Intellectual bankruptcy in Anti-UID arguments

Enlightened debates on topics of public interest are an essential part of any vibrant democracy. We are seeing such debates on a variety of topics - now, more than ever.

However, there is a disturbing tendency evolving. When shouting matches and dramatic rhetoric dominate, most intellectuals quietly withdraw. Clearly, when two intelligent people can argue any topic ad infinitum, how many people are willing to argue until exhaustion? 

Yet, this is only one-half of the problem. Most reasonable opponents of UID are content to let others win their battle for them.These others include those who don't fully understand the issues at hand; those with vested interests and those with narrow political agendas. That, is a serious problem (that intellectuals, even if passively, are siding with the others).

Two reasonable anti-UID arguments I've heard so far are:

• Why can't NPR do the enrolments in one step? Why two separate projects?
• Is Aadhaar cost-effective for what it is setting out to do?

Just because there is a reasonable argument to be had, it doesn't mean that it is automatically right. It is important to tone down the rhetoric. To climb down from positions; to approach the problem(s) with open minds; and to engage in that debate. To accept a let us agree to disagree approach. As opposed to an approach that says I will not rest until you and your opinion are ground to dust. The former permits freedom of expression and encourages diverse opinions to emerge. The latter, doesn't.

Are you taking the latter route? Do you realize that if you sacrifice reason to be extinguished at the altar of win vs lose, then the alarmists win. It will be your turn next. 

If you are one such person, then I ask that while you state your opposition to the UID project, you also denounce the illogic and rhetoric. Not implicitly promote it - just so that you can win.

My friends and I started the ThinkUID website, to express our views. To express support to the UID project, based on our years of thinking and knowledge gathered in relevant areas. To rebut some of the rhetoric we hear. To bring reason to the fore. If your opinions differ, we are fine with that. Not to fight until only person is left standing.

This clarity is important to us. Especially as we are going to step up our campaign to support UID. To engage more people whose opinions differ from ours. With respect, not disdain.

Promo: Please visit ThinkUID - for useful articles, a mythbuster game and news on UID.

Why it is not NPR vs UID

First. During the past week, we have had a lot of questions and a lot more messages of support at the thinkuid.org web site. My big Thank You to all those interested enough to participate, support or argue with us. It shows that you care.

---

[edit 4-Feb: Making some corrections, thanks to suraiya95's point that NPR is not a statistical exercise. So I will cross out the deletions & put additions in purple. I will distinguish between Census (the statistical exercise) and NPR (the new project by the Census dept). 
Net effect of these corrections: Either because I am pig-headed or perhaps my reasoning stands yet, the essence of my post remains. I leave it for you, the reader, to decide.]

Now for the tough part. Tough because NPR the Census is an otherwise good example of a huge project, well-executed. It is also tough because of my own first-hand experiences that color my views despite well-meaning admonition by a Director-Census once: "Don't let your personal experiences be the sole basis to pre-judge our work, Sastry".

I'll try to keep those in mind. This is going to be long, so grab that coffee, switch off that phone and make yourself comfortable. :)

NPR The Census is a great project, no doubt.
Those who criticize the NPR project Census Dept casually, can only do so when they don't understand the goals, the vast scope and the extraordinary amount of effort that goes into such a gigantic exercise. No doubt, it is a great project - created to count the population of India and various demographic profiles of the population, to better understand our nation as a whole. There in lies the problem.

It has been, and still is well-suited to be only a statistical exercise. The processes and the error-tolerances are perhaps within acceptable bounds, statistically speaking. But they are not good enough when it comes to matters that need every individual to be more than a statistic. Not acceptable when one or two, but a staggeringly large number of people are casually tossed aside as a mere statistical anomalies. Oh please don't quote percentages. Please be one-of-those anomalies and tell me.

Pardon me for being a skeptic. Perhaps I don't exist.

Since 1986 I've been trying to get on to the census and the electoral rolls. Without using bribes and calling favors of people I know, I have tried every possible avenue that I came across including online campaigns such as Jago Re. Stood in queues, wrote letters, stood against walls for photographs - all in vain. The only thing I did not do is to become a fanatic, chasing them day and night. Incidentally, the same government lets me be an income-tax payer (pan card), a vehicle-regn-fee-payer, a home-registration-fee-payer - but nothing where it doesn't want money from me. No ration card. No voter id card. Not on census. If this is my fate, what do you think is the plight of the poor ID-less?

I have no better result from the UID project either (waiting since June 2011; many attempts at follow-up and escalation silently rebuffed). So I won't defend UID on this count.

Now for the other points I've been hearing frequently.

#1. UID & NPR are double the effort, double the cost. Hard to argue, except when you consider that enumeration is very different from enrollment. In order to achieve coverage, even in enumeration you need multiple visits. Even more so, with enrollment.

I don't know about elsewhere, but in Haryana, we pay the operators only upon successful de-duplication -- effectively curtailing artificial enrollment inflation; and keeping costs within reason. Good enough, to curtail a majority of the costs, I think.

Overall, there is some credence to this argument; though it is not 100% duplication as it is criticized to be. Theoretically, this could've been avoided; but in practice I am not so sure. I see the current compromise as a vast improvement over the pre-compromise situation.

#2. UID & NPR cause double the pain to the citizens. Yes it is avoidable. Given that UID has set a scorching pace and high standards of quality of execution, would the NPR set aside its pride and UID do a job it is designed to do? If only prejudices are set aside one might see as a neutral party would. Instead of re-defining a statistical exercise as a deterministic one, NPR might embrace logic and piggy-ride on UID (permanent enrollment centers among other ideas).

This would strengthen the hands of "UID is not really optional" logic of some opponents, but it is still a workable method. It would actually recognize that the NPR's work would never really be 100% done -- it would correctly be designed as an ongoing exercise. So is UID work, of course.

Bottomline: Citizens are definitely inconvenienced by the government's pig-headedness; but to blame the UIDAI alone on this, is nothing but hypocrisy.

#3. NPR is more secure! Of all the tall claims, this is the most laughable. Here again, a personal example might help illustrate. I am sure a vast majority of passport holders will also agree with this.

Ironically for all the famed MHA's well-suitedness on security, it was a good samaritan Sri Lankan national in Bangalore who held me by hand, took me directly into the police commissioner's office, introduced me and got my police verification done in a few minutes. Every other transaction related to my passport (required police verification twice) since then was done by touts without my presence anywhere on the scene. The police officer once came home 3 months after the passport did - to ask for money for verification. 

Yes, I know, passport is MEA's area; but what about the police? How do the NPR proponents expect much better security from other apathetic government employees? These are the same employees who routinely ask that 30+ year-olds be enrolled as eligible for old-age pensions; and intimidate any private sector employee who dared ask questions during biometric enrolments of the said pensions. The same employees who, in panic, declared "dead" even those pensioners with bank accounts (that were opened with biometric enrollment, incidentally) - when they were asked to remove duplicates. Mild protests by NIC officers and yours truly were set aside under the "due process and empowerment" garb.

No, it doesn't inspire any confidence -- unless you are a statistician; in which case, you can find some solace in that most out-of-process (paid-for or otherwise) verifications are also genuine anyway. For all others, the question remains, "how many illegal immigrants got through this allegedly watertight security"? How many genuine citizens are left out not because of security, but because of apathy?

Someone told me about audit trails being a strong point of NPR. And UID isn't? Audit trails mean something when a) the original job hasn't been routinely botched up; b) when people have mechanisms to complain and they use it; and finally c) someone actually looks at those trails and does something about them. All the govt officers I have seen are content to write file notes and DO letters - instead of doing something, anything about security. Including in the UID project. So here is one more area where I can't be accused of bias.

[edit @4-Feb: There is some credence to the idea of community verification apparently being used in NPR. Admittedly, it is a strong method, esp., in rural India - when collecting biographic data. But it leaves the door open for exploitation of the ID-less by the very same power-centers who excommunicate people or order honor killings. This could still be made to work: e.g., biometrics enrollment "anywhere" guarantees identity; other processes for dispute resolution on biographic data.]

Bottomline: Security arguments are lame, IMHO. If you are still worried about fake UID enrollments, please read my blog post Consequences of a fake UID

#4. Two outstanding issues with NPR - that I cannot comment on with the same feeling and authority as the above.

• How is citizenship determined (inclusions and exclusions) in the light of all this? I am yet to finish reading all the relevant documents; as yet I am unconvinced. (yes, as suraiya95 pointed out, the citizenship issue is no longer central to UID vs NPR debates - though not everyone has left it behind just yet)
• What exactly is the meaning of "NPR is mandatory"? It is mandatory for all citizens to enroll? Or mandatory for Census Dept to enroll all citizens? What happens if either party defaults? No clear answers yet; searching for them.

A note of balance before closing:

• In all the above, please note that I did not rate UID as higher than NPR in anything other than the scorching pace and high standards of execution. The idea is not to vilify one in favor of the other; rather to put things in perspective.
• In all my years in working with the government, I have had a chance to work with some very diligent govt officers - including some exemplary police officers and a few passionate regular employees. Most of them suffer silently.

Done correctly, pro-NPR and pro-UID proponents (me included) should bury their hatchets (and egos) and get down to doing a good job. There are people out there with outlandish arguments to derail both sides. Squabbling on this topic will get us nowhere.

This, that and uncertainty

Quick recap of recent events.

1. On 26th Jan, we launched ThinkUID - a website dedicated to spreading awareness on the Aadhaar (UID) project.
   It is not a company / trust / society or any such thing. Just a web site. An initiative by four of us friends - Raj Mashruwala, Raju Rajagopal, Tushar Vashisht and I. As a first step, we sent emails to our friends and are seeing good initial response. Please send us your good wishes.
   If you haven't already, please register your support (on the site or on facebook or twitter).
   It won't take much effort, I promise.
2. Yesterday (27th Jan), a compromise between UID and NPR was announced by the cabinet. Seeing the initial reports, I am happy that we made some progress. A brief summary of this is in our news report.
   Some are are asking for an even better solution, but I think this is no small progress in itself.

Flip page. 

Role of uncertainty in our lives.

We may not admit it, but we abhor uncertainty. We go to any lengths to remove doubts from our thoughts. Scratch that. We actually take the shortest path to certainty (avoid any hard work) - willingly embracing illogic on the way. Innovate rationalizations. Fiercely argue with external opposition and mercilessly put down small voices in our minds.

We come to conclusions based on skimming of news reports. The good general is bad. Or not. 

Either way, each of us have our certainty that exists almost harmoniously with the next person's opposite certainty.

We listen to experts of our choice and happily accept their pronouncements. Even if we labelled them experts based on one utterance somewhere because they sound so.... convincing? Aadhaar data can be stolen by foreign agents. Or not.

We even believe our politicians. FDI is good for our farmers. Or not.

We take known information and extend the logic into the unknown. Pakistan is certainly behind this event or that. Wait, there is no "Or not" here. We love this certainty. It is easy to hate someone whose face you haven't ever seen.

We absolutely must know how we came into being and how the universe works. So we embrace god. Not enough. Our god is the original / most powerful / one-and-only / most tolerant. All others, not so much.

With that last para, I probably shot myself in my foot. Or not. 

Consequences of a fake UID

It is downright silly to even try denying the damage caused by the news reports about faking information to get a UID. IMHO, this fiasco would've happened despite any number of precautions. But that's besides the point. So, is all lost? 

It is important to understand the consequences clearly, before freaking out.

Take the case of fake doctor's certificate used to enroll for UID. What happens next? 

The person may receive a UID (Aadhaar number). Remember, he has only enrolled. If he has already enrolled earlier - then he will not get a second Aadhaar number. Then the fake document is a non-issue.

Let us say this is the first time he enrolled, so he gets his Aadhaar number. What he really got, is an incorrect ID, not a fake ID. It still represents him and him-only. Since he can never get another Aadhaar number with his real name, he must live his life as the fake person.
OR, choose to go back to the government, give his real papers and get the records corrected. This has to happen sooner than later - at least to avoid explaining life-long, why his wife's husband's name is different from his. 

Meanwhile what can he use this ID for? To get his rations? To get his NREGA wages? In each of these cases, the eligibility for the scheme is determined by the ID, as well as the low-income. After similar eligibility faking, he can get the benefits. How big a problem is it?

The benefits have (however wrongly) gone to a real person. You cannot create 100s of ghost ration cards, ghost pensioners or ghost govt employees sucking out your tax money. That brings us to how the UID is really different 

• The number is given to a real person. To only one person. And that person can have no other number. 
• Can this be said about any of our other IDs and ID cards? 

Now, whoever understands that will understand the true potential of the UID. 

To know more,

• please come visit our facebook page, www.facebook.com/SupportUID
• -or- follow @supportuid on twitter. Follow @supportuid , 
• -or- begin a conversation with us on our facebook page. 

One last word to say about the Headlines Today report: It begins with...

"... was supposed to be the most secure identity card for Indian citizens."

Nope. Not "secure identity". Not just for "citizens". The Aadhar number was meant to be a (in my words) unique, reliable, widely-accepted and easily verifiable identity for all residents. Security is still possible. Residents to Citizens mapping is also possible. For that, the Home Ministry must play ball.

Support UID: Good developments

First things first -- before I go into other details:

Now more than ever, we  must continue to speak up in support of UID. Here are a few things you could try.

• On twitter: Follow @supportuid  
• On facebook (like us): www.facebook.com/SupportUID
• Dial this number (courtesy ZipDial): 080 300 500 91
• After one ring you will be auto-disconnected and will receive a thank you SMS - unless you've already called from that number before or you can't receive an SMS.
• Tweet your support: Tweet #supportuid
• Retweet! (our tweets from @supportuid)
• Post about these links on your facebook page, email friends and in general, spread the good word.
• A web site with a lot of well researched articles and news links is coming soon.. I will update this page as soon as it is ready. So come back here in a day or two.

Now for the brass tacks...

There has been a lot of activity on the UID front these last two weeks. Quite (pleasantly) surprisingly for me and my fellow supporters, a lot of people have begun speaking up. So the tide has clearly begun the turn - though this story isn't over yet. Not by a far shot.

On the flip side, in most places enrollments have come to a standstill (or slowed down) -- due to two major reasons

• UIDAI laying down stringent verification requirements of proof documents (this is my interpretation; official verbage is a bit different)
• UIDAI laying down enrollment quotas for most registrars to ensure that the overall enrollments won't overshoot their targets (when was the last time "overshooting targets" happened in a government project?)

Owing to the lack of official pronouncements, most people in the governments are still groping for direction and are on the verge of giving up hope / declaring their support to the anticipated-winner.

Let us see what we can take-away from this mixed bag environment.

So the good parts are...

1. Focus has shifted to the core issues (instead of turfs and personalities). This is definitely good.
2. A committee has been formed to converge the efforts of NPR and UID projects. Better than good! :)
3. UIDAI has (finally!) given out some long-awaited information on their biometric success/failure rates and some more data to help their own cause.

What could go wrong?

1. In the name of face-saving, we might end up with illogical compromises. e.g., let NPR re-enroll everybody in a "more secure" (ouch!) way.
2. There hasn't been much noise from the civic society opponents (or wasn't I listening?). That may not be a good sign. We need a healthy dialog (not superficial rhetoric and exhortations driven by fear, of course) on important issues for a vibrant democracy. I am hoping we will return to talk about the core issues. Personally I would've preferred to have a convincing closure on the issues instead of "silencing the critics".

We can we do?

1. Not celebrate too early. If you haven't already done it, please do at least one of the things I've posted at the beginning of this post.
2. You have questions or doubts? Don't let them be... ask questions, clarify matters, take a stand (even if is against UID). Informed consent is what we want in a democracy. Not mindless mob-movements.
3. Encourage others to participate... Yes... As a responsible person, you have already taken a few minutes of your valuable time to read my post. Spend one more minute by spreading the word.

THANK YOU. :)

Support UID: Path to Progress

This last week, I've been talking to friends, colleagues and others - trying to understand what they think about the Aadhaar (UID) Project. Here is what I found.

1. No two people think of UID the same way. 
All have heard some good things and some bad. No one has the time or patience to go into detail. So they are ready to form a summary impression based on how reliable they think the sources are.


2. Most people are apprehensive about UID.
Distrust of the government in general, as well as the widespread negative publicity seems to have played a role here.

3. Nearly all of them are willing to revise their opinion.
Even those who are emphatic in denouncing the UID are willing to reconsider when I tell them that I support the UID Project. But now they are a bit unsure of whom to believe... apparently reliable anti-UID spokespersons, or apparently reliable yours-truly?

This gives me hope. Here is why.

Where there is dark, throwing light usually gives good results. Once we recognize that even educated folks haven't quite understood all aspects of the project, we have an actionable. Educate. Explain. Clarify. As people understand, the hitherto irrational fear of the unknown gives way to well-founded objections. Not surprisingly, such objections can only result in progress.

Credibility is apparently a key problem. While all opponents sound credible; the only defense seems to come from largely untrusted government folks. Here again is an actionable. Bring credible supporters to the fore.

Most of the arguments have lacked real depth. Accusers have apparently gone largely unchallenged on critical assumptions. Fortunately, in-depth analyses and debates can address this. Here again is an actionable that is not insurmountable. The only challenge is to keep the debates grounded on reason - not rhetoric.

I have been working long-enough in the eGovernance area to know how difficult it is to conceptualize and execute a good project. I've been outspoken enough (including in these blogs) for people to know that my views are unaffected by official positions and extraneous considerations. I am unwilling to give up on a golden opportunity to do something good for the country, in the form of the UID Project.

A few friends and I have decided to come together and work on these action items. Spread more awareness. Put our reputations at stake. Engage in real debates.

Come talk to us. Engage in a dialog with us (by commenting here and by email, to begin with). If we can address your concerns, just express your support. It won't cost you anything. But just by participating, you can make a huge difference for our country - even if you don't agree with us.

Support UID: Why it is not a monster

"Sleep quickly, or the UID monster will come and get you!".

Get a hold of yourselves, people.

Before letting our imagination take hold of our reality, let us ask ourselves: How can a project conceived to be pro-poor turn into a nightmarish-monster-that-will-get-you-so-run-away-now? I'll examine a few possibilities here and perhaps add more posts if I hear new possibilities.

1. "Order a pizza" scenario (privacy concerns): 

• You call to order a pizza... they know everything about you and your mother-in-law... and your nano.. so you faint). A popular dramatization quoted in many places. Search for Usha Ramanathan's article on "A Unique Identity Bill" if you haven't read this yet. 

Impressive piece of imagination. But poor in a fundamental detail. They neither need UID nor your biometrics for that. Your bank and your credit card company already knows more about you than all this. If they choose to, your mobile service providers track you 10-times better than this. A pity, nobody warned you before you got that piece of plastic or that new connection.

Many state governments are already working on integrating all the databases they have in some manner or the other. They don't really need UID or your biometrics for this. Your telephone number, email address, PAN#, or-anything-else-at-all, will do. Why they DO NEED UID is to avoid the real scare... that of mixing up your wife's info with someone's 6-yr old kiddo and causing a real mess.

Now let us reimagine that pizza scenario. 'nuff said.

2. Can lack of adequate privacy laws turn the UID Project a monster?

First off the IT Act has already been strengthened in this regard. I am not a lawyer but it is still part of my professional reading. Does the UID Project seek any exceptions from this or any other acts with regard to privacy? Quite the opposite, I think.

As I have already said elsewhere, they are miles ahead in this area than any other government -- or private (yes, including your credit card and mobile company) organizations. 

Finally, the project design naturally and effectively hinders any sort of exploitation due to "intentions gone awry" logic. The UID database has identity info -- but nothing of the benefits and transactions being carried out. They are all handled separately and by different agencies. We need a "mass collusion" theory to crack that one. 

3. Surveillance potential due to UID as a "universal and ubiquitous tag"?

Since the "let us go back to the caves then..." line as already been tried before, I will try a tad more serious approach. 

Even without this tag, there are many other tags by surveillance will be possible (only slightly more inconvenient) and is being done as we speak. e.g., Every mobile company gives the police the ability to tap into any conversation they want to; see where they calls are originating from and landing at, as well as listen in! Surprised? Unlike in the movies, they don't need 50-something seconds of conversation to complete a trace. It is done before the phone even rings and not a second of conversation needs to be missed. Many of the readers will also remember the Blackberry brouhaha (conditions for entry into India) in this context.

In case you missed the point, your mobile phone number is a voluntarily adopted near-universal and ubiquitous tag and it is being used for surveillance. The only reasonable solution is to ensure that the law makers and the police don't misuse it. Not to ban phones and go back to smoke-signals. Same goes for UID.

Bottomline: It is not the UID Project that turns everything into monsters. All it is doing is to give a reliable and convenient way for people to prove their identity. The attendant evils if any are already present in our system. We need to address those... not banish the UID project. That won't solve anything.

Look forward to hearing more in support of UID project. Keep it up folks.

Time to wake up UID supporters

It is disheartening to see many of our leaders criticize the UID Project -- esp., on the grounds that have been reported so far. Misunderstanding of the scope and benefits of the project? Perhaps yes. Conflicting agendas? Perhaps a bigger yes.

What is even more surprising is that nearly no voices are being heard for UID. Are our leaders afraid of betting on a losing horse? What happened to enlightened self-interest, objectivity and national interest? Have we gone intellectually bankrupt, that populism and fears of vocal but ill-advised opposition will still our voices?

I have been a critic myself on some specific issues but I remain an ardent supporter of the concept, the thought-leadership behind it and most of the implementation choices that have been made.


1. Is NPR better than UID Project? 
No. Having seen both from close-quarters, I think of NPR's efforts as a poor copy-cat exercise and a one-upmanship game gone out of control.

Having given in to accommodate multi-stakeholder views, our leaders have a minimal decency requirement of not duplicating effort; that of not foolishly rejecting all prior Aadhaar enrollments.

2. Is Citizenship vs Resident a big deal?
Perhaps it is, for many. But the resident focus is consistent with the vision of Aadhar right from the beginning. I believe it is far more inclusive, humanitarian and enlightened to go after socio-economic upliftment, instead of citizenship.

3. Is UID ignoring homeland security?
No. It simply started with a different (and far better, IMHO) objective. It is perfectly possible to build homeland security on top of the UIDAI effort, with a relatively small "additional effort". There is absolutely no justification to scrap one and start the other from scratch.

4. Is UID Project expensive?
Yes, it is. The biometric device vendors have probably grown much richer since the project started. However, if anyone has *integrity* questions, let them come forth and say it openly. If not, treat it as the price you pay when you want to be the leader.

5. Other country exercises have failed.
So what? Are we afraid we can't do better? Can't we analyze why they didn't, and avoid those pitfalls? Or are we forever going to be mired in our inferiority complex? Never before have I seen such self-defeating reverse-racism!!

6. Is it invasive? Is people's privacy at risk?
Perhaps the people who say this never got to see how government databases are maintained currently. The UID project is much, much better designed for privacy and data security than any other I have seen so far. I think that no other projects including the NPR will come close to this any time soon.

All such objections are hypothetical, argumentative and superficial in nature.

7. Unreliable and untested technology
Relatively speaking, yes. Please see #4 and #5 above, if you really want to be objective.

Let me pause here. I hope that other sane voices will come forth and say the right thing.


Let us not allow rhetoric and narrow personal political gains derail something this important.

Dear Resident :: We are almost sorry!

Dear Resident::

We heard that you now have an Aadhar number and would like to obtain a Ration Card (or Driving License or Old-age Pension or...).

The last time we checked, you enrolled for Aadhar, through some other registrar. Not with us. That poses a few problems for us. You see, though we don't expect you to understand all this (especially the words in bold), we'll tell you anyway.

When you enrolled, you gave your biometrics to the UIDAI. They have sworn to never reveal any of that to anyone else - even if there are a dozen good reasons to. Yup, they take their promises seriously.

However, our Ration Card (or Driving License or Old-age Pension or...) needs to record your biometrics (yup, that bad word again... almost sorry!) on the Smart Card (okay, please don't ask what's so smart about it, especially in this scenario) we want to give you.

What? You want to skip the smarty-pants card and go directly to the gimme-those-rations (or Driving License or Pension money or ...) part? Too bad, we can't do that. That's because our Home Minister gave a bhashan (god bless the soul who advised him on this) in some-big-place (okay, if you know where's the parliament, that's the place) that he will replace your paper ration cards with those thingamajigs (right, those smarty-pants cards, you go it!). Our senior bureaucrats (um... those saab log) would rather follow his speech faithfully than point out the obvious improvements and make him look bad.

Now, we know of a way or two to have our NIC team (okay, the guys who do complicated things on those comPOOters) fix this problem, but they won't do it either. They give us some explanation that even we can't understand (but we can't admit it because we want to look smart).

So you now have a choice.

1. Come fill our forms (yea ours, not the other registrar's), stand in those queues, and give us your biometrics once again. But wait, our current contract with the EA (who?) does not pay them for duplicate enrollments - so they don't want to do it. May be this time, you should not mention it to them that you already have an Aadhar number so that they will take your biometrics? Umm.. we hit a snag there... 'cuz those smart UIDAI folks have made it a punishable offense (it means they can lock you up or do bad things to you or summat like that) if you try that trick..... so let us see, we need to come up with another way.

2. Forget about the ration card (or whatever), go home and curse all of us roundly. It is not healthy to bottle up your feelings, so go right ahead!

Under normal circumstances, we would be sorry; but hey, we are the government - so we are only almost sorry. Don't worry though. We think that Aadhar is such a good idea, so we are planning to make it mandatory!! That won't solve your problems, but that's okay! Coming to think of it, we are not like the ministers and MLAs whom you can hold accountable at least once in 5 years!!  As public servants, our jobs are guaranteed irrespective of how we treat you; our promotions and increments don't have much to do with how hard we don't work. Life is good.

Cheers,

Your friendly public servant.

Note:
Okay, the humor is only to make the problem and the discussion interesting. I am working with various teams to find a way to fix this. Meanwhile, there is still some time to figure out alternatives... hence this. You have an idea? Do let me know. UIDAI's otherwise good multi-registrar idea resulted in this mess which they honestly seem to think is a state's own mess to clean up (it would all be fine if the registrar's all access the CIDR and don't maintain their own databases).


Not much humor in that last para ("Life is good") though. It is an interesting point though entirely unrelated to the main body of the post.

Dear Resident :: Where are you?

I am a major supporter of the Aadhar project(s) in India. This, despite harboring some misgivings on where it is leading us. Instead of airing vague suspicions and grand conspiracy theories let me see if I can initiate open discussion on some specific points. The relevance of these points is likely to change quickly (e.g., if UIDAI or someone else comes up with an answer or a solution). 

As my objective is to cover ground not adequately covered elsewhere, readers will require some basic understanding of the UIDAI activities and the Aadhar project.

Here are some examples of what I come across - ranging from elementary to esoteric:

>> It will make our life so much easier! Why don't they make it mandatory? They should also collect income details and bank account particulars!

>> I am sure the people of UIDAI have debated the required data fields thoroughly before deciding on the KYR data. So why should we (the state) collect additional data (KYR+)? If they, in their wisdom, thought KYR is sufficient, we should not question them.

>> I don't think we should depend on Aadhar UID. We should have our own "State UID" which will be designed to meet state needs - an intelligent alpha-numeric id that will be easy to remember and use by the citizens.

>> It should be easy enough. We simply add a UID field in our database and import all UID data from the central government. I don't see any problem.

What makes life difficult is that those who come up with such interesting points are mostly unwilling or unable to spend the time necessary to understand the answers. However, it is not my intention to use this as a medium to give those answers (at least not in this post). 

Rather, I would like to raise one of my (several) own questions. The idea is not to question and oppose... rather, to simply provoke thought and seek solutions (not just answers, thank you very much) from the wise.

My question for today is: "Dear Resident :: Where are you?". Let me explain. 

Let me pretend to be a state government attempting to deliver some services to a resident. This resident has already obtained an Aadhar number. Let us say that the state has already notified Aadhar number as a valid basis for proof of identity and address. Further, the state has integrated a variety of state eGovernance applications to the CIDR for Aadhar-based authentication.

Now, the first - happy scenario: Resident comes to a service counter, gives his Aadhar number and address; this is verified against the CIDR, found to be true; service is delivered without any hassles, everyone goes home happy.

Now the second - doubtful scenario: Government needs to reach out to the resident.

e.g., #1: to inform about change of status of a beneficiary program ("You are now eligible for a higher pension. Please visit your local DSWO office to complete the formalities"); 

e.g., #2: to seek additional information from the resident as a part of a service delivery; ("We have found that some of the information you have provided may be outdated. Please visit our offices to provide recent information"). 

In an enlightened G2C era, many such interactions are possible. In each case, the state government cannot reach out to the resident because of either of these:

• the state government selected not to duplicate the contents of the CIDR; so the resident's address is with CIDR, not with the state government. 
• the state government does maintain the resident's address separately, but the resident had, for any number of reasons, enrolled in a different state - so the authentic data never reached the state government.
• the state government did collect the address from the resident, but it is outdated; the resident did update the CIDR with a new address; but didn't separately notify the state government. So the letters from the state government to the resident aren't being delivered.

Let me think of a few potential answers/solutions:

>> "UIDAI policy does not allow sharing of such data. CIDR can only answer yes/no to an authentication query."

True. So the state government needs to find a solution by itself; not depend on UIDAI for this then?

>> "UIDAI does allow registrars to retain their registration data; so they can maintain their own resident database."

True. But what happens to data that is updated (e.g., address change)? Can we safely assume that the preferred process of update would be directly to the CIDR, leaving the state resident databases in the lurch?

>> "Registrar's are free to share their information with each other. So data about residents registered in other states / other registrars can be obtained by each state"

True. But is it really feasible for each registrar to enter into agreements with every other registrar in the country? At last check there are 73 registrars/partners. 

Then again, what about data that is updated directly to CIDR?

One last thing before signing off for now: Today's question applies to every registrar - not just state governments. 

Note:

I am involved in some way, in the Aadhar Project implementation in the State of Haryana. This is not an attempt to subvert / bypass normal communication channels between the state & UIDAI. I believe that some questions deserve educated discussion beyond closed doors. Hence this.

Easy Topic - Politics and Corruption

I am yet to meet someone who doesn't have a very strong opinion about "Politics and Corruption". That we absolutely must root out deep-seated corruption in our politics and in the government is something everybody agrees upon. Outpouring of self-righteous anger and integrity-bound-high-seat are common sights in such discussions.

While Anna (Hazare) doesn't need a lecture from me (especially me) on this topic - I submit that the popular treatment of the topic is superficial and misleading. To imply that our politicians and the government are the epitome of corruption and rooting it out must begin there - is to look at the tip of iceberg and steering our social Titanic right over it. Why?

Our politicians are not born and brought up outside the system - despite all the implications of Baba Ramdev's famed assertions about their wives and daughters. Every politician (corrupt or otherwise) had had a childhood, had (and still has) friends and grew up pretty much like others, within limits of statistical and wealth variations in our society. While they were growing up, their value systems were influenced by their parents, friends, teachers and the environment around them - just as it did all of us.

This is true for all those others (especially in the government) whom we accuse of unadulterated greed, opportunism and moral turpitude. So I ask myself: How is it that within the same system, we are able to produce innumerable number of morally upright, high-integrity people (counting all those - including me - who freely lecture on the ills of our system with copious prescriptions to anyone who will listen) and yet fail so spectacularly in checking corruption?

To explain this, I propose that the problem is not as localized as our newspapers and demagogues have us believe. It is deep-rooted, widespread and insidious; its tentacles are embedded in nearly all of us.

Just that some of us are more blatant than others. Most of us readily justify our minor transgressions with "Look, I can't change the system alone, can I? I had no choice!" or "I wasn't greedy... I wouldn't do it if it were not for my son's future!". Something like that.

Haven't any of us come across these:

• A driver pilfering petrol or fudging travel logs and diesel bills?
• A junior or a colleague submitting inflated travel expense statements?
• Someone whose medical bills and LTA bills are not entirely above-board?
• Bought a place in a queue or a berth in a train from a porter / TTC?

I need not say more. It is never "us". While we stand in our self-righteous glory, someone next to us is doing all that. On the rarest of the rare occasion that we are forced to do it, we never do it out of greed or other base motives. We are compelled, had no choice, and so on.. (insert your glib rationalization here). 

Don't get me wrong. We must root out corruption. No doubt about it. 

However, let us not deceive ourselves that it can be done by addressing the tip of the iceberg alone. In order to treat the whole iceberg, we must begin by coaching our children - at home, at the schools, in the play grounds, everywhere. Teachers need to take our "Moral Science" subject seriously in schools. Anna Hazares (and Sas3s too) of the world need to carry their voice into all walks of life - in the form of education and social awakening programs. 

Oh and I couldn't resist this one; pardon me for falling for sensationalism. Unless Nandan was misquoted, he is losing his touch... Here is a multi-part quote from his interview to Raj Chengappa, reported on the July 3rd. My interspersed comments are in italics. 

"Personally I feel that in the whole debate about corruption, passing a law will not stop anything." 

Yup.. I fully agree. 

"I believe if you systematically re-engineer the public-services - if food is distributed to all concerned on time, if money is delivered to bank accounts and you can keep track of it - then you will be able to clean up the system and the whole thing can be sorted out." .... now IMHO, this is misplaced optimism. Having tried a few eGov projects for reform, my experience has been that our people are unbelievably ingenious. Most service seekers, including the poor (surprised?) want corruption because it gives them the unfair advantage that they so badly want (and sometimes"need"). Service givers (read: Government) are only happy to oblige, by rapidly innovating around any re-engineered processes and IT systems. 

Back to my pet theory. While Aadhar-enabled services are necessary, they are not going to solve this particular problem as described by Nandan. They will surely get some benefits to targeted beneficiaries and plug some really big retail leaks. However, they will not have any impact on grossly wrong targeting systems, politically motivated largesses window-dressed as benefits programs, wholesale loopholes and such. 

I think that for a deeper, wider, longer-lasting impact, we need to take our social awakening ("activism" alone is an insufficient concept) programs into all walks of life ... especially the lives of our children. Better still, ask them to lead us on this crusade, before they learn too much of "let us be realistic" rationalizations from us.

Surely, there is more to this problem and the solution(s). Deeply linked, are concepts of population-growth, resource-starvation, food-insecurity and even deeper - sentience itself!! I hope to be able to write more on this in my later blogs.