 Welcome once again, Professor Dunu and because as we've told earlier, we're running a series on the master plan of Delhi and in the series, we thought that with Dunu, we'll be able to finish in one episode, but we have not been because the dialogue has been very interesting or especially conformity, non-conformity, exclusion or slums. So, we've started our journey from the beginning of 1981 to the end of 1981. And from 1981 to 2021, we'll talk about that in this episode. Professor Dunu, I think it's better we start from where you left, you know, where you set the grey area of Shah Janabad and especially the skills that people have developed. He said, no, we don't want you. We can live on our own cell. So I think over to you, please. So basically what I'm trying to say is there's an expert vision and there's a people's creativity. And what the experts do is when the people don't do what the experts think should be done, they declare the people's activity to be non-conform and unauthorized. So in the 81 plan, what the experts had envisaged is the government would do or the government would enable that it did not, the TDA could not do. So the gap was made up by the people. They made their shops, offices, industries, homes, everything. They even made roads. They made trains. They made MCDs into sewage pits. They gave some money to the electricity board and changed the electricity line. This is done. All the slums have done it. All the unauthorized colonies have done it. And this creativity, instead of recognizing the experts declare it to be illegal, not in the plan. So you have not conformed to the plan. But they never answer that the experts have also not conformed to the plan. So this dimension of the failure of the experts and the government bodies to not able to deliver is converted into the success of the people to deliver, but it is illegal. So in the 82-2001 plan, they at least took the position. That all these non-conforming, we will conform them and relocate them. That means the industry is in a non-conforming area. Where they should be, they will develop the industry and we will send them there. So they will be conforming. But they did not answer this question. That you have not made 11 industries. Now you are saying that you will make more. So you are not exploring your own failure. You are only interrogating the success of the people. But at least they did not say they will demolish. They said we will rebuild. We will, for the one lakh people who have built their own houses, we will build one lakh more houses and put them there. But in addition, they said not just one lakh houses, we have to build some more houses for the coming population. So they said we have not built one lakh for them. There are 2 lakh more houses that are being demolished. And there are 13 lakh more houses that will be built. So they set a target of 16 lakhs for the next 20 years. This 16 lakhs they again never built, they have built 6. According to whatever data we have been able to gather. They have not built. So you can understand that if they have not built that house, then the previous one also went as per the plan. And then again and again blame the people. That why have you built all this unauthorized, all these illegals, all this non-conform. So in the MPD 2001, the same pattern was repeated. Failure on the part of government, but refusal to recognize it. Success on the part of the people, but refusal to accept it. And this has continued. But the big difference between the 2001 and the 2021 master plan was they finally recognized their failure. And they said, we cannot build it again. The people who have built it have built it. We surrender, but we will renovate. We will upgrade so that it comes within the norms. But because they were unable to fulfill their own norms, they started diluting the norms. So as I told you, earlier our primary school in the 2001 master plan was supposed to be built on 4,000 square meters of land. In the 2021 primary school, same school, same population, the land shrank to 2,000 from 4,000. That's nearly half. That's nearly half. And by half, they increased the FAR. So this means that in the same half of the land, the school will go up. So the primary school that used to have one goal was of three goals. So this is the kind of pattern that you begin seeing in the 2021 master plan. They are saying we will upgrade, but we will dilute the norms. There's one more thing because you've come to 2021. And I think this is the period post 1990s that we saw, you know, opening up of the economy. And going out of the industry, whether it's the Supreme Court's order or something. And the arrival of more informalization, that is, the informal sector today, almost 400% more, that includes labor. But there is a huge informal sector in the city. How does the master plan reflect that? One, you said about the school, okay, the land shrank up. So this is an argument that withdrawal of the state from all these issues. Do you see any withdrawal of the state in the master plan? We won't do that. We will do it like this. One withdrawal is that instead of giving non-conforming a second place, they are saying that it's non-conforming. That's why we will upgrade diluted norms. This is a withdrawal. That we don't see you as per our norms. There's no withdrawal. There's a deliberate attack. In 2001, the courts had started becoming active on these issues. On environmental issues. And factory closures had started taking place. As well as the eviction of jubilee. Do you remember the biggest demolition in the emergency period? Before the asiat games. Then the commonwealth games. And these have all been engineered till you remove them. But you see the problem is that the organic growth of the city. You cannot stop with this. All that will happen is that the creativity of the people gets channelized more and more into what is called non-conforming and unauthorized. And this tension between people's planning and expert government planning. They try to resolve it this way. One, they surrender that it won't happen to us. That's why we will upgrade. We will dilute the norms. And slowly, slowly, we will try to remove it. You can see these three things from the master plan of 2021. After 2021, the new master plan. There was another big change. And that is total surrender. The government is saying that we can neither make a new one nor can we fix the old one. Now they are saying that we should privatize all of this. You mean the whole thing? Yes, that's the whole thing. Land pooling. Land pooling, institute of privatization, privatization of electricity, privatization of water. They have put all of this into experiments. After the experiment, in 2041, this is all declared. This has now become public policy. That you distribute the whole city in pieces and send it to the private. That's interesting what you said. The phase of the experiment was from 2001 to 2021. And now it's a part of public policy. It's a private public policy. See, I'll give you an example of that. In C2 Upgradation, their first experiment is when they broke the cut-throat colony and gave it to the Rahija builder. I was going to take Rahija's name. Yes, they gave it to Rahija. What did Rahija Builders do there? That policy was 60-40. 60% land, which would be for the residents, would be 40% builder. But in 40% there are two states. 20% and 20%. 20% builder will make his residential complex which he will sell. In 20% he will make that commercial complex. But for whom? For EWS. And in 60% he would build high-rise tournaments for the residents of Cut-Throatry colony. This was all supposed to be done in two years. It is now already in nine years. Still not completed. And what the builder has done is captured the 20% commercial for EWS and made it 20% commercial for safe. So this is the PPP model. Why do they consider it a success? They consider it a success because Rahija made profit. They don't consider it a success because they have destroyed the people of Cut-Throatry colony. They haven't got it yet. They won't get it anymore. They used to give it for free. Now see how they dilute the norm. In the first resettlement, they used to give a plot of 20%. After that, it went down. 40% went down. After that, 25 square meters. After that, 18.5. After that, 12.5. That means the family is the same. But the land is getting smaller and smaller. And now what is there is no land. Now we will give you a flat on the ground. So you cannot expand. You cannot do anything. You are confined. For example, the chicken, they used to let the chicken out. Come out and give eggs. Now what has happened is that you sit in this and give eggs in this. This is modernization. This is productivity. This is efficiency. And this is what is being applied. And this is the logic of the neoliberal, neoliberal economy. Which you are seeing in its naked form. And the biggest problem according to me is mass organizations which resisted this in the 60s and the 80s. Either don't exist anymore because the working class has been in a sense not destroyed, but dispersed, fragmented. And their place has been taken by NGOs. Or Zadadar NGOs have bought this idea of neoliberal development. Well, this brings me to another aspect maybe before we close down. I think that's very important. I mean two aspects that you've got. One is the David Harveyan thesis which speaks in the same language what you are saying. The fragmentation of the working class, the conventional working class breaking down. And of course the rise of the right that's a separate political chapter. But at the same time the Italian communists, I mean the Italian left, in fact the architects and the planners who have been experimenting. And then of course Le Fabre, the French, the famous Frencher, plan architect. They are saying just treat city as an industry, as a factory. And then just wait for the factory to come back again and then wait for the rise of the working class and then further to experiment the social and political change. But right now, look at the whole city as a factory. And the social production as you said in neoliberalism is a massive capital accumulation. Start working on this. What do you have to say on this? I mean if we close down, so what exactly should people like who want to transform who are not even part of that accepted civil society version. I mean what do you have to say on that? You mentioned Italy so I'll take a similar kind of analogy. You know the National Institute of Design in Ahmedabad worked on the principle that if you're making a product designing a product you must first ask the user what is the product that you are designing for the person. You have to ask the person what is it that the person wants and design it accordingly. This is the basis of design which still exists in Italy. Italy is famous for design and the reason is in Italy they still teach according to the same principle that when you make a product you design it according to the needs of the user. The needs of the person who is going to use the product. National Institute of Design in Ahmedabad has changed. Now the user for whom they design is no longer the consumer. The user is the contractor or the industrial house. So the industrial house is giving them a washing machine to design. They no longer ask the user of the washing machine. They're asking the industrial design what is it that you want will give you your. So this is the radical change that has taken place in the concept of design itself. And if we want to restore it in the master planning process then I think we have to follow that principle that the user of the city has to begin saying that this is the kind of city as the people and it's there organically it's there what I have been describing organically it's there but it is never made into a theoretical exercise that people do this we need to understand and make it according to the people. So last word I think that's a very important way to say it I mean there is one more extension of one month now someone is not going to tell you what to do. What should be done I know it's a highly exclusive plan I mean that's what most of the planners I mean who think differently are pointing it out but what should be done so that people reclaiming their space in the planning process. So what is your call? I think in one month there is very little time to do anything I think you will also appreciate that in one month particularly during COVID to be able to do something and they have used COVID they have used the lockdown and the restrictions they have used COVID for the construction of the central vista I mean so it's very difficult to do anything in one month to propose an alternative design but I think there are two things that can be done in this one month one is to begin explaining the principles of planning to people to show that they are actually adopting those principles of planning in their own in their own daily life they are doing their primary studies they are setting their own norms and they are implementing those they are doing it but it is never recognized officially so this is something that can be definitely done and on the basis of this in one month time at least incipient resistance to the existing drug can come up to say we don't accept your master that is the maximum I think that's a fair more than that I don't think anything so thank you so much for explaining it so easily because it is not easy and they don't even want to make it easy they don't want to be as easy that's why they don't want to and thank you for your time and we'll continue with this with the series again