THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Saturday asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi to spare the Thiruvananthapuram airport from privatisation.
In a meeting with the Prime Minister in New Delhi, Pinarayi asked the latter to hand over the running of the airport to the state on agreeable terms for the Centre and state. The state had proved its mettle by running two airports in the PPP model. International agencies like United Nations had appreciated the airport models, he said.
In 2003, the Union Civil Aviation Secretary had given an assurance that private parties would be considered for the running of the airport only after taking the state into confidence. The airport is situated on 35 acres of land. A major portion of this was donated by the erstwhile Travancore king and the state. Handing over of the airport to a private company is not justifiable, Pinarayi said
The Chief Minister said cooperative federalism is still in the conceptual stage and very little structural changes have been made in the past four years to make this work on the ground. States like Kerala have expressed concerns on the Terms of Reference of the 15th Finance Commission, which should be addressed. After doing away with the Five Year Plans at the national level, states have lost grants which they used to get as plan assistance earlier.
Now states have to bear a higher share - 40per cent, instead of the earlier average 25per cent - for many centrally sponsored schemes. This results in the shrinking of state governments’ fiscal space. “NITI Aayog in the present form has not played the much-expected role of a facilitator in the past four years. There is growing realisation that it is perhaps not a substitute for the erstwhile Planning Commission,” said the Chief Minister, adding that Kerala has been continuing with the Five Year Plans.
The adverse impact of the transformation of the Planning Commission to the NITI Aayog is that states like Kerala have lost a source of funding for its state Five Year Plans. Referring to the ‘Aspirational District Programme’, Pinarayi said the ‘one size fits all’ approach of the centrally sponsored schemes goes against the basic principles of cooperative federalism.
The central component of these schemes should not be viewed as gratis from the Centre to states. The states also contribute a share to these schemes, he said, adding, “state governments and local governments should not be viewed as entities in a pyramidal hierarchical structure below the Central Government.”
The Centre spending on subjects in the state list has resulted in centralisation in the design of welfare schemes. It results in states losing the flexibility for implementing schemes in social and economic sectors. Centralisation of these schemes restrains local-level initiatives. A more centralised control will not be in accordance with the constitutional amendments regarding decentralisation. Incursions into areas of legislative competence of state governments will weaken the federal system, he added.