Can’t dilute federal system

Can’t dilute federal system
This is with reference to ‘Non-Cong CMs close ranks, take Centre head on’ (April 17). The Centre-state spat on matters like the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC) where the Centre seemingly tends to encroach upon the authority of the states, must make the Congress wiser and realise that it lacks the art to manage a federal system. In a situation where many states are ruled by a party/alliance other than that ruling at the Centre, taking unilateral decisions on crucial issues without consulting the states is a perfect recipe for trouble. Instead of a discussion after the decision, we need decisions after discussions. The Congress has to come out of the mindset of the era when it ruled the Centre as well as almost all states which didn’t oppose the Centre on any issue. Now even its allies stand up against many of its decisions.
—MC Joshi, Lucknow

II
The coming together of non-UPA ministers at the recent meeting of chief ministers to discuss security and the NCTC will have serious repercussions. In their attempt to push for federalism and respect for state responsibility, their arguments are getting ridiculous. Jayalalitha quotes cultural, social, communal and economic differences while arguing against uniform policing. We are talking about terrorism here, not cultural or social issues! When it comes to terrorist attacks, what India lacks is a coordinated and immediate response which the NCTC will attempt to set into place. The opposition is short-sighted in their resistance to this move — they cry to the Centre for assistance when the situation gets too hot to handle, and then they blame the Centre when assistance is not prompt. They cannot assert their federalism at the cost of national security.
—Suren Abreu, Andheri (East)

III
Non-Congress chief ministers closing ranks sends strong signals to the UPA government that it cannot take arbitrary decisions without consulting the states.  The non-Congress state governments across the country are a strong contingent and have their say in policy matters.  The move by the Union government is obviously to scuttle the powers state governments enjoyed hitherto, and thus a veiled attempt to dilute the federal nature of the Constitution has hit a roadblock. The intrusive policies of the UPA government have obviously drawn flak with the non-Congress chief ministers expressing discontent. To maintain the Centre-state relationship, it’s time the Union government follows the policy of consensus.
—HP Murali, Bangalore

VIP security
Shah Rukh Khan was detained by the immigration authority at a small airport just north of New York City.  He is not the only Indian with a Muslim name to be stopped at an American airport. Why did our politicians not speak up in support of those other Indians? There was absolutely nothing wrong in holding the Bollywood star back due to security concerns. Indians can’t expect the entire world to know who Khan is because he is just an ordinary Indian to others. The immigration officer at the airport was only performing his duty. I agree that most of the time, security measures are troublesome, cause discomfort and can lead to harassment even in India. However, what is unfortunate is the fact that if a VIP feels harassed by these security checks, it becomes news. No one reacts when the common man is humiliated in the name of security even in his own country. Then it remains a ‘normal’ security procedure.
—M Kumar, via email

Chopper requirements
A chopper in the hands of Mumbai police will be useful only if: 1) it is not commandeered to ferry our VIPs (Very Impudent Pests); 2) servicing facilities and spares are available; 3) a special department with trained personnel is established; 4) an inter-departmental chain of command is worked out between the police, fire department, municipality, etc.; 5) sufficient funds are guaranteed for all of this, plus fuel. It was for such reasons that our CP had earlier rejected this proposal.
—Phiroze B Javeri, via email

What’s their beef?
It is surprising that people draw on cultural and traditional beliefs to support their misconceived opposition to beef eating when India has always had a history of beef eating throughout the ages. Opposition to beef eating is drummed up by Hindutvadis and mainly those living in the cow belt who do not want historical facts to which show beef eating was prevalent in India be published. They went out of their way to ban a Delhi University professor’s book Holy Cow — A History of Beef Eating in India written by a Brahmin just because what was written therein was inconvenient for their brand of Hinduism. Those who want to eat beef should be allowed to do so just as much as those who don’t want to eat it should not be allowed to ban it.
—SLJ Gallyot, via email

II
This is with reference to the Beef Festival at Osmania University in Hyderabad. Beef festivals are not celebrated even in the West or in Gulf countries where it is common to eat beef. This is a clear indication that some elements are intentionally trying to provoke a riot in Hyderabad. It is clear the Congress government has remained a mere spectator to these incidents for fear of losing Muslim votes in Andhra Pradesh.
—MV Nahusharaj, Bangalore

The editor welcomes your views and feedback: inbox@dnaindia.net