There has been quite an uproar regarding the bio metric collection authority with both MHA (Ministry of Home Affairs) and UIDAI (Unique Identification Authority of India) staking claim. Both sides have claimed the right to do so with MHA even doubting the procedure followed by UID for collecting data from among 170 million people.
But first, what is UID? It is a project started by the government to provide people with a unique identification number. The 12 digit number will be provided to each person and his demographic and biometric data would be stored to establish his uniqueness. This will help in proper distribution of subsidized foods, ration cards etc. The organization responsible for it is the UIDAI headed by IT Czar Nandan Nilekani and backed by the Planning Commission as well as Sonia Gandhi. The MHA is undertaking a similar project in which chip based smart cards are being issued to people as per the National Population Register(NPR). While Mr. Ahluwalia, deputy chairman, planning commission has dismissed this project, the MHA has called the UIDAI project as a duplicate of their own. The finance ministry is worried that too much money is being spent on two similar projects.
The problem here is that UIDAI was mandated to collect the data for about 200 million people. As the target approaches, the department has asked for an extension in the number. The home ministry, naturally is not pleased and wants to carry on the project on its own now. Now that the battle-lines had been drawn, the Union home minister fired the first salvo questioning the authenticity of UID. Questioning the collection system, he has said that the data is not reliable. As per the rumours, a lot of illegal migrants, especially in north-east have got their adhaar cards on basis of false documents. It has demanded that it wants to look into the UIDAI data servers and carry out checks on people responsible for data collection. However, the Nilekani led UID has a strong backing of the planning commission and the finance minister Pranab Mukherjee.
So who should it be?UIDAI or MHA? I would like to believe that the MHA has no business interfering ith the working of UIDAI. They have done phenomenal work so far. With 200 million people covered in less than year, the efficiency of the organization is for all to see. The biggest biometric data capture so far, the reason for its success can be attributed to the department head, Nilekani. The former Infosys chief has led the organization in an systematic way and coming from an IT background has certainly been an advantage for him. Yes, some false UID number might have been created for wrong people, but at below 0.15%, the number does not sound so big. Also, to expect the age old government machinery to be able to carry out such a path breaking and efficient program is a little too optimistic.
With people's Rs 14800 crore at stake, this inter ministry politics has highlighted the inefficiency of the UPA-2 once again. As the bill now rests with the cabinet, one hopes that the best sense may prevail and the system is up and alive as soon as possible.
But first, what is UID? It is a project started by the government to provide people with a unique identification number. The 12 digit number will be provided to each person and his demographic and biometric data would be stored to establish his uniqueness. This will help in proper distribution of subsidized foods, ration cards etc. The organization responsible for it is the UIDAI headed by IT Czar Nandan Nilekani and backed by the Planning Commission as well as Sonia Gandhi. The MHA is undertaking a similar project in which chip based smart cards are being issued to people as per the National Population Register(NPR). While Mr. Ahluwalia, deputy chairman, planning commission has dismissed this project, the MHA has called the UIDAI project as a duplicate of their own. The finance ministry is worried that too much money is being spent on two similar projects.
The problem here is that UIDAI was mandated to collect the data for about 200 million people. As the target approaches, the department has asked for an extension in the number. The home ministry, naturally is not pleased and wants to carry on the project on its own now. Now that the battle-lines had been drawn, the Union home minister fired the first salvo questioning the authenticity of UID. Questioning the collection system, he has said that the data is not reliable. As per the rumours, a lot of illegal migrants, especially in north-east have got their adhaar cards on basis of false documents. It has demanded that it wants to look into the UIDAI data servers and carry out checks on people responsible for data collection. However, the Nilekani led UID has a strong backing of the planning commission and the finance minister Pranab Mukherjee.
So who should it be?UIDAI or MHA? I would like to believe that the MHA has no business interfering ith the working of UIDAI. They have done phenomenal work so far. With 200 million people covered in less than year, the efficiency of the organization is for all to see. The biggest biometric data capture so far, the reason for its success can be attributed to the department head, Nilekani. The former Infosys chief has led the organization in an systematic way and coming from an IT background has certainly been an advantage for him. Yes, some false UID number might have been created for wrong people, but at below 0.15%, the number does not sound so big. Also, to expect the age old government machinery to be able to carry out such a path breaking and efficient program is a little too optimistic.
With people's Rs 14800 crore at stake, this inter ministry politics has highlighted the inefficiency of the UPA-2 once again. As the bill now rests with the cabinet, one hopes that the best sense may prevail and the system is up and alive as soon as possible.
I believe there should be reservation but not in every area.It should only be in the undergraduate level as after getting a degree they are not at all underprivileged and should get a admission to a college or a job on the basis of merit
ReplyDelete