Modimania abroad - India's growing might & democratisation of diaspora politics

The Bollywood-style grand rallies that Narendra Modi addressed in parts of the world amidst rousing welcome have caught the imagination of the intellectuals both in India and abroad. The Indian Prime Minister is going to address another such rally this Friday afternoon in the grandiose of the Wembley Stadium. For some it is like thumping his 56-inch chest amidst all the talk of unfettered arrogance, and for others it is having the rich and the powerful non-resident Indians on board for a quid pro quo.

The grand community reception at Wembley has become the talk of the town especially after the drubbing Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) received at the hustings in Bihar, one of India's least developed states, ripped apart by caste relations and bloody politics. When the allegations of growing intolerance in India have crossed its shore and Modi is being blamed for his stoic silence, the caricature surrounding the Indian Prime Minister is that he speaks more when abroad than in India. His extensive and grand foreign trips even earned Modi the laurel of being branded India's non-resident prime minister.

For me, however, these grand and festive congregations are expressions of India's growing might in the fields of global politics and economics, which remained suppressed and subdued for various historical and geopolitical reasons. India might still be the home of one-third of the world’s poor and yet Indians at home and abroad want to see her more as an emerging economy. The euphoria surrounding unending opportunities often overshadow the thoughts that India is also ripped apart by stark inequality.

Globalisation of Bollywood

Modi is not the first Indian politician to use non-resident Indians to his political advantage. Katherine Frank’s book on Indira Gandhi would show how the former Indian prime minister used the Indian community in the United Kingdom to campaign against the Janata Party government when she was thrown out of power. The community of Kashmiri Pandits in London always stood rock solid with the Congress party and the Nehru-Gandhi family in particular. This support was not without adequate compensation in the form of political and economic patronage. Those in the know of things know how the Kashmiri head of an Indian news organisation got support from successive Congress dispensations in running a highly successful business in London’s upmarket Regent Street.

Grant Thornton India Tracker 2015

The Bollywood-style festivity also stems from increased globalisation of India’s highly successful film industry. Before I came to the UK in 1999, I never knew that Bollywood was such a recognised form of entertainment industry here which strived more on the glitz and glamour of the colourful Indian society rather than its trials and tribulations with poverty, inequality and discrimination.

So what we are seeing today is not a completely new phenomenon in itself and rather a culmination of a trend which has been work in progress for decades. In fact, over the past decade or so managing the Indian community in the UK and roping them in with the representatives of the Indian government here have become much more democratic than what it was for decades since independence.

The Independence Day celebrations, which once was within the confines of the High Commission building, Nehru Centre or the official residence of the High Commissioner near Kensington Palace Gardens with the same set of invitees - with close links with the Indian establishment both here in the UK and back home - every year has now been opened to the Indian population at large since the time of High Commissioner Shiv Shankar Mukherjee. Over the past few years anybody can attend the Independence Day celebrations at the Indian Gymkhana in Osterley rather than being at the good books of the “Indian Baboos” running their self-styled empire inside the India House at Aldwych.

Evenly balanced relation

The "Gujarati asmita" or the pride of the Gujarati people backing Modi abroad is nothing different from the Kashmiris backing the Nehru-Gandhi family, especially Mrs Gandhi. The symbiotic relationship between the politicians in power and the benefactors abroad is still the same. The only change that has happened over the years is democratisation of the process of engaging with the non-resident Indians in the United Kingdom. One doesn't need to be in the good books of the people at the helm to avail some of the basic facilities. The non-resident Indians are now treated with greater respect by the Indian establishment than it was during the Congress regime. Recall how Mrs Gandhi turned her back to the people of Indian origin who were thrown out of Uganda as part of Idi Amin's Africanisation Project.

The relationship between non-resident Indians and the Government of India has become evenly balanced since the days of economic liberalisation in 1991. The remittances from all around the globe and especially from the Middle East keep India's coffers full with dollars and pound sterling so as to allow the government of the day to engage in economic risk-taking and not count the pennies and the cents needed to keep the oil-pool account up and running. The 30 million Indians living abroad contribute an estimated $70 billion to the national economy each year in the form of remittances.

The suspicious attitude of the Indian establishment towards the non-residents have eased as the government now can see the benefits, including financial, economic, political and diplomatic, of a vibrant expatriate Indian community. The policy-makers in India's archaic North and South Blocks have now realised that China's strength stems not only from its financial and military muscles but also from a vibrant and effective expatriate community.

If India wishes to match China, it can hardly overlook its diaspora.

Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a journalist and media consultant.
He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com All comments are personal.

Osborne set to put brakes on BBC gravy train

In Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs media comes
either under 'esteem' or 'self-actualization'.

After John Whittingdale its now the turn of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In his interview for the Andrew Marr Show, George Osborne has underlined the obligation of the BBC in contributing to balance the books of Britain’s finances. It is an altogether different debate as to whether austerity as proposed by the Conservative government is the right thing to do in the present circumstance, but as a publicly funded organisation, the BBC certainly has its responsibilities in fulfilling certain socio-economic obligations and merely wishing it away in the name of creative licence or journalistic rights or media freedom is not commensurate to the needs of a 21st century organisation, especially at a time when the deprived and the vulnerable are feeling the pinch of the £12 billion welfare cuts as proposed by the government of David Cameron. However important media freedom might be, and no one is denying its significance for a free society, meeting the basic survival needs of the people, especially the impoverished and the vulnerable, comes much higher in the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs as compared to the importance of consuming news.

Along with his colleague Whittingdale, the Secretary of State Media Culture and Sports, Osborne also need to have a close look at how the corporation, considered to be one of the prized British institutions, is managed. BBC Director General Tony Hall has already promised a leaner and thinner corporation which fits into the mold of a modern, inclusive and smart organisation. He has also announced a further thousand job cuts comprising mostly of managers, yet a closer scrutiny is necessary to make sure that public money is not wasted especially at a time of austerity.

'Imperial ambition'

The other observation made by the chancellor about the BBC is equally important. Osborne has expressed his concerns about the “imperial” ambitions of the BBC. His concerns may have stemmed more from Osborne’s political ideology promoting free market where other media organisations within the UK are on a level playing field so as to encourage healthy competition, but a different facet of the problem is as important as mending its finances.

George Osborne wants the BBC to play its role in balancing
the books and rein in over its "imperial" ambitions

The chancellor has highlighted his apprehension about the BBC doing everything from publishing "features and cooking recipes" and “effectively” nearly serving the purpose of the “national newspaper as well as the national broadcaster." But there is a wider aspect to it which goes beyond the national domain of the United Kingdom.
As the successor of the “Empire Service”, the BBC World Service may have lived its age of “overseas broadcasting” since the early 1930s and decided to continue with it in 1946 “after the immediate exigencies of the war had melted away and in harsh austerity conditions”, and many may enjoy the grandiose of referring it to be a “jewel in the BBC’s crown” but one also has to recognise the changed global order where Britain no longer occupies the position of importance it once did.

The purpose of the media in the modern day society may be of an antidote to power and the powerful, ironically its voice and that of the wider civil society is listened to only if they are associated with those who matter and with clout. Whatever may have been its imperial past, not much sheen is left for Great Britain in the current matrix of diplomacy and accordingly the British media doesn't enjoy that kind of penetration and reach as is the case with those in the United States of America, or the emerging economies like in Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Despite all the myth surrounding the glory of the BBC, it has to be accepted that Britain is neither a trend-setter in today's world nor does it have the power and position to adjudicate on maters global as was once the case.

In such a backdrop, it makes little sense to flaunt the BBC World Service as an effective soft power tool. Soft Power as proposed by Joseph Nye becomes effective only when it is supplemented by Hard Power, the resultant being the Smart Power, which lies somewhere in between Hard Power and Soft Power. For the proponents of the argument surrounding World Service as a soft power tool may be self-aggrandisement, but there are doubts as to whether it is value for money for the British economy and fetches any commensurate benefit to the British people.

Cost-benefit analysis

Funding the World Service cost the BBC £245 million in 2014-15, and it is now time to do a cost-benefit analysis in terms of the advantages accrued to Britain - its economy and the people - and whether it is worth spending that kind of money at a time when a large section of the British population, including the disadvantaged and the vulnerable, are feeling the pains of austerity and cuts in public services.

Its now time to do a cost-benefit analysis of the benefits
accrued to Britain from the BBC programmes
in India and Bangladesh

While provisions like the Ebola information service for West Africa on WhatsApp may still be of some ethical value, although rightly questionable at a time of austerity, given Britain's commitment to human rights, development, but one finds it hard to reason as to what British interest will be served by the launch of the BBC Bangla TV programme - BBC Probaho, on Bangladesh’s cable/satellite station, Channel-I, apart from the fact that the editor of the BBC Bangla Service will use this pretext to make bi-monthly trips to Dhaka at the cost of the British taxpayer.
According to the information available through the Freedom of Information Act 2000, "the incumbent editor of the Bangla Service spent 49 working days on duty away from London during the period 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010. The total cost of the three trips paid by the BBC World Service was £6,384.44". The BBC, however, didn't provide any information regarding the costs incurred by the BBC World Service Trust, now the BBC Media Action, as it is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

The media market in Bangladesh is already saturated with a large number of television channels and it will be hard to make any impact for any new entrant. Moreover as it happened with the BBC Hindi TV in India in the 1990s (and the beneficiary it that case was the  ANI), Channel I will flourish at the cost of the British taxpayers. These sort of projects generally serve as a platform of quid pro quo, often nourishing symbiotic relationship between those in the upper echelons of in this case the Bangladeshi society. The privileged make hay as the impoverished and the vulnerable in Britain suffer, and it is morally imperative on the government of the day to rectify such delinquencies.

Also available:
Why should I pay for the BBC.
Scrap BBC tax at a time of austerity

Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a journalist and media consultant.

He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com
All comments are personal.

Future British workforce facing systemic failure

Labour market expert and author of a review of vocational education for former Education Secretary Michael Gove, Alison Wolf has argued that cuts in the sectoral budget will be detrimental to the supply of skilled workforce for the British economy.

Historically, the supply of skilled workforce in Britain may have been ensured by apprenticeship programmes and institutes of vocational learning, but these organisations are failing the current generation and funding cuts is not the only reason behind their systemic failure.

This observation is based on a real life experience of an Employability Adviser in a Further Education (FE) college over the past two years. The views may be constrained by being biased on the experience of an individual in only one such institution, but the general feeling among a large section of the population who are either employed or associated with the FE sector is that a majority, if not all, of such organisations of further education across London, if not all over the country, are run in a similar fashion.

The popular wisdom about the FE colleges in the United Kingdom is that these organisations are meant to make those who are not suitable for the normal route of GCSE and AS & A-levels for whatever reasons, employable so that there is a steady flow of skilled workforce in the British economy and only those who are capable of traversing the higher education route are allowed to do so. The idea was to engage the less qualified ones into gainful employment so that over time they can gain some practical skills so as to make up for the lack of their academic qualifications.

However, it is now evident that the focus is not on making the learners employable by way of imparting vocational education and teaching them functional skills but to make them 'pass' their course(s), by handing over coursework often without independent assessment, so as to ensure the funding of the FE college. The underlying presumption is that a 'pass' ensures £5000 per student per annum and there is no incentive for 'merit' and 'distinction' either to the student or the staff. I do not want to delve into any further details as to how a 'pass' is ensured, often without any learning at all, but there is enough evidence that a section of the students who are unable to write a proper sentence or do some basic Maths even when they are in Level 3, which is equivalent to AS/A-Levels.

Talking about functional skills, there is generally not much faith either in the curriculum or in the teaching methods in English and Mathematics. Having studied in India, I find the content too simple so as to expose the students to the complexities of modern life. Although on paper the focus is on student-centered learning, in practice the onus is on the teachers to ensure that the learners get a 'pass', even if it is through innumerable 're-sits', and the teachers literally hunt the students, coax and cajole them to appear for the tests. This is because of the fact that the performance of a teacher is linked to the paper results of his/her students. Often we are told that the students should be encouraged to take ownership of their acts and be responsible for their actions, however, responsibility or to use its nearest synonym obligation are not part of the lexicon of a majority of the students. Many of them attend these courses not because of any willingness to learn or gain skills but to make sure that the benefits of their parents or carers are not curtailed.

The FE Colleges may be meant to make the students who can't traverse the academic route, of the GCSE, AS and the A-levels, for whatever reasons and make them employable, however, in reality employability has the least priority. The 16-19 year old Levels 1 & 2 students are supposed to attend an hourly session on Employability for 36 weeks, but since it has no qualifications attached, no assignments or examinations, and the Employability Advisers are not accorded the status of lecturers, the students start loosing their focus after six-10 weeks when they start getting assignments on their vocational courses. These lead to behavioral, punctuality and attendance issues ultimately vitiating the relationship between the Employability Advisers and the learners.

Often the classroom sessions deter students with genuine interest and employability needs from seeking help as their voices are eclipsed by those resorting to problems as they consider the hour-long employability session nothing but useless captivity. However, the college enforces classroom seasons over workshop-style ones as, and this is the general perception, it ensures £900 per students per annum as compared to £100 for workshops. In the process, the college ensures its earning at the cost of the Employment Advisers facing the flak at the front-line and the majority of the learners failing to develop any of the peoples' skill.

Making the students employable may be one of the main objectives of the FE colleges, but employability advisers face enormous hurdles while organising work experience for the students and the resistance / reluctance / indifference  are alike from the vocational lecturers, curriculum managers, careers and apprenticeship teams, the college management and the students. There is tremendous apathy on the part of the curriculum managerial staff to engage with the local employers and trade bodies so as to ensure work experience for the students and facilitate employment for them in the long run.

The FE sector in the UK calls for serious introspection and possible overhauling as it is increasingly digressing from one of its main objectives and in the process failing a large section of the future workforce.

Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a journalist and media consultant.
He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com
All comments are personal.

Scrap BBC Tax at a time of austerity

James Whittingdale is expected to take a close and
hard look  at the BBC Charter and the Licence Fee

The Secretary of State for Media, Culture and Sport, James Whittingdale, should take a close and hard look at the Licence Fee when discussing the next BBC Charter, which will come into force at the end of 2016.

When the Conservative government is resorting to Victorian penny pinching and making the poorest and the weakest in Britain more vulnerable, the BBC is employing the resources generated through Licence Fee in Britain to launch a television programme in Bangladesh.

The launching of the BBC Bangla TV programme - BBC Probaho, on Bangladesh’s cable/satellite station, Channel-I is nothing short of an expediency as it will not reap any benefit for Britain and those who help the corporation survive by paying the Licence Fee.

It beggars belief that the new television programme being launched by the BBC Bangla Service will cut any ice with the audience, not least because of the sustained decline in the BBC’s influence in Bangladesh, but also due to the fact that the media market in the country is crowded by the presence of nearly a dozen television channels, if not more. Moreover, the continuous decline in the audience figures of the BBC Bangla's radio programmes are a testimony of the listless editorial leadership of the service.

The BBC World Service has a dubious distinction of floundering with public money when it attempted to launch its Hindi television channel in India in the 1990s. As the BBC faltered, its supplier the Asian News International or the ANI flourished. There is a widespread apprehension that like the ANI in Delhi, Channel-I is prospering at the cost of the Licence Fee payers in Britain as BBC Probaho is destined to fail.

The sponsorship of the longstanding relationship between BBC Bangla and Channel-I by the BBC Media Action also raises serious financial and editorial questions. Questions are being raised as to why the British taxpayers' money should be used to help a foreign media business flourish. Secondly, is the editorial stature of the BBC, despite its continuous decline, compatible with Channel-I's position in the media landscape of Bangladesh?  

When the government is making additional cuts, it should ensure that the ordinary people have enough resources at their disposal to make a decent living. Resources at the disposal of the ordinary people would  be better utilised to meet their basic needs rather than paying the bills of an expedient move by a maverick or a dubious BBC manager.

Also available: Why should I pay for the BBC

Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a freelance journalist and media consultant. 
He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com 
All comments are personal.

High time India reciprocates to reap diplomatic dividends

What a gesture of friendship and camaraderie by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, first to Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee​ and then on Saturday to Prime Minister Narendra Modi​. The people of Bangladesh have always been at the heart of the Indians and their struggle for independence remembered with reverence on the other side of the border and so are their strides on the social indicators of development.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has
walked the extra mile for friendship

Prime Minister Sk Hasina was quick to acknowledge the tide of geopolitics and its significance in South Asia, although it must be said that she had always been on the right side of a cordial relationship with India.

Notwithstanding the irritations in the bilateral relations, Sk Hasina has walked the extra mile not only to strengthen the friendly ties with her neighbour but also delivered on the promises made by the Bangladesh government to make the historic relationship smooth and render it with due cordiality.

It wasn't an easy task though!

Sheikh Hasina had to tread a dangerous path not only in the country, to overcome the widespread anti-Indian sentiments and wipe out an air of suspicion, but also within her party the Awami League to make Bangladesh's relationship with India effective and meaningful. She had to stave off strong and often conspiratorial opposition to friendly ties with India from a section of the domestic media, other groups in the civil society and also an arm of an influential international media organisation having strong roots and historic links with Bangladesh. Quite expectedly, this arm of the international media organisation downplayed the success of what is being termed "a historic trip" and highlighted Khaleda Zia's allegation, during a one-to-one meeting with Prime Minister Modi, that "democracy is at its peril in Bangladesh".

It is high time that India recognises the friendly gesture of Bangladesh in the backdrop of a bilateral relationship which has been on a roller coaster ride over the past more than four decades and with the evolution of geopolitics.

India should be mindful of fulfilling her commitments to the people of Bangladesh, made on several occasions. The public perception in Bangladesh is that India is quick to make promises but falters when it comes to delivering on time, often seen by Dhaka with suspicion and as a sign of lack of commitment. This perception is of course not without reason. The promises made by the then Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee on reconstruction of villages post the devastating cyclone Aila took a lot more time to deliver than the usual period of gestation.

The operators in South Block should recognise the fact that Bangladesh may be small in size but it occupies a position of strategic importance and it is only in India's interest to nurture the bonhomie and friendship that's in the air at a time of sweltering heat and high humidity in both the countries.

Prime Minister Modi's strategy of extending an olive branch of friendship to South Asian neighbours like Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, notwithstanding her size and importance in regional and global politics is bound to reap diplomatic dividends in the time to come.

Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a journalist and media consultant. 
He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com 
 All comments are personal.