As the Chief Secretary of a progressive Indian state committed to equality and women’s empowerment, you introduced the “Digitally Padho” scheme to address the digital divide among students.
Kartavya Desk Staff
Q7. As the Chief Secretary of a progressive Indian state committed to equality and women’s empowerment, you introduced the “Digitally Padho” scheme to address the digital divide among students. The initiative aimed to provide ₹10,000 in direct financial assistance to Class 11 and 12 students, empowering them to purchase tablets or smartphones for digital learning. The implementation mechanism involved schools registering students on a government portal using Aadhaar and bank account details. The scheme was widely appreciated initially, with 16,00,000 beneficiaries benefiting from the financial aid. Six months after the scheme’s rollout, media reports surfaced about discrepancies, with 2,000 students not receiving their entitled grant. Parents lodged complaints, and opposition leaders accused the government of corruption and mismanagement, alleging that funds had been siphoned off by officials. Upon further scrutiny, it was discovered that during data uploads, bank account details of some students were altered, leading to the diversion of funds into ineligible accounts. While public perception leaned toward corruption by government officials, preliminary departmental inquiries suggested a possibility of external hackers tampering with the database. The issue gained significant media attention, escalating into a political controversy. Allegations of systemic lapses and failure to ensure robust cybersecurity added to the public outcry. (20 M)
• How does the paternalistic approach in governance justify financial aid schemes?
• What ethical dilemmas arise from such interventions?
• How does the lack of probity in implementing government schemes affect governance credibility?
• Should the government halt the scheme temporarily to address the allegations of corruption, or continue it while rectifying the flaws? Discuss the ethical implications of both approaches.
Difficulty Level: Medium
Why the question Ethical governance in welfare delivery, focusing on paternalism, probity, public trust, and decision-making under political and administrative pressure in a technology-mediated scheme. Key Demand of the Question The question requires examining the ethical justification of paternalistic welfare schemes, the moral dilemmas they generate, the impact of probity failures on governance credibility, and evaluating ethical trade-offs between suspending or continuing a tainted welfare programme. Structure of the Answer Introduction Briefly link ethics, good governance, and paternalistic welfare with trust, transparency, and accountability in digital governance. Body Explain how paternalism in governance ethically justifies state intervention through financial aid to correct structural inequalities. Indicate ethical tensions arising from such schemes, especially around autonomy, privacy, accountability, and technological risks. Show how lack of probity in implementation undermines institutional credibility, legitimacy, and citizen trust. Weigh ethical implications of halting the scheme versus continuing it with corrections, highlighting welfare ethics versus integrity and public trust. Conclusion Emphasise the need for ethical balancing between welfare continuity and integrity, underscoring transparency, corrective action, and systemic reform.
Why the question
Ethical governance in welfare delivery, focusing on paternalism, probity, public trust, and decision-making under political and administrative pressure in a technology-mediated scheme.
Key Demand of the Question
The question requires examining the ethical justification of paternalistic welfare schemes, the moral dilemmas they generate, the impact of probity failures on governance credibility, and evaluating ethical trade-offs between suspending or continuing a tainted welfare programme.
Structure of the Answer
Introduction Briefly link ethics, good governance, and paternalistic welfare with trust, transparency, and accountability in digital governance.
• Explain how paternalism in governance ethically justifies state intervention through financial aid to correct structural inequalities.
• Indicate ethical tensions arising from such schemes, especially around autonomy, privacy, accountability, and technological risks.
• Show how lack of probity in implementation undermines institutional credibility, legitimacy, and citizen trust.
• Weigh ethical implications of halting the scheme versus continuing it with corrections, highlighting welfare ethics versus integrity and public trust.
Conclusion Emphasise the need for ethical balancing between welfare continuity and integrity, underscoring transparency, corrective action, and systemic reform.