IMP 🚨 INVESTIGATION
India's lockdown was called world's largest, strictest etc. @ BBC, we wanted to know how the govt planned it.
So, what're we looking at?
Govt docs that reveal every department/agency who was consulted by PM Modi before imposing #lockdown.
#Thread
China, with thousands of deaths and cases by March 2020, never imposed a national lockdown.
Let's start with what we've got now.
So we asked NDMA - who all were consulted before lockdown? Also, how many NDMA meetings did the PM attend? Their response.
NIL to both. Yes, NIL.
Am giving you an example below 👇
@FinMinIndia depts transferred our apps to MHA. But when MHA sent them all back, admitted it had no info on consultations.
They had no information on consultations.
In fact, nothing to show they were EVEN INFORMED before lockdown.
CMs/Govs from Assam, Delhi, Punjab, Gujarat, UP, DONER (centre's bridge to North East) all of them had nothing to show they knew.
*UP CMO threw our application out when it was asked about its own prep and info.
Over 1 crore workers had to return home post lockdown.
@LabourMinistry could not produce ONE DOCUMENT to show it had given any suggestions/foreseen the crisis/provided means to avert it - before the lockdown came.
Proof?
Well even NiTi Aayog's own documents don't support what Rajiv Kumar is saying.
We asked them TWICE.
In the release issued afterwards, we found no mention of the word 'lockdown'. When we asked PMO if the topic was even broached, no information was provided. @HMOIndia asked us to see the press release again.
It was claimed India had adequate PPEs, isolation beds, masks. Then, on Feb 22, 2020 - 2 days before Trump arrived, @drharshvardhan claimed India had 'stalled' entry of coronavirus.
They were looking to their government.
Found it absent.
Without lockdown, would suffering have been more? We don't know.
To be fair, few govts world over did well against the virus.
Q remains - why did India dive into something MINUS it's best & relevant experts on board?
@BBCHindi: https://t.co/W2bwjcZn8B
@bbcnewsmarathi: https://t.co/kGrilse7C4
@bbcnewsgujarati: https://t.co/XVkxMsvy5F
We requested the Modi Govt to put its point of view forward and waited for @PrakashJavdekar @MIB_India for OVER THREE FULL WEEKS.
@bbcnewspunjabi: https://t.co/l7SbWS7Quw
@bbctamil: https://t.co/87TJo61GTl
More from Politics
This idea - that elections should translate into policy - is not wrong at all. But political science can help explain why it's not working this way. There are three main explanations: 1. mandates are constructed, not automatic, 2. party asymmetry, 3. partisan conpetition 1/
First, party/policy mandates from elections are far from self-executing in our system. Work on mandates from Dahl to Ellis and Kirk on the history of the mandate to mine on its role in post-Nixon politics, to Peterson Grossback and Stimson all emphasize that this link is... 2/
Created deliberately and isn't always persuasive. Others have to convinced that the election meant a particular thing for it to work in a legislative context. I theorized in the immediate period of after the 2020 election that this was part of why Repubs signed on to ...3/
Trump's demonstrably false fraud nonsense - it derailed an emerging mandate news cycle. Winners of elections get what they get - institutional control - but can't expect much beyond that unless the perception of an election mandate takes hold. And it didn't. 4/
Let's turn to the legislation element of this. There's just an asymmetry in terms of passing a relief bill. Republicans are presumably less motivated to get some kind of deal passed. Democrats are more likely to want to do *something.* 5/
I\u2019m sorry it\u2019s just insane that Democrats are like, \u201cwe won everything and our opening position on relief is $1.9T\u201d and Republicans are like, \u201cwe lost and our opening position is $600B,\u201d and the media will be like, \u201cDemocrats say they want unity but reject this bipartisan deal.\u201d
— Meredith Shiner (@meredithshiner) January 31, 2021
First, party/policy mandates from elections are far from self-executing in our system. Work on mandates from Dahl to Ellis and Kirk on the history of the mandate to mine on its role in post-Nixon politics, to Peterson Grossback and Stimson all emphasize that this link is... 2/
Created deliberately and isn't always persuasive. Others have to convinced that the election meant a particular thing for it to work in a legislative context. I theorized in the immediate period of after the 2020 election that this was part of why Repubs signed on to ...3/
Trump's demonstrably false fraud nonsense - it derailed an emerging mandate news cycle. Winners of elections get what they get - institutional control - but can't expect much beyond that unless the perception of an election mandate takes hold. And it didn't. 4/
Let's turn to the legislation element of this. There's just an asymmetry in terms of passing a relief bill. Republicans are presumably less motivated to get some kind of deal passed. Democrats are more likely to want to do *something.* 5/
