standards was not provided for in the bill.

It may be mentioned here that the Private Universities bill, introduced in Rajya Sabha fourteen years ago in August 1995 had also stipulated a corpus fund of Rs 10 crore for starting a private university. The FEI bill’s stipulation for a corpus fund of Rs 10 crore for a foreign university coming to India for profit was a pittance.

The bill also provided that a FEI will have to ensure that the programmes offered and delivered by it in India of quality comparable, as to the curriculum, methods of imparting education and the faculty employed or engaged to impart education, to those offered and delivered by it to students enrolled in its campus in the country of its origin. A FEI ranked of low quality in its country of origin, was not be under any obligation to raise quality in India under that provision. The FEIs were given freedom to have their own norms regarding qualification and pay scales to appoint faculty.

A detailed critique of the FEI Bill, 2007, was presented by this author in these columns in its May 27, 2007 issue. 

IMPLICATIONS OF FDI  IN HIGHER EDUCATION

It is argued by those who welcome FDI in higher education that due to lack of funds, investments in public funded institutions is being reduced and it is not possible to increase the number of state funded universities and colleges. Therefore FDI in higher education would solve this problem. Another argument is that since a large number of Indian students go abroad for higher education, allowing foreign educational institutions to open their campuses in the country will arrest the outflow of Indian students. As a result, a relatively larger number of Indian students would be able to access quality higher education in the country itself which would be relatively much less expensive in terms of fees, travelling costs and living expenses abroad. This would also not allow the outflow of our foreign exchange reserves.

It is also argued by them that foreign higher educational institutions would create competition with the local institutions enabling them to become internationally competitive. This competition would force the local institutions to change their curricula and respond to the immediate needs of the students. And by this, the degrees offered by these institutions will become internationally comparable and acceptable. Further, the FDI in education would create new institutions and infrastructure and generate employment.

In fact, the FDI in any field does not have an attached objective of fulfilling the social agenda of a welfare state. It is guided by profit and market alone and if these are not fulfilled, the investors look for other destinations for FDI. Foreign investors aim to increase their profits that lead to commercialisation. In the field of higher education, FEIs would launch courses in frontier areas of science and technology, design courses which the market needs, create false impression about their courses through advertisements, charge exorbitantly high fees for courses which have immediate employment potential.

By their money power FEIs would be able to attract best teachers and financially well off students from local institutions affecting them adversely. Since competition entails reduction in costs, therefore infrastructure, laboratories and libraries would find least investment and the teachers and non-teaching staff would be appointed without necessary qualifications on such terms which would be exploitative as is in existence in most private institutions in India today. Teaching, learning process and award of degrees would also not be as rigorous as is required.

FDI would impede the development of indigenous and critical research within our university education system, aggravate the tendency towards commercialisation and strengthen the stranglehold of neo-liberal ideas in our academia. The FEIs would be concerned about their profits and not about our culture and society. Therefore the courses which would appreciate and strengthen our ethos would not be started by the FEIs, and such courses would also get marginalised in public funded higher education institutions due to competition.

These tactics of the FEIs would also result in local private institutions raising their fee charges to establish competitiveness affecting adversely those students who are studying in local private institutions. The FEIs would tend to repatriate as much profit as possible back home thus accelerating the outflow of foreign exchange from the country. Therefore, the argument put forward by those welcoming FDI in education that outflow of foreign exchange from the country could be reversed has no sound footing.

NO TO FDI IN HIGHER EDUCATION

In a market-model university like the FEI, departments that make money, study money or attract money are given priority. Heads of universities assume the role of travelling salesmen to promote their programmes. The thinking and attitudes of students, now called consumers, are manufactured and an education system is created that produces standardised people. Thus the whole idea of culture will be threatened as this standardisation eliminates cultural focuses, thoughts, language, and educational themes. No longer will truth be sought, except whatever suits the corporate interests. As this standardisation is institutionalised through international equivalency, the uniqueness of each educational institution will vanish.

In view of this, no foreign university should be allowed in India and therefore no bill is required. Mr Sibal, the Wall Street Journal is gleeful, as mentioned above, that your government now does not require the outside support of the Left. That notwithstanding, you should not take this initiative which will result in jeopardising the existence of our higher education system. The FDI in education will promote crass commercialisation of higher education. It will further marginalise the already marginalised sections of our youth. 

This article was published in People’s Democracy, Vol. XXXIII, No. 25, June 21, 2009.

10 de junio de 2009

A new life opens path.

Una nueva vida se abre camino.

A few years ago (2003) I wrote a monograph for the Commonwealth of Learning on the impact of globalisation on education, including distance education.*

At that time the World Trade Organisation (WTO) was master-minding international negotiations aimed at opening up of trade in services. GATT (the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) has been complemented by the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The US, Australia and the UK were the countries most likely to benefit from greater access to students living and studying in other countries – and probably still are.

The complex, contentious debate on the impact of GATS on education has yielded important policy questions for governments and institutions, especially those interested in online and distance learning. These include:

• Should private or publicly funded education and training from abroad be encouraged to supplement publicly funded on-campus provision?
• Should public funds be made available to pay for education and training provision by public or private foreign companies?
• How should private or publicly funded education and training from foreign providers be regulated, bearing in mind GATS?
• Will the poor be able to afford education and training offered by public or private providers from abroad under GATS? If not, who will assist them?
• What policies and incentives would turn poor students into a market for education and training?
• If education and training from abroad is offered mostly or entirely online, what help can students expect from their home government in gaining access?
• Will individual governments recognise, and will accreditation bodies accept, foreign education and training curricula without any adaptation to match national cultural values?
• How will individual governments prevent foreign education and training providers from offering below-standard courses leading to worthless certificates?

And perhaps pre-eminently important:

• How far can national policies, priorities and culture be protected in a more
open market (than at present) for services such as education?

GATS has not been in the news recently, but it is not likely to go away. What is known as the Doha round of GATT and GATS negotiations has been difficult and very drawn out, with no final outcomes as yet.

The worldwide financial crises have had a tremendous impact on many countries’ willingness to allow foreign services to enter their territories and, for some Western countries, on their ability to export these services. The global downturn is likely to affect governments’ capacity to sustain current levels of public education provision, however. In a few years’ time there may be unprecedented opportunities for private enterprise to offer out-sourced services. There may also be a de-liberalisation of attitudes regarding open educational resources (OERs): proprietors of intellectual property may be even keener than they are now to protect their rights rather than giving them away in order to benefit poor countries, let alone rich ones.

What do you think will happen on this front?

David

*Globalisation, education and distance education, accessible at:
http://www.col.org/SiteCollectionDocuments/2003_MODL_Globalisation.pdf

di Yogyakarta, kota pendidikan, saja pendidikan masih semrawut, apalagi yang di Papua sana?

Berikut beberapa hal yang menyangkut penyelenggaraan dan sistem pendidikan nasional di Indonesia di kemudian hari. Hal ini saya rangkum dari diskusi Rapat Koordinasi, Konsultasi, dan Pengkajian Produk Hukum Bidang Pendidikan, 28 April 2009 lalu yang dipimpin oleh Prof. Wuryadi, Dewan Pendidikan Propinsi DIY dan Penasehat BMPS Pusat.

1. Ke depan, masih akan terjadi kerancuan konsep yang berkaitan dengan pendidikan nasional di Indonesia, di antaranya: pengertian mengenai perspektif global, globalisasi, berwawasan internasional, bertaraf internasional, konsep proses dan hasil dari sebuah kualitas, kerjasama internasional atas dasar kesederajatan, juga konsep investasi internasional. Berbagai konsep ini belum begitu jelas termaktub dalam produk hukum pendidikan Indonesia. Jika ketikdakjelasan ini dibiarkan terus menerus, maka akan berakibat pada masa depan dan kesiapan persaingan pendidikan bangsa kita.
2. Masih akan terjadi kerancuan arah kebijakan pendidikan di Indonesia, diantaranya yang berkaitan dengan “menyiapkan anak bangsa (nation and character building) atau individu anak yang berprestasi”, “berjiwa kompetitif atau sinergis, bekerjasama, dan gotong royong”, “kriteria ke-Indonesia-an atau kriteria global”, “membangun dasar-dasar kerjasama antar bangsa atas dasar saling menguntungkan atau meniru dan mengikuti keunggulan-keunggulan bangsa lain”.
3. Indonesia juga belum siap akan arah kebijakan program pendidikan nasionalnya. Manajemen dan efisiensi pengelolaan pendidikan yang masih rapuh. Kelembagaan dan produk hukum yang masih tumpang tindih. Sistem pengawasan dan evaluasi hasil pendidikan yang semrawut. Apalagi jika kelak dihadapkan pada realisasi anggaran pendidikan 20% dari APBN-APBD dan variasi yang akan ditimbulkannya.
4. Indonesia sangat perlu dan selalu mewaspadai kepentingan WTO (World Trade Organization atau Organisasi Perdagangan Dunia) atau GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services atau Perjanjian Perdagangan Jasa) dalam layanan pendidikan yang lebih terbuka dan persaingan bebas dari negara lain.

Artikel Persoalan Permasalahan Pendidikan Nasional Indonesia. Ada pendapat lain dari Anda? –Mishbahul Munir–

An article in the DNA gets it wrong when its writes:

India, under the WTO obligations, is required to open up its legal sector, as this comes under ’services’ category.

Another example of how Indian media reporting on WTO issues can get things completely wrong. The GATS negotiation on services do not “require” India to open up legal services. Here, I am not on the issue of whether liberalisation of trade in legal services would be beneficial as such to the Indian legal industry, Indian businesses or to the Indian economy. But any GATS commitment by India on legal services would be entirely voluntary. 

5 de mayo de 2009

Vijender Sharma

ABSTRACT

 Education at all levels will continue to grow. Predatory and powerful transnational corporations are targeting public education, particularly higher education, for profit making. Though pre-dominantly government supported service, most governments are, as a consequence of trade liberalization, withdrawing from it. Education is sought to be traded as a service through General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) covered in the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Several countries are exporting higher education and making huge profits. The United States has shown largest trade surplus in education. The trend of treating education, particularly higher education, as a tradable commodity has affected the economy and education system of many developing countries including India. Policy planners in developing countries are also succumbing to the pressures of developed countries, particularly that of the United States. In this paper, the general states of affairs obtaining internationally in the field of education have been discussed. The basic rule of GATS, forms of trades and the kinds of trade barriers have been described. The kinds of pressures to remove trade barriers, the Government of India has been facing and its response to them, have been analysed. Growth of transnational trade in education and huge profits made by several countries has been pointed out. The state of Indian higher education has been summarized. Recent initiatives and policy papers of the Government of India treating higher education as a tradable private good have been critically examined. The concerns and implications, for the people and our education system, of commercialization of higher education in India have been expressed. The necessity for the whole society to rise to defend the system of higher education in India has been emphasized.

Corporate sector has discovered an industry of over a trillion dollars. It is yet to be fully explored and exploited. This industry is in the area of education as ‘service’ with a huge global market in which students, teachers, and non-teaching employees constitute resources for profit making. In this industry, the students are consumers, teachers are expert speakers, the institutions or companies catering to education service are service providers, and the teaching-learning process is no longer for the building of a nation but a business for profit making.

Education cultivates human mind and makes them important and useful in all out development of a country. Therefore, education at all levels will continue to grow. However, for the corporate sector it will grow as a big service industry for profit making. Global public spending on education at present is estimated to be much more than one trillion US dollars, that is about Rs. 49,00,000 crores representing the cost of over 50 million teachers, one billion students and hundreds of thousands of educational institutions throughout the world. Predatory and powerful transnational corporations are targeting public education, particularly higher education, for profit making. Though pre-dominantly government supported service, most governments are, as a consequence of trade liberalization, withdrawing from it. The government of India through extensive privatization, commercialisation and deregulation has been supporting this trend.

The service sector accounts for more than 70 percent of production and employment in the advanced industrial countries. This sector accounts for two thirds of the European Unions’ (EU) economy and jobs, almost a quarter of the EU’s total exports and a half of all foreign investment flowing from the EU to other parts of the world. More than one third of economic growth of the United States over the last several years has been due to service exports. In 1996, the United States provided exports of education and training services that reached $8.2 billion. It had a trade surplus in education of some $7 billion. In 2005, the United States had a trade surplus of $13.5 billion and in 2007 it was $14.5 billion. Thus, trade surplus in education in the United States almost doubled in ten years. The higher education was the fifth largest service exported by the US. Therefore, the pressure of the United States on WTO Member countries in relation to trade in education service is very clear.

WTO and GATS

The World Trade Organization (WTO), established by replacing General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs at the Uruguay Round in 1994, is a forum for the corporate interests to push their corporate agendas down the throat of developing countries and people without any democratic accountability. The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) covered in the WTO, also a product of the Uruguay Round, is a legally enforceable agreement aimed at deregulating international markets in services, including education. Before this agreement, trade agreements used to be in relation to tariffs and eliminating other barriers for the goods produced in one country and sold in other countries. Some services used to be exchanged but there was no mechanism for trade in services because services are place specific and were considered to be non-tradable. According to the European Commission the GATS is “first and foremost an instrument for the benefit of business.”

Objective of GATS is to liberalise trade in services as quickly as possible. It is clear from the preamble of GATS that it is a “multilateral framework of principles and rules for trade in services with a view to the expansion of such trade under conditions of transparency and progressive liberalization” and with a ‘desire’ (Read: compels its Members) for “the early achievement of progressively higher levels of liberalization of trade in services through successive rounds of multilateral negotiations.” Equipped with WTO-enforced trade sanctions, the “multilateral negotiations” would expand the takeover of service delivery by transnational corporations in such critical areas as: health care; hospital care; home care; dental care; child care; elder care; education – primary, secondary and post-secondary; museums; libraries; law; social assistance; architecture; energy; water services; environmental protection services; real estate; insurance; tourism; postal services; transportation; publishing; broadcasting and many others.

The WTO has defined and drawn up the rules so as to give itself enormous powers. According to the WTO website, “The GATS is the first multilateral agreement to provide fully enforceable rights to trade in all services. It has a ‘built-in’ commitment to continuous liberalisation through periodic negotiations. And it is the world’s first multilateral agreement on investment, since it covers not just cross-border trade but every possible means of supplying a service, including the right to set up a commercial presence in the export market.” The WTO has explicitly stated that one of the advantages of the GATS is that it will help “overcome domestic resistance to change“.

The US, the European Union (EU), Japan and Canada are the main forces behind the GATS. Though WTO membership consists of nation states, its agenda is shaped by the transnational corporations (TNCs) of these countries that sit on all the important “advisory” committees and determine detailed policy. While denying access to decent healthcare, education, housing, and long-term care to millions of workers and their families the world over, the agreement will confer ever-greater political power on these corporations as they control and dictate public policy. The role of the State is attacked and its services criticised, public education systems are being systematically under-funded like in India.

GATS has two components: (i) The framework agreement containing 29 articles and (ii) a number of Annexes, Ministerial decisions, etc., as well as the schedules of commitments by each Member government, which bind them to allow market access and/or remove existing restrictions to market access. This agreement covers all services including education.

Basic Rules of GATS

Basic rules of GATS will apply to services like education in following distinct ways:

 1. A general framework of obligations that applies to all member countries of WTO includes two principles of “Most Favoured Nations (MFN) Treatment” and “National Treatment”.

As per Article II, subsection 1 of GATS on “Most Favoured Nations”: “each Member shall accord immediately and unconditionally to services and service suppliers of any other Member treatment no less favourable than that it accords to like services and service suppliers of any other country.” That is, there should be no discrimination between the Members of the agreement.

As per Article XVII, subsection 1 of GATS on “National Treatment”: “each Member shall accord to services and service suppliers of any other Member, in respect of all measures affecting the supply of services, treatment no less favourable than that it accords to its own like services and service suppliers.” That is once a service provider from a Member country enters another Member country under specific commitments, it cannot be discriminated from other domestic service providers in the other country.

The rules of “most favoured nations” and “national treatment” are aimed at eliminating all restrictions on big business. Under these rules, governments must treat each nation’s corporations equally, which will effectively end all attempts by the developing countries to insulate their economies to some degree from the world market. There are a host of “market access rules” making it illegal to restrict competition or place national restrictions of any kind on foreign ownership. Indeed the US is demanding the abolition of any special treatment for the so-called developing countries.

2. Each Member country will have to make a request offer for a particular service to be a part of the agreement. That is, a Member country can decide which service sector it would like to cover under GATS rule.

The lists of market access commitments (along with any limitations and exemptions from national treatment) are negotiated as multilateral packages, although bilateral bargaining sessions are needed to develop the packages. The commitments therefore contain the negotiated and guaranteed conditions for conducting international trade in services. If a recorded condition is to be changed for the worse, then the government has to give at least three months’ notice and it has to negotiate compensation with affected countries. But the commitments can be improved at any time.

3. As per Article IX of GATS, a Member maintaining practices which may “restrain competition and thereby restrict trade in services” is directed to “enter into consultation with a view to eliminating” them when requested by another member. In case of disagreement between members, the Council for Trade in Services under Article XXII “shall refer the matter to arbitration” and decision of which “shall be final and binding on the Members.”

4. Members have to ensure that all measures (e.g.  all laws, regulations and practices from national, regional or local governments that may affect trade) are administered in reasonable and impartial manner, establish judicial/ arbitral/ administrative institutions for review to ensure it and not introduce any regulation that affect operation of an agreement.

In order to guarantee transparency, governments must publish all relevant laws and regulations.  Moreover governments have to inform the WTO of any changes in regulations that apply to the services that come under specific commitments.

Specific commitments are defined as individual countries’ commitments to open markets in specific sectors, and how open those markets will be, is the subject of negotiations. The commitments appear in “schedules” that list the sectors being opened, the extent of market access being given in those sectors (e.g. whether there are any restrictions on foreign ownership), as well as any limitations on national treatment (whether some rights granted to local companies will not be granted to foreign companies).

These commitments are “bound”: like bound tariffs. They can only be modified or withdrawn after negotiations with affected countries, which would probably lead to compensation. Because “unbinding” is difficult, the commitments are virtually guaranteed conditions for foreign exporters and importers of services and investors in the sector to do business.

Forms of Trade in Services

In terms of Article I, subsection 2 of GATS, the WTO has defined trade in services in the following four modes “as the supply of a service”:

1. Cross Border Supply: “supply of a service from the territory of one Member into the territory of any other Member.” This service in education includes any type of course provided through distance education, or Internet, or any type of testing service and educational materials that can cross national boundaries. When the institution of a Member country A provides distance courses, etc. to another Member country B, then A is deemed to be exporting education service to B.

2. Consumption Abroad: “supply of a service in the territory of one Member to the service consumer of any other Member.” This refers to the education of foreign students. When the students of a Member country A move to another Member country B, then B is said to be exporting education service to A.

3. Commercial Presence: “supply of a service by a service supplier of one Member, through commercial presence in the territory of any other Member.” This refers to the actual presence of foreign supplier in a host country. This would include foreign universities or providers of a Member country A setting up courses through branches or franchisees or entire institutions in another Member country B. A would be deemed to be exporting education service to B. This mode is also known as Foreign Direct Investment (FDI).  

4. Presence of Natural Persons: “supply of a service by a service supplier of one Member, through presence of natural persons of a Member in the territory of any other Member.” This refers to when foreign teachers of a Member country A move to teach in another Member country B. A would be deemed to be exporting education service to B.

All Education under GATS Umbrella

Article I.3 defines “services” to include “any service in any sector except services supplied in the exercise of government authority;” and “a service supplied in the exercise of government authority” means “any service which is supplied neither on a commercial basis, nor in competition with one or more service suppliers.”

That is, only when the services are entirely provided by the government, they do not fall within the GATS rule. For a service to be out of the purview of the GATS rule it has to be entirely free. However, when the services have been provided either by the government partially or some prices are charged (as happens in education where some fees is charged) or provided by the private providers shall fall under the GATS rule.

The idea behind this is the creation of an open, global marketplace where services, like education, can be traded to the highest bidder. GATS covers the educational services of all countries whose educational systems are not exclusively provided by the public sector, or those educational systems that have commercial purposes. Since total public monopolies in education are extremely rare, almost all of the world’s educational systems fall under the GATS umbrella.

The informal WTO Classification List (W/120) divides educational services into five parts: (a) primary education services; (b) secondary education services; (c) higher education services; (d) adult education and (e) other education services.

Pressure to Remove Trade Barriers

The WTO has identified certain barriers to trade. These barriers/ obstacles include the restrictions on free movement and nationality requirements of students and teachers, immigration regulations, type of courses, movement of teachers, modalities of payments or repatriation of money, conditions concerning use of resources, direct investment and equity ceilings, the existence of public monopolies, subsidies to local institutions, economic need tests, exchange controls, non-recognition of equivalent qualifications, etc. Because services are not objects, barriers to trading services are referred to as non-tariff barriers. The goal of ‘free trade’ regime under WTO is to get these barriers removed in order to further liberalize the world economy.

The United States, on 18 December 2000, made a proposal to the Members of the Council for Trade in Services, WTO, in which US has included “all tertiary education, i.e. education beyond secondary education, adult education, and training services” under the umbrella of “higher education”. As per this proposal, “Such education and training encompass degree courses taken for college or university credits or non-degree courses taken for personal edification or pleasure or to upgrade work-related skills. Such education and training services can be provided in traditional institutional settings, such as universities or schools, or outside of traditional settings, including at workplace, in the home or elsewhere.”

The U.S. proposed the inclusion in education services the two types of services: (1) training services which are “less theoretical and more job-related than academic courses, and (2) educational testing services which are used to “evaluate the student as well as the course material,” and include “designing and administering tests, as well as evaluating test results.”

The US proposal calls for “an open regime in the education and training sector” and demands “market access, national treatment, and additional commitments” from Member countries who have been called upon to “inscribe in their schedules ‘no limitations’ on market access and national treatment” and to undertake “additional commitments relating to regulation of this sector.”

The US has identified several obstacles/ barriers which “make it difficult for foreign suppliers to market their services” which obviously must be removed for “an open regime in the education sector.” Some of the obstacles/ barriers are:

1.  Prohibition of higher education offered by foreign entities.
2. Lack of an opportunity to obtain authorization to establish facilities within the territory of the Member country.
3. Lack of an opportunity to qualify as degree granting institutions.
4. Inappropriate restrictions on electronic transmission of course materials.
5. Economic needs test on suppliers of these services.
6. Measurers requiring the use of a local partner.
7. Denial of permission to enter into or exit from joint ventures with local or non-local partners on a voluntary basis.
8. Where government approval is required, exceptionally long delays are encountered and when approval is denied, no reasons are given for the denial and no information is given on what must be done to obtain approval in future.
9. Tax treatment that discriminates against foreign suppliers.
10. Foreign partners in a joint venture are treated less favourably than the local partners.
11. Franchises are treated less favourably than other forms of business organization.
12. Domestic laws and regulations are unclear and administered in an unfair manner.
13. Subsidies for higher education are not made known in a clear and transparent manner.
14. Minimum requirements for local hiring are disproportionately high, causing uneconomic operations.
15. Specialised, skilled personnel (including managers, computer specialists, expert speakers), needed for a temporary period of time, have difficulty obtaining authorization to enter and leave the country.
16. Repatriation of earnings is subject to excessively costly fees and/or taxes for currency conversion.
17. Excessive fees/taxes are imposed on licensing or royalty payments.

Thus, the United States by getting all these so called obstacles or barriers removed, wants to further liberalise the world economy and then control, manage and provide higher education everywhere in the global market and make huge profits. If these obstacles are removed then the system of higher education in developing countries, including India, will crumble and the future of democratic public education will be bleak. In fact, our very protest of corporate run education could be seen as an obstacle to investment.

However there are only 44 countries out of about 150 WTO Member countries that committed to trade in education service. Majority of them are from developed countries for all the four sub-sectors except for ‘Other Services”.

Japan has also opened up adult education sector. But in Japan under national law education can only be provided by recognised non-profit-making organizations. This is going to be a major barrier to foreign suppliers at least in that country.

Australia’s commitment for higher education covers provision of private tertiary education services, including university level. The European Union has included higher education in their schedule with clear limitations on all modes of trade except ‘consumption abroad’, which generally means foreign tuition paying students. Only four (Australia, New Zealand, USA and Japan) of the 21 countries with higher education commitments have submitted a negotiating proposal outlining their interests and issues.

New Zealand’s proposal indicated its commitment to private education, within primary, secondary and higher education levels, highlighting “other services” as areas of interest like short term training courses, languages training and practical/vocational courses on a range of subjects.

Recent Pressures and Government’s Response

A National Level Meeting of Vice-Chairpersons of State Council of Higher Education, Vice Chancellors and Experts on “Trade in Education Services under WTO Regime” was organized by NIEPA on 11 September, 2001. The meeting expressed concern that “the socio-economic implications of opening the education system globally and making education service for profit needs to be carefully examined. Even making it a full cost paying service has caused social and cultural trauma in many countries including developed countries. Making open to world competition with high cost of education might cause further social-cultural problems. These may be un-manageable in the developing countries and particularly in India. Global competition, full or profit cost pricing of education has several socio-cultural implications and may adversely affect the Constitutional obligations of equity.”

National Seminar organized by NIEPA on Privatization and Commercialization of Higher Education held on May, 2, 2006, re-iterated that the “State is primarily responsible for ensuring quality education at all levels and in all regions. This would entail strengthening of public institutions as also their quantitative expansion. It is evidently the obligation of the state to find ways and means of raising public resources for higher education.”

Commercialization of higher education can have adverse implications, both in terms of access and equity. Commodification of education, research and knowledge will not serve the long range interests of the nation. It could lead to truncated growth and lop sided development of higher education. Therefore, the NIEPA seminar recommended that “commercialization needs to be controlled.”

On Foreign universities, NIEPA seminar stated that the universities “are promoting the process of privatization and fuelling commercialization. Issues like regulation by the various professional bodies to control fees, fine tune quality and suitable legislation for the entry of foreign universities would have to be immediately attended to.”

ASSOCHAM – ICRIER Joint Conference on ‘Globalization and Higher Education in India’ held on 1-2 November 2006 at New Delhi, came out with a 27-point charter that “ASSOCHAM would earnestly pursue.” Some of the demands are:

1. Borderless learning would necessitate a 6-pronged approach of i) Attracting world class institutions, ii) Diversifying the range and modus of PPP, iii) Making India an educational destination, iv) Catalyzing education systems of “India Abroad”, v) Devising an India window programme for internship and vi) Promoting distance education in a hybrid model like IT & ITES undertaking a “Marketing Brand India Education Mission”.
2. Commercial orientation of educational offerings should be tried as philanthropic approach alone cannot deliver both quality and quantity on the scale demanded in India.
3. Favorable FEP (Foreign Education Providers) regime and setting up more and more model institutions of collaboration (like Oxford Business School on the anvil).
4. Endeavor to try and test innovative models like “SEZ for Universities” for capitalization of knowledge through restructuring of Universities.
5. Higher Education in India has by and large remained one of the most stringently regulated sectors that has only stifled growth with quality. It is therefore essential to redetermine the policy matrix by dismantling the hurdles and barriers, both implicit and explicit. The conducive policy should envisage a judicious mix for growth through private commercial orientation for the affordable and a financing support for the poor.
6. To make teaching an attractive, respected and valued profession. Begin by delinking pay from the UGC scales and letting the market determine the remuneration structures.
7. Passage of a legislation enabling easy setting up of private universities should be desirable in keeping with the recommendations made by Mukesh Ambani Committee.
8. A beginning has to be made by enlisting companies in Higher Education that would work for “Not for Profit” and redeploy their accretions for the growth of the enterprise. This would be a precursor to the opening up of the sector for commercial orientation.

The FICCI Secretary General, Dr. Amit Mitra, while addressing a seminar on “The United States & India: Partners in Education” in New Delhi on  29 March, 2007, said “the long-term nature of our economic partnership is further strengthened by the convergence based on skills availability in India and human resource needs of the U.S. An English speaking, pluralistic society with an open economy that produces graduates by the millions and engineers, and scientists and doctors by the hundreds of thousands, will be a natural long-term partner for the United States in the era of the knowledge economy.”  Referring to various provisions in the proposed Bill to regulate foreign universities, like FEPs, have to obtain No-Objection Certificate issued by the concerned Embassy in India, the fee to be charged and the intake in each course to be offered by a FEPs shall be as prescribed by the AICTE, and only existing Indian institutions recognized by AICTE will be eligible to enter into collaboration/ partnership/twinning arrangements etc. with FEPs, Dr. Mitra called upon getting “the issue of FDI in higher education in India” addressed “appropriately leading to increased opportunity for qualitative collaborations and partnerships between India and USA.”

The corporate organizations have been making clear demands of deregulated FDI in higher education. FICCI made its choice clear that it wanted to make closer trade ties in the field of higher education with the United States. The ASSOCHAM is aggressively demanding favourable FDI regime with commercial orientation making India destination for FEPs for a “Marketing Brand India Education Mission”. It has demanded SEZ for universities to get huge facilities at cheaper rates and no tax regime so that profits could be maximized, delinking pay from UGC scales so that differential pay structure could be introduced and a suitable legislation for easy setting up of private universities. Only for profits and more profits.  

The Approach Paper

The Planning Commission issued, in June 2006, an Approach Paper to the 11^th Five Year Plan titled “Towards Faster and More Inclusive Growth”. For the transition towards faster and more inclusive growth, the Approach Paper calls for new initiatives in many sectors including ‘education services’ and “a more comprehensive restructuring” which actually would lead to privatization and commercialization of education.

The Approach Paper points out that since “only 10% of the addressable global IT/ITES (Information Technology/ IT-enabled Services) market has been realized”, the remaining 90% of a “global potential market of approximately $300 billion still remains to be realised.” For this purpose, India’s advantage is, apart from talent, established track record, and a geographical location, that it “provides a 24 hour working day to American professionals.” Therefore, the Approach Paper recommends to “work through WTO to assure access to overseas outsourcing” and “build a much larger IT workforce through an HRD plan, and improve urban infrastructure through public private partnerships.” The Approach Paper recommends full exploitation of private sector initiatives in higher learning for expanding capacity towards human resource development.

The entire concept towards education in the Approach Paper is centered around privatization, and appeasing the US lobby interested in education that can be traded as a commodity for profit. That the higher level of education, which ensures quality, quantity and equity, in a country leads to all round development of the country does not figure at all in the Approach Paper. For it, limiting only the “quality of human resource development” limits the “growth process itself.” There is no concern for access and equity in education.

The Consultation Paper

It is expressed all over the world that education policies under the GATS regime are decided by the commerce and trade ministries and not by the education ministry. It is true now in India, and it appears that the Commerce Ministry is under pressure to make commitments in the higher education, as part of adjustments, to secure commitments in other sectors.

The Trade Policy Division of the Department of Commerce, Government of India, in September 2006, circulated a consultation paper on trade in education services titled ‘Higher Education in India and GATS: An Opportunity” in preparation for the on-going services negotiations at the WTO. The Consultation Paper, while pointing out the problems of higher education in India, has argued that with a multi-billion dollar industry involving foreign education providers, distance learning and franchisees, “GATS could provide an opportunity to put together a mechanism whereby private and foreign investment in higher education can be encouraged.”

According to it, education is generally considered more a merit good rather than a public good. However, this is based on the assumption that “the government steps in to provide education services, because it is ‘good’ for society. If this assumption is relaxed, education could as easily be considered a private good.”

Thus, a case is being made to relax the aforesaid ‘assumption’ in order to shift higher education from the category of even ‘Merit-II goods’ to ‘private goods’. It further stated that “higher education does display many characteristics of private goods in a number of countries.” This would lead to further degeneration of our higher education system rather than solving its problems.

Even then the Commerce Ministry recommended that services negotiations (in WTO) could be used as an opportunity to invite foreign Universities to set up campuses in India. It further recommended striking “a balance” between “domestic regulation and providing adequate flexibility to such Universities in setting syllabus, hiring teachers, screening students and setting fee levels.”

In order to strengthen the case of commercialisation of higher education in India as demanded by the big business, the Consultation Paper even questioned the Indian Higher Education System. It stated, “While India is endowed with a large and growing base of skill professionals (21.4 million graduate workers in 2000), there are conflicting views about the quality of its endowment. According to McKinsey (2005), only 25% of Indian engineers, 15% of its finance and accounting professionals and 10% of Indian professionals with general degrees are suitable to work for multinational companies. The fact that many Indian professionals do not possess the global skill and quality is also evident from the fact that, despite large pool of middle managers available at home, some Indian firms are beginning to recruit them from abroad. The issues concerning scarcity of quality human resource have come out clearly in our consultations with various professional associations and industry bodies, particularly NASSCOM. There is a consensus in these consultations that reforms in higher education are required since this would lead to better human resource development.”

Export of Education Services

Over the last twenty years, there has been strong growth in transnational education. According to the OECD, there were 2.7 million tertiary students worldwide enrolled outside their country of residence in 2004, an increase of 41% since 2000 (1.9 million students) and over 200 % since 1985 (0.9 million students).

The USA is the largest exporter of education services in the world. The other large exporters are UK, Australia and New Zealand. Developing countries such as India and China are the largest importers of education in the world. According to the Consultation Paper, in 2004-05 the Asian countries had 3,25,000 students in U.S. colleges and universities, including 80,466 from India, 63,000 from China, 53,000 from South Korea and 42,000 from Japan. Further, 15,000 Indian students were enrolled in UK, 22,279 in Australia and 2567 in New Zealand. However, the Indian enrolments in United States dropped from 80,466 in 2004-05 to 76,503 in 2005-06 – a 4.9% drop represented the first decline since 1996-97. But it increased to 83,833 in 2006-07.

An estimate given by Global Alliance for Transnational Education indicate that about $27 billion worth of higher education is exported to Asia and Pacific by three countries namely USA, UK and Australia. A business of $37 billion trade in tertiary education services in Asia and Pacific region is projected in future.

In 2006-07, nearly 14.4% of all international students in the US were from India. During this year, education itself generated as much as $14.5 billion in export revenues for the US including Indian students’ contribution of over $2.08 billion (over Rs.9382 crore with US$1=Rs.45). The US has therefore profited enormously as a result of these revenues, which have come in through Mode 2 (Consumption abroad). Therefore, one can say that the US is aggressively promoting ‘educational imperialism’.

In 2004, Australia was the fifth largest destination for overseas students, attracting 6% of all tertiary students enrolled outside the country of their residence. In 2005, overseas students represented 18% of all higher education students in Australia.

The provision of education services to full-fee paying overseas students is emerging as an important industry for the Australian economy. Education services provided in Australia to international students were valued at over $9 billion in export earnings in 2004-05. This was the third largest export for Australia. Full-fee paying overseas students are also important revenue source for Australian universities. In 2005, revenue from full-fee paying overseas students represented 15% of all revenues within the higher education sector. This is used by the Australian universities to subsidise Australian students. In order to increase the revenue from overseas students, Australian universities are trying to increase the intake of overseas students.

The Consultation Paper therefore asserts that “there is a huge excess demand in India for quality higher education”, which is being met by “foreign campuses”. Indian students studying abroad keep these “foreign universities going and even subsidizing foreign students”. In comparison with 105 lakh students enrolled in higher education institutions in India, a meager 1.4 lakh students enrolled abroad does not amount to a “huge excess” demand. It is only 1.3 percent! These students could be retained in the country, had the Government invested in the higher education as promised in its National Common Minimum Programme. In any case, the Consultation Paper has clearly shown that India was not spending even as much as was being spent by other South East Asian countries.

Indian Scenario

In the beginning of the last decade, some foreign universities tried to market their higher education programmes in India. Representatives of several countries visited India to market certain percentage of their medical and engineering seats. Some foreign universities have also engaged Indian agencies and firms to recruit students to study in their universities. Others have started franchisee or commercial presence in India by allowing students to be enrolled in India and carry out studies for a part of the period in India and completing the other part of the degree in the institutions abroad. In certain cases even full degree institutions in India for giving foreign university conduct their programmes. Some also have twinning programmes between foreign and Indian universities. Some offer programmes through distance mode, through print, computer, television and electronic mode, i.e. the virtual university.

Thus the export of higher education to India by universities of several countries has been through modes of consumption abroad, cross border supply, franchisee, twinning programmes and virtual university. In 2005-06 about 1.4 lakh students went abroad for education mostly to USA, Australia, UK, Canada and France. However, on an average only 1500 students per year mostly from Gulf and South Asian countries come to India for education. It is not known as to how many Indian students are enrolled under cross border supply, franchisee and other modes. Fee charged from students ranges from Rs. 50,000 to Rs.3,40,000 per annum.

An analysis of the advertisements issued by foreign universities or on their behalf in India reveals that the courses offered by them mostly relate to hospitality services, management, medical and information technology. Some times concurrent degree programmes, i.e. two degrees in the same period are offered. No conditions of minimum qualification, i.e. percentage of marks, etc. are insisted upon, only 10+2 degree/certificate plus an interview is enough. Quite often the duration for getting degree may also be less than that required in India for the same degree. Largest number of universities advertising in India is from UK followed by Australia, Canada and Austria.

As far as India is concerned, the foreign education providers are interested in higher education with the use of all the four modes of trade. They are targeting at economically affordable group in the society in order to maximize profits. The impact of GATS would be that the non-organised private education providers in India would be the first ones to take an advantage. There would be unfavourable balance of payments as far as trade in education services are concerned. The public education providers would be marginalized in the race due to unequal play rules and ground.

10^th Five-Year Plan Proposal

In view of the ongoing WTO negotiation on trade in services including trade in educational services, which presents issues that have very serious implications for higher education, some of the recommendations made in the 10^th Five Year Plan Proposal are the following:

•  “Although India has approved to complete liberalization on Trade in Educational Services, it may not be able to withstand the international pressures unless she prepares well for the second round of WTO negotiations. The matter is urgent and the Government should therefore appoint Committee/ Task Force to advise on (a) negotiation on higher education issues in WTO, and (b) issues relating to erecting the safeguards for the post-negotiations market access regime.
• Serious thinking is required to extend the benefits of higher education to the less privileged section of society. For this an Educational Development Bank should be created.
• Private relevant institutions of higher education should be encouraged provided they adhere to equity parameters determined by appropriate regulatory mechanism.
• Optimum utilization of public infrastructure and manpower in the higher education sector should be ensured.
• Universities should also consider setting up a cell for taking care of internationalization of higher education, both for import and export. Universities may devise ways and means to mobilize their own resources through various means.”

Explaining its approach for internationalization of higher education, the 10^th Five Year Plan Proposal suggested “special incentives” to universities: “Universities which are willing to raise say 25-30% of their recurring expenditure from the fees of foreign students should be permitted to retain 10% of the collection towards a designated fund for updating equipment and facilities. The university should be within its rights to admit as many foreign students as necessary to raise the target amount. For five years Government should also consider making a matching grant towards their designated fund. This would progressively reduce the dependence of such a university on the Government.”

The Proposal warns, “The paradigm of development has changed. International arrangements in trade in commodities, services and intellectual property rights are occupying greater importance and the place. Some of the State policies and rules have to give way to international arrangements.”

NIEPA’s Report on Policy Perspective

According to the Report of a “Policy Perspective Seminar on Internationalisation of Higher Education and Operation of Foreign Universities in India” organized by NIEPA, in 2000, education should be seen from the point of view of “promotion of knowledge and development of knowledge and skills among the people which are mutually beneficial and oriented towards development of mankind and also reducing the gap or the factors which cause the gap in knowledge and skills among people. If this point of view is accepted then it is necessary to allow free flow of knowledge cutting across the geographical boundaries of nation states. Though this idea sounds well and high, but in practice it might as well result in selected flow of information/ knowledge and skills from one set of countries to another set of countries in one direction whether in a single or multi-disciplines subjects. If this happens then it might as well result in draining of resources of receiving country as well as strong cultural and political influence by one set of countries on other set of countries.”

Some of the recommendations made in the Report are:

• Setting up of a “national level mechanism” for registering foreign universities in India and promote the Indian Higher Education abroad.”
• Clear guidelines and laws about “VISA, infrastructure facilities, social and welfare programmes and accommodation facilities for students coming to India and students going abroad.”
• An “Ordinance should be passed” to allow universities to open their campuses abroad.
• The acceptance of the “certification/ credit given by the respective institutions should form the part of agreement.”
• The accredited Indian universities or Institutes of higher education should have “15-20% full payment seats for foreign students in every subject/ programme as a supernumery position not cutting into the available seats of India students.”
• In order to have an international context in education, the course content should “focus on requirements of job market and should have provision for innovative and flexible programmes.”
• Indian universities should be “allowed to offer programmes through twinning, franchisee as well as distance mode.”
• Foreign students studying in India should have “work permit for a period of three months per academic year. Total duration of work permit would not exceed one year six months.”

 The Facts About Indian Higher Education

We entered the twenty-first century with unprecedented demand for higher education: general as well as professional. Instead of meeting this demand for higher education and ensuring further growth of the country, the Central Government at the Centre and UGC have resorted to several measures with ever-faster speed of actions under the dictates of the World Bank and as a part of ongoing negotiations with WTO on trade in services. Raising of fees, autonomy to institutions with practically no controls but wide ranging powers to managements, funding linked mandatory assessment and accreditation, and students loan scheme are some of their decisions taken on the eve of the turn of the century for massive privatization and commercialization of higher education.

 “Major efforts have been mounted for mobilization of resources and it has been recommended that while the Government should make a firm commitment to higher education, institutions of higher education should make efforts to raise their own resources by raising the fee levels, encouraging private donations and by generating revenues through consultancy and other activities,” said the HRD Minister, Murali Manohar Joshi in the Country Paper presented in the UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education held at Paris, in 1998.  Justifying privatization of higher education, he added, “It is not only justifiable but desirable to raise money from private sources in order to ease pressure on public spending.”  Trying to befool us that privatisation will not lead to commercialization of higher education, he said, “The Government wants to encourage private initiatives in higher education but not commercialization.” What we have been witnessing all these years is, in fact, commercialization of education at all levels. These Governments have been implementing the very same World Bank prescriptions that we have been fighting against for the last twenty years. They have also been implementing the prescriptions of WTO and GATS for privatization and commercialization of higher education.

Mukesh Ambani and Kumarmangalam Birla, in their Report on “A Policy Framework for Reforms in Education” submitted to the Prime Minister’s Council on Trade and Industry in April 2000 considered education as a very profitable market. These two industrialists made a case for full cost recovery from students and immediate privatization of entire higher education except those areas of education involving “liberal arts and performing arts.” Ambani-Birla Report sought to convert the entire system of higher education in the country in to a market where only profit making will be the only consideration. Only those who will be able to pay exorbitant amount of fee will enroll in higher education. For Ambani and Birla, education is a very profitable market over which they must have full control and for their industrial requirements “education must shape adaptable, competitive workers who can readily acquire new skills and innovate.” In view of this, Ambani and Birla proposed the enactment of a legislation “banning any form of political activity on campuses of universities and educational institutions”. Even the normal trade union activities will not be allowed.

A large number of students enrolled in universities and colleges situated in townships and tehsils are first generation learners. These students could go to institutions of higher education because of the subsidy given to higher education and the prevalent fee structure. But this is also a fact that only about 7-8% of the students in the age group of 17-23 years could afford to go to universities and colleges. What about those 92-93% who are left out? They could not bear even the so-called “paltry fees” which the government wants to increase several folds. More than 88% of all students are enrolled at undergraduate level. About 83% of all students are enrolled in colleges. About 82% students opt for liberal arts, commerce and science and the corresponding figure for girl students is 87.2%. Only 5.4% of girl students are doing engineering and medicine. About 90% students are enrolled in general higher education and about 10% are in professional higher education. A substantial number of students from weaker and less privileged classes are availing the benefit of higher education.

The total enrolment of over one crore students appears to be large in absolute numbers, but the enrolment of students in the age group of 17 to 23 years was about 7 percent in 2003-04. This ratio is less than the average of lower middle income countries in the world. Various studies have pointed out that no country could become an economically advanced country, if the enrolment ratio in higher education is less than 20 percent.

While women students constitute about 40 percent of all students, enrolment of Scheduled Caste students is only 11.3 percent and that of Scheduled Tribe students is 3.6 percent. These ratios are far less than their corresponding ratios in total population. The women belonging to Scheduled Castes and Tribes living in rural areas are most disadvantaged and on the whole, both in rural and urban areas, scheduled populations are much behind the others.

There were 4,56,742 teachers in 2003-04, which meant the number of students per teacher has risen from 12.6 in 1965-66 to 21.8 in 2003-04.

As a percentage of the GDP, the government expenditure on higher education was 0.46 in 1990-91 which decreased to 0.37 in 2003-04. It is shocking to note that expenditure per student has declined from Rs. 7,676 (in 1993-94 prices) in 1990-91 to Rs. 5,522 in 2002-03. This amounted to a decline by about 28 percent in just twelve years.

The process of privatisation of higher education was accelerated by starting profit making institutions called “self financing” institutions, which do not get funds from the government. The number of general higher education and professional colleges increased from 568 in 1950-51 to 16,865 in 2003-04. In forty years from 1950-51 to 1990-91, about 5,180 new colleges were started. More than this number, i.e. 5,398 new colleges were started in eleven years from 1990-91 to 2001-02. A phenomenal number of new colleges, i.e. 5,719 were started in just two years from 2001-02 to 2003-04. Thus in thirteen years 11,117 new colleges were started. Most of these colleges are “self financing” institutions.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           By

By reducing the subsidy and financial support to the institutions of higher education and with a big rise in annual charges, the students from the lower middle class, weaker and less privileged classes would be denied access to higher education. Therefore, a decrement in the enrolment from even such a low figure of 7-8%, which is less than the average of that in developing countries in Asia, to a lower value would be inevitable.

In order to strengthen national intelligence, to increase contacts with the scientific and intellectual community of the world, and to increase capabilities and upgrade knowledge for further development, our country has no option but to strengthen its public higher education system.  In any case these key issues cannot be delegated to private institutions.

Surrender to WTO and GATS

It is absolutely clear from the recommendations given in 10^th Five Year Plan Proposal and the Report of the NIEPA Seminar that the Government is going in the direction of bringing higher education under the umbrella of GATS. The Central Government has already taken steps in line with the provisions of the GATS. The Central Government made offers on 24 August 2005 under GATS with no limitations on National Treatment under Modes -1, 2 and 3, and no limitations on market access under Mode-2 (Consumption abroad). Limitation on market access under Modes-1 and 3 included that the Foreign Service providers will be subject to Indian regulations. All the modes of trade in education service are being used. The UGC has already issued instructions for reserving 15% seats in addition to already existing ones as supernumery seats for foreign students. Thus the class size and the workload of teachers and employees are going to be increased without any additional funds.

The UGC guidelines for declaring an institution as a deemed university required that the institution should be of 10 years standing with courses recognized by the relevant accrediting bodies and infrastructure, including building for administration and academic purposes of about 4000 square metres, worth Rs. 50 lakh and corpus fund of Rs. 5 crores in case of professional education and Rs. 3 crores in case of general higher education. For the De-novo institutions in the emerging areas with the promise of excellence, no such conditions were required. These deemed universities were allowed to open their campuses anywhere in the country or abroad. Thus, any private institution or a new one with meagre funds and facilities was encouraged to get the status of a deemed university in order to run courses for profits. In December 2007, the UGC issued the new guidelines for deemed universities. The effect of these guidelines is still not known.

The UGC is not giving any funds for starting new courses or upgrading the existing ones. However, it is ready to spend huge amounts for starting courses on Jyotirvigyan and Karmakand. By starving the universities and colleges of funds, a case is being built for private funding and full cost recovery. The idea of giving incentive to universities ready to export education is to make them financially independent so that the Government is allowed to give up its responsibility towards higher education.

The globalisation has forced the education system to reinvent itself. The main role of universities to create, assimilate and disseminate knowledge is being given up in favour of the marketplace. A full professor of English in an American University earns no more than a starting assistant professor of accounting. More than half the full time faculty is hired on short-term contracts. Universities in the USA woo prospective undergraduate students by promising quality campus life, as if they were selling shares, with the offer of apartments rather than dorm rooms, high tech gadgetry and gyms. Faculty at some schools feel the pressure to keep grade-point averages high to keep the students as their customers happy. The emergence of for-profit competition among the multisite schools, called multiversity or busni-versity, like DeVry Institute, Phoenix University and Jones International University, which exist only virtually have made “any time, any place” higher education a near reality. In a market-model university, departments that make money, study money or attract money are given priority. Heads of universities are now assuming the role of traveling salesmen to promote their programmes.

An important cost recovery measure being proposed as an alternative to state financing of higher education and for the benefit of the market in higher education is to give loans to students so that they are able to meet the enhanced fees. This proposal is based on the market principle that those who benefit must pay. It is being advocated that the poor students who cannot pay the fees, instead of dropping out from higher education, should take loans, get jobs and then pay back loans. There are several serious problems associated with this proposal. But education does not guarantee employment. With no employment or no ability to repay, people from relatively poorer sections will be worst affected. The Central government has already declared students loans and the limit of loans has been increased upto Rs.15 lakh. They prefer to cater to economically better-off students. The conditions of guarantee based on co-obligation, the mortgage of immovable property, etc. would further exclude a large section of students. Since dowry is an important social phenomenon in several countries including India, loans to students would work as a ‘negative dowry’ resulting in decline in the enrolment of girls in higher education. It is being argued that the student loan programme may be revitalized to generate some resources for higher education in the long run. A margin money of 5 to 15% is also proposed. By this measure those who do not have resources to study would be forced to pay further for future investment. Instead of student loan programme the government must bear the full cost of education and the students belonging to the weaker sections should be given scholarships to meet fees and other expenses. In fact the student loans upto Rs. 15 lakh for studying abroad basically develop the higher education of other countries.

Young women in USA and Europe, main forces behind the GATS and WTO, are resorting to selling their eggs for thousands of pounds a time to childless couples as a way of paying off their fees and student loans they had taken to meet the cost of higher education. The average graduate begins the search for a job with debts of more than 10,000 pounds. According to a report, “American clinics are allowed to reward donors handsomely for the unpleasant and potentially risky procedure. Some of them, aware of British students’ financial problems are now targeting women here. Graduates and those with high IQs are in particular demand. Many commissioning couples, desperate to have children, are also prepared to pay premium prices for specific physical attributes and good looks.” Depending upon the looks, educational background like Ph.D., ‘good’ family profile, rare ethnic groups like Jewish, Asians and east Africans, the women get about 2,400 to 10,300 pounds. Eggs are collected from women by administering drugs to induce artificial menopause. The menstrual cycle is then restarted with more drugs designed to cause multiple eggs to ripen, instead of the normal one-a-month released naturally. A young healthy donor can produce 15 or 20 eggs, sometimes many more, in a single cycle of treatment. The procedure is very painful and sometimes causes severe trauma to the donor. According to another report, one girl (18 years of age) under debt while pursuing higher education decided to sell her virginity to the highest bidder. She claimed “she has been inundated with offers, including one of 10,000 pounds, since she placed an advert on the Internet.”

This being the situation in USA and Europe as a result of the policies adopted by them regarding privatization and commercialization of education and liberalization of trade in ‘education service’ under GATS and WTO regime, one can understand what will happen to the enrolment of girls in higher education in India. The fall in their enrolment is going to be inevitable.

In Conclusion

The world’s trade representatives under WTO, who are leading the assault on education, are attempting to establish ‘New World Government’ based on profit threatening and arm-twisting the nation governments. This would be a government of and for the corporate sector–an extremely undemocratic, authoritarian institution. In this assault, they have discovered the possibility of manufacturing the thinking and attitudes of their consumers, and creating an education system to reproduce standardized people. The whole idea of culture will be threatened as this standardization eliminates cultural focuses, thoughts, language, and educational themes. No longer will truth be sought, except whatever suits the corporate interests. As education standardization is institutionalized through international equivalency, the uniqueness of each educational institution will vanish.

The GATS regulation of education can jeopardise the sovereignty and autonomy of nations on a path that can lead to the loss of cultural diversity and local values; thus, hampering countries and their people’s lives while reinforcing homogeneity and making room for a new form of cultural/educational colonialism.

Under the dictates of the World Bank, WTO and GATS, the cherished function of higher education, for the search, creation and dissemination of knowledge and for instilling sensitivity or social awareness in its students in India is under fire today. The steps (e.g. reducing state funding of and limiting access to higher education, heavy cost recovery, loans to students, terming higher education as a non-merit good, assessment and accreditation of institutions, autonomous status to colleges, self-financing courses and institutions, and privatization and commercialisation of higher education, etc.) taken by successive governments at the Centre would lead to the dismantling of the state funded higher education system. The World Bank, WTO and GATS dictated policy on higher education must be reversed. As citizens of India, we have to ensure that the Government takes care of public interests and act to protect public services like health and education from the predatory elements that preach the ideology of the marketplace as the solution to every issue. Otherwise, the country would be dependent on developed countries for its requirements in qualified manpower essential for it’s all round development. Therefore, the future progress of our country is at stake. We cannot afford to be complacent any longer. It is the responsibility of the whole society to rise to the occasion and take measures so that the process of dismantling the higher education system in the country is reversed.

References:

Agarwal, Pawan, 2006, “Higher Education in India: Need for Change”, ICRIER Working Paper, No. 180, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, June. URL: http://www.icrier.org/pdf/ICRIER_WP180__Higher_Education_in India_.pdf

ASSOCHAM – ICRIER, 2006, Joint Conference on Globalization and Higher Education in India 1st-2nd November, New Delhi, Recommendations. URL: http://www.assocham. org/events/recent/event_107/EducationConferenceRecommendation s.doc

Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2007, International Students in Australia. URL:http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/latestproducts/E0FE4 ACEF9C8A65ACA25732C00207596?opendocument

FICCI, 2007, Seminar on “The United States & India: Partners in Education” in New Delhi on 29 March, Address of Secretary General. URL: http://www.ficci.com/media-room/speeches-presentations/2007/march/march29-us-drmitra.htm18 April 2007

Frase, Peter and O’Sullivan, Brendan, 1999,“The Future of Education under the WTO”,  October, 180/Movement for Democracy and Education. URL: http://www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/wto/wtoEducation.html

Government of India, April 2000, ‘A Policy Framework for Reforms in Education’, a report submitted by special subject group on ‘Policy Framework for Private Investment in Education, Health and Rural Development’ constituted by the Prime Minister’s Council on Trade and Industry with Mukesh Ambani (Convenor) and Kumarmangalam Birla (Member), New Delhi. URL: http://indiaimage.nic.in/pmcouncils/reports/education/

Government of India, 2001,10^th Five Year Plan Proposal, Excerpts on Development of Higher Education, as circulated in the National Level Meeting of Vice-Chairpersons of State Councils of Higher Education, Vice Chancellors and Experts on Trade in Education Services under WTO Regime, 11 September, NIEPA, New Delhi-110016.

Government of India, 2005, CABE Committee Report on “Financing of Higher and Technical Education”, Ministry of Human Resource Development, June, New Delhi. URL: http://education.nic.in/cabe/Report%20CABE%20Committee%20on%20Financing%20Higher%20and%20Technical%20EducationL.pdf

Government of India, 2005, CABE Committee Report on “Autonomy of Higher Education Institutions”, Ministry of Human Resource Development, June, New Delhi. URL: http://www.education.nic.in/cabe/AutonomyHEI.pdf

Government of India, Department of Commerce, 2005, “India’s Revised Offer on Trade in Services” 24 August. URL: http://commerce.nic.in/trade/sub_tnsOIND_rev.1.pdf

Government of India, 2006, “Towards Faster and More Inclusive Growth”, An Approach to the 11th Five Year Plan, Planning Commission, June.  URL: http://planning commission.nic.in/plans/planrel/app11_16jan.pdf

Government of India, 2006, “Higher Education in India and GATS: An Opportunity”, A Consultation Paper, Department of Commerce, September. URL: http://commerce.nic.in/wto_sub/services/Consultation_paper_on_ Education_GATS.pdf

Joshi, M.M., 1998, ‘Higher Education in India: Vision and Action – Country Paper’, Presented at UNESCO World conference on Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century, Paris, October 5-9. URL: http://www.education.nic.in/unhighedu.asp

Kirp, David L., 2000, “The New U”, The Nation, April 17. URL: http://firgoa.usc.es/drupal/node/9392. 

Marc & Craig Kielburger, 2008, “The successful export of American education”, The Vancouver Sun August 11. URL: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/editorial/story.html?id=b777300d-8892-4911-97db-13ea8a025df2

MID-DAY (Mumbai), 2004, “Student puts her virginity on sale to highest bidder”, January 28.

NIEPA, 2000, Report of ‘A Policy Perspective Seminar on ‘Internationalisation of Higher Education and Operation of Foreign Universities in India’, New Delhi-110016.

NIEPA, 2001, Background Paper-I, “Trade in Education Service Under WTO Regime – An Indian Response”, New Delhi-110016.

NIEPA, 2001, “Summary of Proceedings”, National Level Meeting of Vice-Chairpersons of State Councils of Higher Education, Vice Chancellors and Experts on Trade in Education Services under WTO Regime, 11 September., New Delhi-110016.

NIEPA, 2006, National Seminar on “Privatisation and Commercialisation of Higher Education,” May 2, Recommendations. URL:http://164.100.24.208/lsq14/quest.asp ?qref=29453

Nigavekar, Arun, 2001 “GATS and “Higher Education: What is at Stake for India?”, Paper presented at National Level Meeting of Vice-Chairpersons of State Councils of Higher Education, Vice Chancellors and Experts on Trade in Education Services under WTO Regime, 11September, NIEPA, New Delhi-110016.

Shaoul, Jean, 2001, “World Trade Organisation Agreement Aims at Privatissing Public Services”, 26 April, World Socialist Website. URL: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/apr2001/wto-a26.shtml

Sharma, G.D., ‘Trade in Education Services under WTO Regime’, Paper presented at National Level Meeting of Vice-Chairpersons of State Councils of Higher Education, Vice Chancellors and Experts on Trade in Education Services under WTO Regime, 11.09.2001, NIEPA, New Delhi-110016.

Sharma, Vijender, 2001, “Reject Ambani-Birla Report on Education”, People’s Democracy, Vol. XXV, No. 12, March 25. URL: http://pd.cpim.org/2001/march25/march25_vijender.htm

Sharma, Vijender, 2001, “Crisis of Higher Education in India”, a CPI(M) Publication, 2nd Edition, July, New Delhi.

Sharma, Vijender, 2002, “WTO, GATS and Future of Higher Education in India” People’s Democracy, Vol. XXVI, No. 06, February 10. URL: http://pd.cpim.org/2002/feb10/02102002_wto_edu.htm

Sharma, Vijender, 2002 “WTO, GATS And Future Of Higher Education In India –II”, People’s Democracy, Vol. XXVI, No. 07, February 17.   URL: http://pd.cpim.org/2002/feb17/02172002_wto_educ_2.htm

Sharma, Vijender, 2005 “Commercialisation of Higher Education in India” Social Scientist, Vol. 33, No. 9-10, pp. 65-74, September-October.

Sharma, Vijender, 2006, “On Approach Paper to 11th Five Year: Towards ‘Slower’ And More ‘Exclusive’ Growth In Education” Part -I, People’s Democracy, Vol. XXX, No. 41, October 8. URL: http://pd.cpim.org/2006/1008/10082006 vijender.htm

Sharma, Vijender, 2006, “On Approach Paper to 11th Five Year: Towards ‘Slower’ And More ‘Exclusive’ Growth In Education” Part-II, People’s Democracy, Vol. XXX, No. 42 October 15. URL: http://pd.cpim.org/2006/1015/10152006_vijendra%20sharma.htm

Sharma, Vijender, 2006, “Higher Education in India and GATS: A Disastrous Proposal” People’s Democracy, Vol. XXX, No. 44, October 29. URL: http://pd.cpim.org/2006/1029/10292006_vijendra%20sharma.htm

Sharma, Vijender, 2007, “Privatisation Of Higher Education Is The Main Aim”, People’s Democracy, Vol. XXXI,No. February 18. URL: http://pd.cpim.org/2007/0218/02182007_vijender%20sharma.htm

Sharma, Vijender, 2007, “Indian Higher Education: Commodification and Foreign Direct Investment”, The Marxist, Vol.XXIII, No.2, April-June. URL: http://cpim.org/marxist/200702_marxist_v.sharma_edu.pdf

Tilak, Jandhyala B. G., Fall 2002, “Privatization of Higher Education in India” International Higher Education, No. 29. URL:  “http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/News29/text0 07.htm

United States, Communication, Council for Trade in Services Special Session, WTO, Higher (Tertiary) Education, Adult Education and Training, dated 18 December, 2000. URL: http://www.wto.org/English/docs_e/legal_e/26-gats.doc             

United States, Open Doors, Educational Exchange with India for 2005-07, Institute of International Education. URL: http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-      10000/3390/folder/56369/India+2006.doc and  http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/?p=113743

University Grants Commission, “Guidelines for Considering Proposals for Declaring an Institution as Deemed to be University under section 3 of the UGC Act.” New Delhi.

University Grants Commission, 2007, UGC (Institutions Deemed to be Universities) Regulations. URL: http://www.ugc.ac.in/notices/deemed_regulations07.pdf

Weiner, Harvey “Why Teachers Should be Concerned”, Canadian Teachers’ Federation, 2490, Don Reid Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 1E1. URL: http://www.qpat-apeq.qc.ca/corporatif/english/common/liaison%20vol12%20no4-ang.pdf

WTO, 1995, “GATS: General Agreement on Trade in Services”. URL: http://www.wto.org/English/docs_e/legal_e/26-gats.doc

NOTE: This paper was presented in the International Seminar on Democratic and Secular Education organised by the Ministry of Education, Government of Kerala, from 4^th to 6^th December 2008 at Thiruvananthapuram. It has been published by the Students Federation of India in 2008 in its book “Denial of Education“, available from 11, Windsor Place, Janpath,  New Delhi-110001.

Vijender Sharma

Click here for Part I                                       Click here for Part II

HAVING crippled the higher education system in India and other developing and transition countries, the World Bank has evolved a ‘new role’ for itself in the higher education sector. But the prescriptions for the reforms in the higher education system are the same that the World Bank has been giving since 1986. The previous BJP led NDA government had responded promptly through the UGC which issued a concept paper for a Model Act for all universities in October 2003.

THE WORLD BANK REPORT

A World Bank Report ‘Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challenges for Tertiary Education’ published in 2002 points out that the developing and transition countries are faced with new trends in the global environment that affect not only the shape and mode of operation but also the very purpose of tertiary education systems. Among the most critical dimensions of change are the convergent impacts of globalisation, the increasing importance of knowledge as a main driver of growth, and the information and communication revolution. The challenges that the tertiary education systems of most developing and transition countries continue to face, the Report points out, are the need to expand tertiary education coverage in a sustainable way, inequalities of access and outcomes, problems of educational quality and relevance, and rigid governance structures and management practices.

Having witnessed large-scale protests from the students, teachers and people at large against the policies pursued by their governments, including government of India, the World Bank is now shedding crocodile tears in order to create much bigger space for itself in these countries in the area of higher education. According to the Report, “The World Bank is commonly viewed as supporting only basic education; systematically advocating the reallocation of public expenditures from tertiary to basic education; promoting cost recovery and private sector expansion; and discouraging low-income countries from considering any investment in advanced human capital. Given these perceptions, the rapid changes taking place in the global environment, and the persistence of the traditional problems of tertiary education in developing and transition countries, reexamining the World Bank’s policies and experiences in tertiary education has become a matter of urgency.”

The World Bank, therefore, has put emphasis on the emerging role of knowledge as a major driver of economic development, appearance of new providers of tertiary education in a “borderless education” environment, the transformation of modes of delivery and organizational patterns in tertiary education as a result of the information and communication revolution, the rise of market forces in tertiary education and the emergence of a global market for advanced human capital and the recognition of the need for a balanced and comprehensive view of education as a holistic system that includes not only the human capital contribution of tertiary education but also its critical humanistic and social capital building dimensions and its role as an important global public good.

AN ENABLING FRAMEWORK

In order to meet these challenges, the World Bank directs the governments of these countries to “put in place an enabling framework that encourages tertiary education institutions to be more innovative and more responsive to the needs of a globally competitive knowledge economy and to the changing labour market requirements for advanced human capital.”

In contrast to its earlier prescriptions, the World Bank now preaches, “Investments in tertiary education generate major external benefits that are crucial for knowledge-driven economic and social development……. Tertiary education facilitates nation building by promoting greater social cohesion; trust in social institutions, democratic participation and open debate, and appreciation of diversity in gender, ethnicity, religion, and social class. Furthermore, pluralistic and democratic societies depend on research and analysis that are fostered through social sciences and humanities programmes. Improved health behaviours and outcomes also yield strong social benefits, and higher education is indispensable for training the needed health care professionals.” The Report further points out that the tertiary education plays a key role in supporting basic and secondary education, thereby buttressing the economic externalities produced by these lower levels. Improved tertiary education is necessary for sustainable progress in basic education.

With the diminishing State funding of tertiary education, a coherent policy framework, an enabling regulatory environment, and appropriate financial incentives, student mobility can be encouraged by developing open systems that offer recognition of relevant prior experience, degree equivalencies, credit transfer, tuition exchange schemes, access to national scholarships and student loans, and a comprehensive qualifications and lifelong-learning framework. The regulatory environment should be one, the World Bank suggests, that encourages the private sector to expand access to good-quality tertiary education. Rules for the establishment of new institutions, including private and virtual ones, should be restricted to outlining minimum quality requirements and should not constitute barriers to entry. In the public sector, revenue may be generated from institutional assets, students and their families, and donations from third party contributors.

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE BANK SUPPORT

The World Bank proposes to play a central role by facilitating policy dialogue and knowledge sharing, supporting reforms through programme and project lending, and promoting an enabling framework for the production of the global public goods crucial to the development of tertiary education.

The World Bank has noted that reform proposals have been met with “fierce resistance and opposition.” In the formulation of a long-term vision for the country’s tertiary education system as a whole, it will “play a catalytic role by encouraging and facilitating the policy dialogue on tertiary education reforms. This can often be accomplished through preemptive information sharing and analytical work in support of national dialogue and goal-setting efforts, as well as through project preparation activities aimed at building stakeholder consensus during the project concept and appraisal phases. The Bank can bring to the same table stakeholders who would not normally converse and work together.”

THE MODEL ACT

The World Bank basically directed the governments of developing and transition countries to respond to the necessities of the globalisation, emerging new trends in the higher education sector mentioned above, and make an enabling framework common to the entire education system. In return, it promised to bring about consensus among the stakeholders so that new market-oriented policies are implemented and not opposed by anyone.

In this background, the University Grants Commission (UGC) issued a Concept Paper in October 2003 entitled “Towards Formulation of Model Act for Universities of the 21st Century in India” with a view “to prepare the Indian University system for the future.”

Since the time the BJP-led NDA government came to power at the centre, so many decisions were taken by the government and the UGC which crippled the system of higher education in the country. On none of the issues, the then central government or any of its agencies including the UGC had any debate or discussion with the academia or any stakeholders: students, parents, and people at large. All decisions were imposed by notifications and circulars. The fact that this was the first time that all concerned were called upon to respond to the questionnaire so that the responses “could be used for the formulation of a Model Act” gave rise to the suspicion about the intention of the NDA government at the centre. Contents of the Concept Paper and telegraphically worded leading questions in the questionnaire which were to be answered in Yes or No confirmed the suspicion that this was a desperate act of the government towards all round commercialisation of higher education in India. This debate was to be organised in accordance with the prescriptions of the World Bank.

THE CONCEPT PAPER

The Concept Paper notes, “Indian Universities, like their counterparts elsewhere in the world, have   been performing many additional functions now a days, e.g., undertaking sponsored R&D and continuing education, providing knowledge-based advice and consultancy, preparation / publication of educational material like books / study reports / research papers and extending services to society. Of late, the worldwide   advances, particularly in new Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), are greatly influencing the University system in the country. However, major issues like size, access, equity, relevance, quality and resource constraints continue to dominate the working of Indian Universities.” Since the “Universities are becoming complex institutions”, an appropriate strategy needs to be adopted “for their governance, organisation and management.” Not only the reasons but also the language of the Concept Paper is derived from the World Bank Report.

Therefore, the Acts of Indian Universities should be changed “to bring in some uniformity in the working of Universities” through a Model Act framework, so that there is a “smooth transition from the earlier teacher-centric focus to the required learner-centric educational processes and activities,” and so that the Universities accept “the challenges of globalization to offer high quality education and other services in a competitive manner”. The new Acts of Universities would be “flexible and responsive to rapid changes taking place in the society (Read: market – Author).” According to the Paper, the new common Act for all the universities would help the universities to benefit from ICT revolution and to “become competitive nationally and internationally” and help “India to become a Knowledge Super Power by the year 2020.”

While, University funding by central/state governments has been a well-established tradition in the country, the Concept Paper points out, “this practice is steadily declining now a days.” In this era of rapid commercialisation of higher education, “so far, only a small segment of the University system has exhibited its readiness to meet the challenges of the 21st century. This makes it necessary to look into this issue from all angles and correct the situation urgently, for all the Universities in the country to become Universities of the 21st century.” This correct the situation means that the Universities would be forced to change their character which the University community established in last several decades and respond to the market rather than the needs of the people at large.

 REVENUE GENERATION

The Concept Paper advocated “commercial culture and corporate culture” for the governance of universities. In addition to already existing traditional functions, the Model Act, applicable to all the types of Universities in the country, would include “the mobilisation of financial resources to become self-sufficient” as one of its objects and would have statutory provisions for raising resources through sponsored research and consultancy for government, industries and companies, competitive examinations, etc.

The Universities would be allowed to set up a “Company or Registered Society”, and associate and collaborate “with the Private Sector.” Thus the Vision and Strategy of the UGC in times to come is not only that the Universities should respond to the market needs, but the universities should become the part of the market and private sector by setting up companies and registered societies for revenue generation. Distance education mode would also be a commercial activity for revenue generation through audio/video broadcasts and ICT and related new technologies.

POLITICAL CONTROL OF ALL UNIVERSITIES

The Concept Paper for the Model Act was designed to implement the recommendations of the World Bank and Ambani and Birla Report. Since the Universities are proposed to be the part of market and private sector, a legislation would be enacted “banning any form of political activity on campuses of universities and educational institutions.” Even the normal trade union activities will not be allowed. Further, though the universities will not be funded by the governments, but they would be controlled through Visitors (Governors) who are political appointees of the party in power at the centre. (Further details of the proposed Model Act have been published in these columns earlier.)

The previous BJP led NDA central government and the UGC wanted to completely withdraw from the funding of the universities, colleges and institutions of higher educations. The UGC also wanted the universities and institutions of higher education to prepare themselves to be part of globalisation and face the consequences in the event of India becoming part of General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and throw open its higher education sector to the transnational providers of education for profit-making. As a result, a vast majority of students who come from the disadvantaged and weaker sections and the lower middle class would be excluded from the benefits of higher education because these sections cannot bear the exorbitant cost of education.

As citizens of India, we have to ensure that the new UPA government takes care of public interests and acts to protect public services like health and education from the predatory elements that preach the ideology of the marketplace as the solution to every issue. The attempt to introduce a Model Act was a desperate attempt of the BJP-led NDA government towards all round commercialization of higher education in the country. The UPA government must withdraw this Concept Paper on Model Act so that the process of dismantling the higher education system in the country is reversed.

This Article was published in People’s Democracy, Vol. XXVIII, No. 30, July 25, 2004

Vijender Sharma

Click here for Part I                     Click here for Part III

 IN view of “the ongoing globalisation in the higher education sector, the steady reduction in government funding of the universities, and the increasing influence of ICT on education,” a generalised university of the 21st century in the country has to “perform multiple functions.” In addition to the already existing traditional functions, the Model Act, applicable to all the types of universities in the country, would include “the mobilisation of financial resources to become self-sufficient” as one of its objects and would have statutory provisions for raising resources through:

• Sponsored R&D projects funded, apart from government agencies, by industries and companies,
• Consultancy and testing services for “industries, companies and other institutions in India/abroad,
• Preparing the outgoing students for national/state level competitive   examinations, interviews, entrepreneurship, new careers and other opportunities, and
• Creation and preparation of educational/research material like text/reference books, audio/video tapes/cassettes, floppies/CDs.

Further, “for financial and physical resources generation/mobilisation from various sources, like central/state governments, non-governmental organisations, international funding agencies, philanthropists and other donors,” the universities would be allowed to set up a “company or registered society,” and associate and collaborate “with the private sector.” Thus the Vision and Strategy of the UGC, in times to come, is not only that the universities should respond to the market needs, but that the universities should become a part of the market and private sector by setting up companies and registered societies for revenue generation. The fundamental task of the universities to assimilate, create and disseminate knowledge is of least priority for the Vision and Strategy of the UGC.

In the wake of “diminishing financial support from the government,” lot of emphasis has been put, in the Concept Paper and the questionnaire, on revenue generation and financial self-sufficiency. Therefore, one of the main functions of the vice chancellor would be “mobilising financial and other resources.” In order to help the vice chancellor, an additional post of pro-vice chancellor, a senior academic with knowledge or experience of business or finance, would be created to take charge of resource generation and related aspects. There would be provisions for constituting various boards for distance education, publication, sponsored research, consultancy, etc, that would help raise funds. In a market-model university, departments that make money, study money or attract money are given priority. Heads of universities and institutions of higher education — the vice chancellors, directors, principals — will now be assuming the role of travelling salesmen to promote their programmes.

DISTANCE EDUCATION

In the Model Act, common for all the universities, emphasis would be on “distance education for the society at large, which would be provided using audio/video broadcasts and/or ICT and related new technologies as against the earlier correspondence courses, now becoming obsolete.” The main slogan of private and business universities the world over — “any time, any where, any discipline learning for any one” — has been made the central slogan for the distance education programmes of the universities in India. Following the practices of business universities, students would be allowed to take courses of their choice from many universities at a time with the facility of inter-institutional students’ mobility by mutual credits transfer, and degree/diploma would be awarded jointly by universities in partnership. For this purpose “statewide/countrywide virtual classrooms would be set up.” The distance education, described by the Concept Paper as a commercial activity, would be one of the sources of revenue generation. However, the marginalised and disadvantaged sections of the society who opt for the correspondence courses would be kept out of this stream as well. Only those sections who can pay the fees for profit making courses and have access to electronic media and the internet would be able to enrol in these courses.

DEPOLITICISATION OF UNIVERSITIES

Ambani and Birla had recommended to the prime minister in April 2000 that legislation should be enacted “banning any form of political activity on campuses of universities and educational institutions.” Responding to the requirement of these businessmen and since the universities are proposed to be the part of market and private sector, the new Act would have statutory provision “for maintaining campus peace and harmony” and good public relations with respect to all its constituents, like students, faculty, staff, alumni, parents, funding agencies, press/media, government, UGC and the society at large. For peace and harmony, even the normal trade union activities will not be allowed. This is clear from the questionnaire wherein responses have been invited on “depoliticisation of the campus for a healthy academic environment.”

OTHER PROVISIONS

There may be some flexibility “to maintain some variation in the University Acts to facilitate regional emphasis.” The Concept Paper is “against curtailing the power and position of the chancellors (governors of states at present — Author).” In the new Act, the president of India or the governor of the state would discharge the constitutional responsibilities relating to the central/state university as visitor and they would have “powers of discretion and judgment” in various functions relating to the university, including the appointment of the chancellor and vice chancellor and their duties and responsibilities, and deciding appeals, petitions, representations, etc. In order to facilitate networked learning centres distributed all over the country and even abroad, the jurisdiction of the universities will not be relevant any more. The executive (management) council, the highest authority with powers to frame statutes/ordinances/regulations would have only ex-officio and nominated members, and the provisions of elected representatives on this body would be withdrawn.

THE REAL FACE OF THE MODEL ACT

There are five points that emerge from the exercise of formulating the Model Act, common for all the universities, which show the intention of the central government and UGC:

•  They want to completely withdraw from the funding of the universities, colleges and institutions of higher educations.
• They want the universities and institutions of higher education to prepare themselves to be part of globalisation and face the consequences in the event of India becoming part of general agreement on trade in services (GATS) and throws open its higher education sector to the transnational providers of education for profit making.
• Therefore, they want that the universities and institutions of higher education should not be dependent on the funding from the government and its agencies.
• That is why they are trying to make an Act with the provisions by which the universities and institutions of higher education in India can do and become part of the business.
• As a result, a vast majority of students who come from the disadvantaged and weaker sections and the lower middle class would be excluded from the benefits of higher education because these sections cannot bear the exorbitant cost of education.

 HOW STAKEHOLDERS HAVE TO RESPOND

In order to create an environment for these purposes, the government and UGC have been working overtime for the last several years by reducing state funding of and limiting access to higher education, heavy cost recovery, loans to students, terming higher education as a non-merit good, assessment and accreditation of institutions, autonomous status to colleges, self-financing courses and institutions, increased workload of teachers and non-teaching employees, contractual appointments and privatisation and commercialisation of higher education, etc. If the Model Act is allowed to be adopted an orderly development of higher education in India in the 21st century shall not take place. No longer will truth be sought through education, except whatever suits the corporate interests.

Therefore, the first need is not to respond to the questionnaire attached to the Concept Paper. Rather a detailed critique of and opposition to the government policy of privatisation and commercialisation of higher education under the dictates of the World Bank, WTO and GATS should be the response of teachers, students, parents and all stakeholders in higher education. As the citizens of India, we have to ensure that the government takes care of public interests and act to protect public services like health and education from the predatory elements that preach the ideology of the marketplace as the solution to every issue. The attempt to introduce a Model Act is a desperate attempt of the BJP-led NDA government towards all round commercialisation of higher education in the country. In order to fail this attempt of the government, no one can afford to be complacent. It is the responsibility of the whole society to rise to the occasion and take measures so that the process of dismantling the higher education system in the country is reversed.

 (Concluded)

 This article was published in  People’s Democracy, Vol. XXVII, No. 52, December 28, 2003