BENGALURU: The Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) has proposed the opening up of two “seva kendras” in each of its five city corporations, claiming to make services such as registration of births, e-khatas and others faster and more transparent, at the cost of premium fees.
The obvious questions that emerge at this juncture are: why make new centres instead of making the existing ones function like they are supposed to? And, more importantly, are basic necessities an exclusive domain of the privileged?
To achieve its proposed objective, the GBA has recently floated a tender for private companies to bid and set the costs of 27 services, promised to be delivered under one roof. While the scheme appears to pose a relief to citizens from being extorted by middlemen and corporation staff, many are of the opinion that concept is “absurd”.
Kathyayini Chamaraj, executive trustee of Citizens’ Voluntary Initiative for the City of Bangalore (CIVIC Bangalore), said, “This is just replacing the middleman with a contractor. What difference does it make? They are making quicker services available to only the affluent people. This is discriminatory, and sends out a message that the GBA will serve faster those who pay more.”
Chamaraj also believes that two seva kendras per corporation is a flaw within the absurdity of the concept itself. “These services should be available at the ward level. Set up a Bangalore One centre at every ward, and simplify the processes therein by making the people placed there accountable. The addition of these seva kendras will only confuse people further. This, to me, is a total abdication of responsibility,” she added.
Urbanist Ashwin Mahesh is of the opinion that the privatisation of the essential service domain is an admission of incompetence, and one that runs the risk of eroding public trust on state-run institutions. “The GBA has to answer if a private provider is more efficient. Without a headcount reduction at the GBA, why would you hire more people to do the same job? Some of the services that they have mentioned are included in the Sakala list. So, they are supposed to be time-sensitive deliverables by default – without having to pay premium fees. Two kendras per corporation as a concept would not work either, especially when the corporations are disparate in terms of area and population,” Mahesh said.
Mahesh also believes that this is a ploy to distract from the GBA’s failures. If the core premise behind the creation of the GBA was decentralisation and better planning, the decision to open up seva kendras is yet another example of the GBA failing on its both its premise and promise.
“The GBA is a planning body, according to them. So far, the one thing they are clearly not doing is planning. We have an urban development department, they can instruct. The people at the GBA are wasting time on interfering in other institutions’ responsibilities, while neglecting theirs,” Mahesh added.