21 Jan 2021: UPSC Exam Comprehensive News Analysis

E. Editorials

Category: GOVERNMENT POLICIES

1. True empowerment of the electricity consumer

Context:

•  The Electricity (Rights of Consumers) Rules, 2020 was promulgated recently.

Details:

• The Electricity (Rights of Consumers) Rules, 2020 rules aims to “empower” consumers with rights that would permit them to access a continuous supply of quality, reliable electricity.
• The rules cover several key areas of power supply to consumers in the country, such as obligations of distribution licensees, metering arrangements, the release of new connections and modifications of existing connections and grievance redressal and compensation mechanisms.

Issue of supply quality

• People in several states do not have access to quality power supply, this is largely witnessed among rural and small electricity consumers.
•  The recent enactment of the Electricity (Rights of Consumers) Rules, 2020 has brought the focus on to the consumer, it is claimed that the new rules would truly empower the consumers.
• The Rules give prominence to national minimum standards for the performance parameters of electricity distribution companies (DISCOMs), without urban-rural distinction, especially for new connections, metering and billing.
•  The rules reiterate the need for automatically compensating consumers, but the jury is still out if the rules can enhance the quality of the power supply.

What are the limitations of the Rules?

• Electricity sector in India falls under the Concurrent List of the Constitution and is administered both by the central and the state governments.
• The Concurrent List provides for supremacy to central legislation, and therefore in any conflict between a central act and the provisions of state legislation, the law made by the Parliament would prevail and the inconsistent provisions of the state legislation would be void.
• It needs to be recognised that providing quality supply is primarily the responsibility of States and DISCOMs.
• There are states which have similar or upgraded provisions through their respective State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs) existing in the Standards of Performance (SoP) regulations and such regulations have been in place for two decades in most States, thus providing a smooth functioning.

Lack of accountability

• The reason behind not being able to provide quality supply across the states is largely due to the absence of an accountability mechanism to enforce the existing rules.
• However, not much efforts have been expended to put in a mechanism that seeks to enforce the rules and make DISCOMS accountable – the draft National Tariff Policy, the proposed Electricity Act amendments, or various committee processes have all failed to address the issue of accountability.
• The rules promise a 24-hour power supply, which may appear to be more than what some of the State regulations currently provide for, but there are doubts on the efficacy of automatic compensation payments towards such a guarantee.
• The doubts largely stem from the fact that the availability of power supply is inadequately monitored, even at the 11 kV feeders. Therefore, recording the same at the location of the consumer cannot be guaranteed.
• Moreover, such compensation will require serious commitment. For example, according to government reports, rural areas received about 20 hours of supply, in August 2020.
• Following existing regulations, this would entail compensation of hundreds of crores, but the actual amount paid adds up to just a few lakhs in each State for the entire year; even here it involves the resourceful few who could escalate their complaints to higher levels.
• This highlights not only the need for implementation of existing provisions in letter and spirit but also amending them with strong accountability provisions.

Weakening provisions

• The new Rules appear to water down some of the progressive mechanisms that already exist in some of the State regulations.
• Case in point being the electricity meter-related complaints. The Rules provide a window of 30 days within which the complaints regarding faulty meters should be addressed. This provision pales in front of certain state regulations which were enacted years ago in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh, which provide for such testing needs to be conducted within a span of seven days.
• Another parameter for comparison is the proposed composition of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum.
• The Rules state that the forum set up to remedy complaints against DISCOMs as per existing laws and regulations should be headed by a senior officer of the company, this appears to be a regressive provision and there is an element of conflict of interest as there is a likelihood of more cases being decided in favour of the companies than the consumers.
• The states have taken a thorough look into the composition of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum. For example, regulations of Delhi have a defined eligibility criterion that prohibits a person who has served a DISCOM as an employee and who was in service in the last two years, to be appointed as a forum member.
• States such as Maharashtra, Telangana and Bihar, among others, have the option of appointing a retired senior judicial officer or other independent members as the chairperson. It appears that the states have a better mechanism to oversee the appointment of the chairperson of the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum than what the Rules provide for.
• The Rules do not promote progressive reforms as well, with the promotion of solar rooftop units by the government, there is a guarantee of net metering for a solar rooftop unit less than 10 kW, but there is no clarity if those above 10 kW can also avail net metering. This could lead to a change in regulations in many states based on their own interpretations.
• The possible litigation could impede investment flow to rooftop solar units and would dissuade medium and large consumers to opt for an environment-friendly, cost-effective option.

Need for commitment

•  In the absence of a strong accountability provision, the consumer protection rules will not ensure better power supply quality.
• The central government can ensure accountability by nudging the SERCs to examine the SoP reports of DISCOMs and revise their regulations more frequently. Also, the SERCs should conduct meetings with the consumers helping them raise their concerns.
•  DISCOMs could be directed to ensure automatic metering at least at the 11 kV feeder level, this will help in adequate monitoring of power supply.
• The Central Electricity Authority (CEA) of India could be directed to collect supply quality data from DISCOMs, publicly host them on online portals and prepare analysis reports. Such efforts need to go beyond the quality of information that is currently hosted on portals such as the National Power Portal.
• A regular tariff revision has been pursued by Central agencies. They could also support independent surveys and nudge State agencies to enforce existing SoP regulations. The central government could disburse funds for financial assistance programmes based on audited SoP reports.

Conclusion

• The Sustainable Development Goal 7 calls for universal access to sustainable energy by 2030. In 2019, India widely outperformed this target, achieving near-universal electrification, only a few hundred households are still in need of an electricity connection.
• Providing access to electricity for such a huge population is an achievement taking into consideration India’s geographical size and diversity of terrain.
• However, ensuring round the clock supply will require continuous efforts and an absence of accountability and consumer compensation are not helpful.
•  The enactment of the new rules will not change this status quo. The governments, DISCOMs and regulators will have to work together. They should demonstrate the commitment and will power to implement existing regulations. It is not yet late to recognise this and initiate concerted efforts to truly empower consumers.

Category: HEALTH

1. Managing the rollout

Context:

• The Covid-19 vaccination drive has commenced in India. Reports have suggested the prospects of Covid-19 vaccine doses being wasted in states over hesitancy.

Details:

• Authorities in at least six states have said that doses of coronavirus vaccines are going to waste because people’s attendance has been lower than anticipated, underscoring a persistent vaccine hesitancy problem in the country that may now impact inventories stockpiled in the millions.

Vaccine hesitancy

• WHO describes vaccine hesitancy as the reluctance or refusal to vaccinate despite the availability of vaccines that threatens to reverse progress made in tackling vaccine-preventable diseases.
•  In 2019, WHO listed “vaccine hesitancy” as among the top 10 threats to global health.

The vaccination drive

• The government must investigate and publicise the reasons for vaccine hesitancy.
• The vaccination programme is a powerful weapon in combating the Covid-19 pandemic, but it requires people to volunteer, thus it is very important to create a sense of assurance among the people.
• The example of Tamil Nadu is striking, a state with a relatively higher percentage of health literates, and relatively well-equipped with health infrastructure, managed to have only over 16% of its targeted coverage on the day of the launch and astonishingly, the second day of vaccination witnessed an even lower turnout.

Clinical trials data

• The SII because of its agreement with AstraZeneca has furnished data from a phase-3 trial in the U.K. and Brazil, but the data regarding the vaccination impact on 1,600 volunteers from India have not yet been made public.
• All of the leading vaccine candidates — Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca, made public at least partial results of the vaccine’s abilities in their own populations before these were given a formal clearance by the respective regulators.
• Bharat Biotech, which is conducting such a phase-3 trial in India, has not so far submitted similar data as it has not been able to complete recruiting the required number of volunteers.
• The Indian data furnished by the companies only certify the vaccine’s safety and it’s evoking some immune response. However, the experiences from the pandemic suggest that the therapies and interventions (for example, the convalescent plasma therapy) the antivirals that work well under idealised lab conditions do not always yield the same results in real-world hospital conditions.

Not admissible to certain sections

• The Bharath Biotech, just on the heels of securing approval for Covaxin under ‘restricted emergency use’ conditions, has formally informed through its website, that the vaccine is inadvisable in those with a history of allergies, fever and bleeding disorders.
• Those on medication or blood thinners and whose immunity has been compromised have also been advised against taking the vaccine, a similar recommendation is made advising not to administer the vaccine to pregnant or lactating women.
• Covishield, developed by the Serum Institute of India, has issued a similar set of restrictions to prospective recipients.
• The Drug Controller General of India approved Covishield on the back of preliminary efficacy data from phase 3 clinical trials and bridging trials in India, supplied by its manufacturer, Serum Institute of India.
•  However, at the time of approval, Bharat Biotech didn’t provide efficacy data from phase 3 trials because phase 3 trials were yet to begin in full swing.

Low volunteering

• Covaxin has been rolled out with insufficient evidence of its efficacy, or whether it is actually protective. The vaccines have been so far made available to health-care and sanitation workers and other frontline staff, who do not have a choice in the vaccine being administered but have the choice over getting vaccinated or not.
• The Union Health Ministry data suggest nine states have rates of over 70%, and three States, less than 40%. More than half the States lie in between.
• The vaccination drive is still in a nascent stage, and the government is hoping that in the next few days the pace will pick up.
• However, the government has not clarified the reason for a low turnout. The low turnout has puzzled the government, despite the Health Ministry officials underlining that adverse events following vaccination have been negligibly low, and backing the safety of the product.
• There have been reports of hospitals resorting to putting pressure on senior doctors to volunteer to build confidence and officials in the highest government offices are of the view that choosing not to get vaccinated tantamounts to dereliction “in duty”. The adoption trend is unsurprising.

Conclusion

• There is a difference between a vaccine being ‘safe’ and ‘efficacious’. A general dip in fresh cases as well as the knowledge that an array of vaccines will be available in the months ahead further contribute to the temporary ‘hesitancy’ pervading hospitals now.
• Vaccine hesitancy has to be addressed by government and health policymakers by a combination of educating the general public and implementing policies that reduce the public health risks associated with vaccine hesitancy.
• The government to inspire confidence will have to undertake stringent monitoring, reporting and be forthright with the challenges it is facing. It will also require the centre and the states to coordinate well keeping aside the political differences.

 

Q1. Consider the following statements with respect to International Labour Organization:

Q2. “Sanaa” recently in news is located in:

Q3. Which of the following is correct with respect to Secured Overnight 
Financing Rate (SOFR)? 

Q4. Which of the following are classified under the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal 
Groups (PVTG)?

I. UPSC Mains Practice Questions

1. The Sustainable Development Goal 7 calls for universal access to sustainable energy by 2030. Discuss the steps taken by India to achieve universal electrification. (150 words,10 marks).[GS-3, Energy]
2. “Public confidence in the vaccines is crucial for a vaccination campaign to succeed.” In the light of the above statement, explain the vaccine hesitancy witnessed currently in the Covid-19 vaccination drive. (10 marks,150 words)[GS-2, Health]