"We have come to the end of the 54th meeting of the National Development Council. It has been a very fruitful day. I thank the Chief Ministers for their detailed observations on the strategies being adopted in the XI Plan for achieving inclusive growth. I have noticed that there is general agreement on the growth target as set out in the Plan document. I compliment the NDC for this unanimity of the high growth target. From the tenor of today's discussions, I sense that the NDC also supports the thrust towards faster and more inclusive growth.

During the course of our discussions, a wide range of views have also been expressed on other issues relating to the development problems of various states. Several Chief Ministers have also highlighted some of the initiatives being taken by them at the State level to improve the living conditions and livelihood opportunities of their people. Several specific points have been raised. Some have been responded to by the Finance Minister and the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. As for the others, I am certain that the Planning Commission has taken note of these suggestions and will discuss these further with you during the Annual Plan discussions.

India is at a unique point in its history. Never before has the overall environment been as conducive to our sustained high growth as it is today. We are on the verge of finally living up to our full potential. All our constraints and challenges are internal and it is therefore, incumbent on each one of us to work together to remove these constraints. In my opening remarks, I elaborated at length on some of the concerns I have about the growth process. While we are quite capable of realising our goal of 9-10% growth, we must be concerned about the uneven nature of this growth. Hence, the emphasis on inclusive growth.

As I heard each speaker today, it only reaffirmed my belief that all of us share a common concern about the welfare of our citizens and are in agreement that inclusive economic and social development is a high priority national goal. This is irrespective of the fact that all of us represent a diverse set of political parties and ideologies. This is heartening and gives me confidence that we can work together to build a prosperous, humane, just and equitable India. I believe, therefore, that we all endorse the XI Five Year Plan.

While we can go into great detail about the specifics of each item in the Plan document, I must emphasise that the launching of a Plan is only the beginning of a process.

As we go ahead, the Planning Commission will engage in a detailed dialogue during the Annual Plan discussions and pursue some of the issues raised today.

A point that emerges today is that there is a general desire for more resources. After all, a little more money will never hurt. But, we must realise that the resource cake is a limited one. And we have to live within our means. Given the resource constraints, the Plan has tried to maximise investment in priority sectors such as agriculture, irrigation, rural development, education and health. At the same time, it has also suggested important ways in which private investment could be catalysed in infrastructure and other areas as a supplement to public investment. We must wholeheartedly embrace with this approach. I am in fact, encouraged by the emphasis laid by almost everyone here on agriculture, education and health.

Many Chief Ministers have talked about their individual experiences in different schemes, particularly those specifically designed at the State level. There is much to learn from successful examples. I agree that such innovation is the essence of a successful development strategy and is also a reflection of the federal nature of our polity. It will be our constant endeavour to enable such State level innovation as there can be no generalised solution to problems in a country as vast and as diverse as India is.

Some Chief Ministers have raised a concern that increasingly, the "untied" resources available to states are gradually shrinking with a corresponding increase in Centrally Sponsored Schemes and "tied" assistance. Some felt that this constrains State level planning and resource allocation. This may appear to be true on the surface. But the reality is quite different. Firstly, the number of Centrally Sponsored Schemes have been shrunk from over 300 a few years ago to around 180 today. Further, given the emphasis on social sectors such as agriculture, education, health and rural development, a few schemes in these sectors account for the bulk of Central resources. These are all sectors which are basically in the sphere of State governments and most of these funds are to be transferred to States for being spent by them and I wish to emphasise this point. In a sense, these funds are intended to support the State development plans.

The only difference is that the spending is directed towards a few nationally agreed priority sectors whose importance no one can deny. These sectors are critical for enabling inclusive growth. And most importantly, the design of programmes and schemes in each of these sectors whether it is agriculture, whether it is education, whether it is health, is based on State and district level planning, catering to the local needs and providing local flexibilities. No two states are being asked to follow identical strategies in any sector. Be it Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, be it the Rashtriya Krishi Vikas Yojana, be it the National Rural Health Mission or be it the Food Security Mission - all of them are based on localised planning and implementation. Therefore, this mechanism helps to promote decentralised planning and monitoring, while at the same time increasing the resources available to specific sectors. There is no attempt to micro-manage planning from the Central level.

I have, a few minutes ago, received a note from the Chief Minister of Rajasthan on behalf of some Chief Ministers on the subject of centrally sponsored schemes versus untied central assistance. The note raises a basic issue regarding the need to cut centrally sponsored schemes and to provide more funds to States in the form of untied assistance. It is clearly too late in the day to revise plan allocation for the XI Five Year Plan and as I have mentioned and I repeat I would like to point out that each centrally sponsored scheme is formulated in close consultation with State Governments, for example, the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, the Mid-Day Meal Scheme, the National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme, the National Rural Health Mission, ICDS and PMGSY are universally acknowledged and welcome. The Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission has also addressed this issue but if anything more needs to be done, I shall certainly look at the same. So, now my assurance is if these issues require any further examination, we will apply ourselves to that task.

While a number of issues have been raised by the Chief Ministers, I would like to respond to a few of them. From your interventions, it is apparent that irrigation is a priority area for almost all States. The Hon'ble Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh mentioned it, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Maharashtra mentioned it, several other Chief Ministers mentioned it and there is a feeling that we need far more resources to accelerate the current pace of irrigation projects. There is a feeling that it is necessary to complement the major hikes in investment taking place in agriculture. I therefore propose to constitute a Task Force in the Planning Commission to comprehensively examine the resource requirements for expanding irrigation and identifying a new approach to implementation of irrigation projects. The Task Force should identify innovative ways of raising resources, designing projects and implementing projects so that we can rapidly achieve our irrigation potential.

Agricultural indebtedness has been a concern of many States. The Chief Minister of Maharashtra also mentioned to it. We had appointed the Radhakrishnan Committee to examine this problem and the Committee has submitted its report. The Finance Minister, in consultation with the Agriculture Minister, is finalising a scheme for addressing the issue of the debt burden of farmers. The details of this will be announced shortly.

A related concern is that of land reforms and the diversion of agricultural land to industrial and other purposes. I agreed with the Hon'ble Chief Ministers of West Bengal, Tripura and Kerala that this is an issue which merits further thought. I agree that we must minimise the diversion of agricultural land and given the choice, must opt for using wasteland for non-agricultural purposes. But, it must be kept in mind that industrialisation is also a national necessity if we have to reduce the pressure on agriculture and provide gainful, productive employment to millions of our youth who see no future in agriculture. It is with this in view that a forward looking, liberal Relief and Rehabilitation Policy has been put in place and necessary amendments are being made to our laws. This would enable a 'fair" compensation to be paid to all displaced persons where displacement becomes inevitable. As for land reforms, I have already constituted a high-level committee to look into this problem. There was a mention of land titles being given to tribal inhabitants of forest areas. We have already passed the legislation for conferring clear titles to forest dwellers and the rules for this are to be notified in January itself. Once this is done, States would immediately be in a position to issue titles to all entitled forest-dwellers and this will be a major step forward in reducing the extent of discontent that we all observe is prevalent in the tribal belts of our country.

Many of the smaller hill States have raised problems unique to their geography. They have specific connectivity, transport and infrastructure problems. Norms applicable to the rest of the country are not easily relevant to them. I therefore propose to constitute a Task Force in the Planning Commission to specifically look into the problems of hill States and hill areas and suggest ways in which we can ensure that they do not suffer in any way because of their locational peculiarities.

I also note that the PPP approach in infrastructure and other areas can run into difficulties in some states. This could be for a variety of reasons. I would like to reassure states that the PPP approach is only a supplement to public investment and, wherever the approach faces difficulties, we will not hesitate to invest directly. I have noticed that there is widespread concern about the slow release of funds under the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyuteekaran Yojana. I will discuss with the Power Ministry how to accelerate the sanctioning process and the Planning Commission must make the resources available to meet rural electrification targets.

Coming to clearances for projects, I notice that many of you are anxious about the delays to major projects as a result of cumbersome clearance procedures. This is a problem which is common to State and central agencies as well as to industry. I will request the Finance Minister to constitute an Expert Group to go into the system of statutory clearances for industrial and infrastructure projects and suggest concrete ways for speeding these up.

This plan is a plan for the poor. Its focus is on the most marginalised sections of society. The goal of this Plan is to invest in our people to enable them to become active participants in processes of economic growth. The Plan does not attempt to divide our people on the basis of caste, creed, gender or religion. It is, however, a reality that there are certain social groups who are relatively badly placed on all developmental indicators. The Plan does pay special attention to the needs of these marginalised groups and targets them in a precise manner. This is, after all, the true meaning of inclusiveness. Inclusiveness does mean better targeting. And it is not at the cost of other groups. You will all agree that if we hope to have a prosperous, equitable, just India, we must cover all groups and ensure that no one is being left behind. Chief Ministers of the North Eastern States referred to their special problems, resource constraints and how they felt more resources have to be devoted to accelerate the tempo of the North Eastern States. I do appreciate and the Planning Commission of the Government of India has always recognized that the North Eastern States of our Union face special difficulties, face special problems and I will therefore direct the Planning Commission to go carefully into issues raised by all the Hon'ble Chief Ministers of the North Eastern States and come up for a discussion in the Full Planning Commission meeting to devise ways and means, how we can all work together to accelerate the tempo of development in the North Eastern States of our Union.

In conclusion, I would like to say that India's future is in our collective hands. In this room sit people whose mindset will determine what happens to India in the next ten, twenty, thirty years. We represent the leadership that can shape the destiny of this great Nation. The XI Five Year Plan gives us an opportunity to shape a destiny in a direction which will enable us to become a proud, prosperous nation, addressing both concerns of rapid growth and equity. If we work together in the true spirit of nationalism and federalism as envisaged by our founding fathers of our Republic, we can and we shall achieve the goal of eradicating chronic poverty, ignorance and disease. I appeal to you to make this happen.

With these words, I bring to a close the 54th Meeting of the National Development Council and I thank each one of you for the contribution that you have made to the successful outcome of this meeting of the National Development Council."