5 Yrs Since Gujarat 2012 Elections, Know What Was Promised And What Is Delivered
Suresh Ediga Gujarat
December 8th, 2017 / 6:56 PM
What was promised in 2012 election manifesto for health
What was (not) delivered?
Shortage of staff:
The delivery of quality healthcare services in hospitals largely depends on the adequate availability of manpower especially in the cadres of doctors, staff nurses, para-medical and other supporting staff.
Shortage of beds:
The people of these districts were deprived of adequate healthcare facilities that may force them to either opt for private hospitals for treatment or to obtain treatment in congested facilities. Moving to private hospitals is a financial burden for the poor patients.
The Chief District Medical Officers (CDMOs) stated (May-June 2015) that due to insufficient infrastructure, beds had been kept adjacent to accommodate more number of patients and arrangement of floor bed was done to give. The patients were highly vulnerable to getting hospital-induced infection.
2.49 crore (41 per cent) of population are served by only 3,188 (23 per cent) beds in 22 districts
Registration of patients is the first step for getting healthcare facilities in hospitals. Around 400 to 600 patients visit each DH and around 800 to 2,000 patients visit each CH daily. There were two counters in each of the test-checked DHs except DH Vadodara and eight to eleven counters in each of the test-checked CH for registration of patients. It was observed that patients had to wait for one to two hours for getting themselves registered. These facts indicated that the number of counters were not sufficient to handle the volume of work.
In CH Surat, a new Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU) of 12 beds constructed (January 2013) at a cost of 55.65 lakh alongwith necessary medical fittings and equipment such as medical gas pipeline, bed head panel, ICU beds, 12 ventilators costing ` 99.29 lakh was found non-operational due to shortage of nursing staff and other supporting staff since its establishment.
In DH Surendranagar, the posts of Gynaecologist and Paediatrician were lying vacant since November 2011. Resultantly, average delivery cases in a month was less than 15, as people hesitated to come for institutional delivery in the hospital.
Maternity ward of CH Surat was highly congested and patients were found lying on the floor
Due to shortage of beds, an instance of two neonates accommodated on one bed was noticed at DH Palanpur
What was promised in the 2012 manifesto for Employment
What was (not) delivered?
Analysis of available data of trainees on web-portal under three major schemes revealed large number of duplications in same scheme and multiple trainings being availed of by same candidates. The achievement figures were thus over reported by 4.58 lakh trainees.
Gujarat Skill Development Mission (GSDM) has not formulated uniform skill development policy even though it was decided (June 2010) in the meeting chaired by Hon’ble Chief Minister of the State, as a result of which concerned departments implemented skill training programme without uniformity in syllabus, duration of course and fees structure.
Audit also observed that instructions (February 2014) by Labour and Employment Department for mandatory issuance of certificates of National Council of Vocational Training/Gujarat Council of Vocational Training to all trainees were not followed by private training institutes in majority cases.
To enhance their capacity of providing vocational training to the youth in the State, the Director of Employment and Training (DET) had established 97 new ITIs between 2010 and 2015. However, average number of students passing out remained almost static during the period 2010-15.
After passing the trade test, candidates are required to undergo practical training in industries as apprentices to enhance their skills. Audit observed that 26 per cent of seats of apprentices remained vacant during 2010-15 and out of 1.63 lakh.
Under Industrial Policy 2009, a target was set to establish 200 Skill Up-gradation Centres (SUCs) with capacity of 1.5 lakh trainees per year. However, Centre for Entrepreneurship Development (CED) could set-up (2012-14) only 39 SUCs and train only 0.14 lakh candidates till March 2015 nullifying the objective of preparing technically competent.
manpower as per industrial needs.
Audit found that female participation in Vocational Training Centres developed by Tribal Development Department (TDD) on Public Private Partnership mode for skill training to tribal youth was only 17 per cent against a target of 50 per cent set by TDD. Overall achievement of training target by all VTCs was 35 per cent only (2010-15).
To put all the information in public domain is important for creating awareness as well as for transparent administration of a scheme/programme, however, the web-portal developed (2011) by GSDM remained non-operational since September 2013.
What was promised in 2012 manifesto for housing?
What was (not) delivered?
Out of the 17,703 dwelling units to be constructed in 34 projects, only 10,245 units have been completed and only 4,554 of them were allotted to the beneficiaries as on August 31, 2015
There was inordinate delay in implementation of the project on the part of the state government. Due to this delay, the cost per dwelling unit enhanced to an average cost of Rs1.70 lakh
However, the contribution of state government, along with the Centre, remained at Rs 1.25 lakh. Resultantly, the burden on the beneficiary became more than 10 percent envisaged in the scheme guideline.
There was delay in preparation of Development Plans and Town Planning (TP) schemes.
As against 53 TP schemes proposed in the First Revised Development plan, VUDA had proposed only four TP schemes.
The reservation of land for specific purposes in the TP schemes was not made as per the provisions of GTP&UD Act i.e. as against 10 per cent of land to be earmarked for Socially and Economically Weaker Section (SEWS) beneficiaries, the land reserved for SEWSs in 11 TP schemes ranged between 2.69 and 6.74 per cent only.
As against 292.31 crore of funds received during the period 2010-15, VUDA could utilise only 118.18 crore.
Economically Weaker Section (EWS) beneficiaries evacuated from Madhavnagar and Keshavnagar EWS housing complex, owing to collapse of blocks of Madhavnagar could not be rehabilitated till date of Audit (June 2015) owing to delay in commencement of construction work and stoppage of work by the contractor.
You can read the full report here Suresh Ediga’s Blog.
Edited by :