বৃহস্পতিবার, ৫ মে, ২০১১


Three R (3r) in Marketing



Question What are the 3Rs in marketing


Answer: The term 3 r is used in marketing for understanding the customer’


Three R refers to


• Royal customer
• Real customer
• Regular customer




এর দ্বারা পোস্ট করা এই সময়ে 1 টি মন্তব্য:

রবিবার, ১ মে, ২০১১




The 80-20 rule in marketing
By
Rokibul hossain











We have all been exposed to the 80/20 rule. This rule states that 80% of our results come from 20% of our labor, or 80% of our income will come from 20% of our clients. When this rule is learned and applied, it is a powerful tool toward success.

There is another rule, which I have applied with great results throughout my sales career. It is more powerful but less known than the 80/20 rule. It is the 20/50/30 rule. Let's take an in depth look at this rule.

In the 20/50/30 rule, the 20% are made up of the people who will do business with you easily. This 20% are people with whom you have built trust and rapport. They have belief and faith that what you say is true. They believe that you are skilled at what you do, and they would be pleased to work with you. They often treat other professionals in other fields with respect. These types of clients and prospects are like gold. This 20% is a pleasure to do business with. They can come from any source such as open houses or by prospecting. They could also be a past client or referral.

 The next group is the 50% of people who are on the fence. This group, upon receiving a solid presentation and systematic approach, moves towards your side of the fence. But it takes sufficient data and reasoning to get them to commit to buying or selling a home. This group, after careful evaluation of the data, will make a decision based on how it will benefit them. Having a benefit-based listing presentation is crucial to landing this type of prospect. This group is where the majority of your prospects will reside. You just need to apply solid sales skills and these prospects will become like the "golden" 20%.

The final group, which is the group that 30% of people fall into, is the most dangerous group. This group demands tremendous amounts of energy and time to convince them to join your side of the fence. This 30% is highly demanding and often has limited respect for the services provided by others. Even with a solid service presentation, they often demand more from a sales person than the other two groups do.

 During my career, once I determined an individual was in this 30%, I would throw the lead away because the conversion ratio of this group is very low. A large amount of time can be invested on people in this 30%, which will equal low payoff and high frustration. I am not sure if this group can be satisfied even if everything goes perfectly. My advice is run away from prospects and clients in this group, fast!!

We, as sales people, cannot help everyone. Why not just focus on the easy 20%, the 20% that is truly in your corner rooting for you? Then move to the 50% that takes a little selling of yourself and the benefits of working with you. These categories will provide more income and less frustration. You will have a more enjoyable experience providing your service to these two groups than the 30% group.

Next time you speak with a prospect or client there are three questions to ask yourself. The first question is which category are they in? Next ask how can I move them into the 20% if they are not already in it? And finally, how much effort and energy will my team and I invest in moving them to the 20%? Once you have asked those questions, determine what the odds are that they will convert. Is the effort worth the reward? By asking these questions you will be applying the 20/50/30 rule effectively. Your efficiency and income will increase in your business.

এর দ্বারা পোস্ট করা এই সময়ে কোন মন্তব্য নেই:

শনিবার, ৩০ এপ্রিল, ২০১১

THE NEW MARKETING MIX .


Marketing Mix: How Many Ps In Marketing - 4Ps, 7Ps, 11Ps or More?

One of the most famous concepts in marketing is the marketing mix or the 4P's of marketing.

I will look at the traditional marketing mix, how the marketing mix has been extended for service marketing with the 7Ps of Marketing.
I then consider just how many Ps there are in marketing since there have been many derivations of the marketing mix. In the comments section, you will find many different versions of the marketing mix based on a wide variety of Ps of marketing.
Which is right for you?
Whatever gives you new insights into making your marketing more successful.
The Marketing Mix or 4 P's of Marketing

The marketing mix was designed as a simple way to focus on the main elements of marketing for a business and to create a marketing strategy either at business, product or campaign level.

Some clever marketer played around with the words and realised that the concepts could be described with words beginning with the letter P - and created the 4Ps of marketing.
  • Product - what you are selling
     
  • Price - how much you are charging for your product
     
  • Promotion - how you tell people about your offer i.e. your product and price
     
  • Place - how people can buy your product
So for any marketer, the aim is simple.

To sell the right product (that customers want) at the right price (which customers can afford and are willing to pay) at a convenient place using effective promotions.

Each element of the marketing mix should be consistent, fit together and reinforce the other elements.

So you don't market a premium product at a "pile 'em high" price.

You don't market a premium product with tatty "done from home by your 9 year old daughter" promotional material - unless of course it is targeted at people with 9 year old daughters.

And you don't sell your premium product at the local flea market.

Remember the marketing mix is about consistent fit.

Criticisms Of The Marketing Mix and the 4 P's of Marketing

The marketing mix has been a mainstay of teaching marketing to students and professionals for fifty years although, like any well established idea, it is also criticised.

One thought is that it is too product focused and doesn't translate well into the growing service based economy we live in - see the Service Marketing Mix below).

Others criticise the marketing mix as a tool for setting marketing strategy because it doesn't have a goal - or I suppose beginning with P that should be Purpose - making a profit, generating quick cash flow, a low priced front end product which opens up the opportunity for future sales.

Without establishing purpose, how do you know if you have a marketing mix which is suitable?

An equally relevant criticism is the internal focus - where is the customer in the discussion of marketing, which however you dress it up, is concerned with persuading particular customers to buy.
So in this case, we should be adding another P - for purchaser to keep the focus on the target customer, what they want, need and what motivates them.
And if marketing is about wanting customers to buy, the traditional marketing mix is for suppliers pushing products into the marketplace and not customers pulling products out of the potential suppliers based on their needs and wants through market research.
I can't think of a word beginning with P for the research issue so at the moment I'm going with Push/Pull to communicate the idea in a new marketing mix. (Please leave comments with any suggestions).
If customers need to feel confident before they buy - to know, like and trust you - then there is no mention of the development of Personal relationships which are an essential element of 21st century marketing.
Just to recap I have suggested that the marketing mix is missing:
  • Purpose (normally profit)
      
  • Purchaser
     
  • Push/Pull
     
  • Personal relationships
Service Marketing Mix - The 7P's of Service Marketing
In my MBA I was taught the traditional marketing mix based on the 4Ps and also taught the Service Marketing Mix or the 7Ps of marketing.
This picked up the traditional marketing mix of Product, Price, Promotion and Place and added:
  • People - services are performed by people whose performance influences the quality of the service delivered and perceived to be delivered.
     
  • Process - it's not just the attitudes of the person that matters but the process they use to provide the service.
     
  • Physical evidence - services are intangible so the customer looks for physical clues about the quality.
How Many Ps Are There In A Marketing Mix?

So far we have the original 4Ps of marketing, the extra 3 Ps added in the Service Marketing Mix and my four based on critiquing the marketing mix.

That takes us up to 11 Ps of marketing.

UK Marketing expert Fraser Hay published a list of the 5 fundamental principles of marketing:
  • Positioning
     
  • Packaging
     
  • Promotion
     
  • Persuasion
     
  • Performance
Since promotion is already covered in the traditional marketing mix, this adds another 4P's to the marketing list - positioning, packaging, persuasion and performance.

Then I Started Brainstorming About Marketing

Do the 15 Ps identified so far summarise what marketing has to offer and the important characteristics of marketing?

I don't think so.

The first marketing book I ever read - getting on for 25 years ago was Offensive Marketing by Hugh Davison - it got me hooked. That book used an acronym of POISE.
  • Profitable - even in loss leading campaigns and image advertising to build brands, there has to be a clear path to profit.
     
  • Offensive - perhaps Proactive would be more suitable in this situation.
     
  • Integrated - your marketing has to Pull together and not consistent of a scatter gun approach of different campaigns which send out conflicting messages.
     
  • Strategic - I mentioned Purposeful earlier
     
  • Effective - it has to work. Marketing that creates results is an investment, marketing that produces nothing is a waste of time, effort and money so the best P I can come up with is Perform - this is different to Fraser's performance which I believe relates to the product or service you provide.
The Marketing Ps Don't End There

We are bombarded with marketing messages and spam coming into our email inboxes so Seth Goden's concept of Permission Marketing is becoming increasingly relevant - and Permission is another P.
And isn't marketing about helping a customer finding a solution to a Problem?
Aren't customers motivated by the thoughts of moving away from Pain or towards Pleasure?  
One of the key factors I stress in my marketing coaching is the need to be intentional - to decide what you want and to work out how you will achieve it - i.e to Plan your marketing.
Further thinking brings in two extra Ps - you need to have Periodic communications since one message won't do the job and you need to be Persistent.
In fact because of the difficulty of building up the know, like and trust factors, one of the most successful marketing strategies is to work through Partners who are already trusted.
And what is the most important thing that determines whether a customer buys - what is going on inside their heads - logically and emotionally which brings in the twin forces of Psychology and Perceptions.
The New Marketing Mix
Have I convinced you that seeing marketing in terms of the traditional marketing mix of the 4Ps or the service marketing mix of 7Ps is too simplistic?
So how does the new marketing mix appeal - the 27P's of Marketing (and counting)
  1. Product
     
  2. Price
     
  3. Promotion
     
  4. Place
     
  5. People
     
  6. Process
     
  7. Physical evidence
     
  8. Purpose
     
  9. Purchaser
     
  10. Push/pull
     
  11. Personal relationships
     
  12. Positioning
     
  13. Packaging
     
  14. Persuasion
     
  15. Performance
     
  16. Profitable
     
  17. Proactive
     
  18. Pull together
     
  19. Perform
     
  20. Permission
     
  21. Pain
     
  22. Pleasure
     
  23. Periodic
     
  24. Persistent
     
  25. Partners
     
  26. Psychology
     
  27. Perceptions  

OK what key marketing concept have I forgotten? Inevitably there are bound to be things that I have missed so please leave a comment and let me know.
One P That Marketing Isn't
There is one thing that marketing can never be.
Perfect.
Whatever you do can be improved.
And the 27s Ps of the new Marketing Mix are a good place to start.
In the comments section, I have outlined various versions of the marketing mix / Ps of marketing model.

এর দ্বারা পোস্ট করা এই সময়ে কোন মন্তব্য নেই:

বুধবার, ২৭ এপ্রিল, ২০১১

A STUDY ON INDIA COUNCIL

A STUDY ON INDIA COUNCIL

Introduction: Once upon a time, this subcontinent was full independent financially and politically. Then in 1487, the ocean way was discovered for coming in India. After being discovered the ocean way, the businesspersons and the strangers of many countries came in this sub-continent. For example, on 27 May, 1498, Portuguese sailor Vasco Tha Gamma came in this sub-continent. In 1668, the French came here for the purpose of business. The Olonthas came in this sub-continent in ancient time. Then at last in 1608, the British established commercial institutions by taking approval from emperor Jahanger. The British was very talent for establishing colonial rule in any country. In this target, they were forwarding. Then in 1757, a great war was occurred in the place of “Polashi” which is known in the history as “Polishir War”. This war was occurred between the Nowab Shiraj Uddullah and the British. In this war, the Bengal emperor Nowab Shiraj Uddullah was defeated and the British won the war. By this defeat, the independence of the Bengal was sunk for 200 years. As a result, we have to suffer about 200 years. The British, then, were expanding their functions throughout the country, which were the symbol of their powers. Step by step the British started to formulate laws, rules and regulations and to establish institutions and organizations throughout the state for operating their functions. Thus, they started to exercise colonial practice in this country. With the pressure of time, the British enacted many Act, laws, rules and regulations. Such as the British enacted the Indian councils Act of 1861, the Indian Councils Act of 1892, the Indian Councils Act of 1909, the Government of India Act of 1919, the Government of India Act of 1935 and Indian Independence Act of 1947, etc. all these Acts were on the support of the British. For these discriminatory policies of Britain, the Indian also made many movement. Among these movements, one of most important movement is the Quit India Movement, 1942. Our discussion topic is background of the British period in the then sub-continent (present name is Bangladesh, Pakistan and India). Now we will discuss the background of the British Period in the then sub-continent.


History of the Council of India: The Council of India (Legislative Council of India) was the advisory council to the Governor-General of India for the period of British rule in India between 1773 and 1920. The Governor-General, while exercising many functions, was referred to as the "Governor-General in Council."

The Council was established by the Regulating Act for India 1773 to oversee the newly created office of Governor-General, who later became the Viceroy and Governor-General of India.

The 1773 Act provided for the election of four counsellors by the East India Company's Court of Directors. The Governor-General had a vote along with the counsellors, but he also had an additional casting vote. The decision of the Council was binding on the Governor-General. The Council of Four, as it was known in its early days, did in fact impeach the first Governor-General, Warren Hastings, but in his subsequent trial, he was found to be not guilty.

In 1784, the Council was reduced to three members; the Governor-General continued to have both an ordinary vote and a casting vote. In 1786, the power of the Governor-General was increased even further, as Council decisions ceased to be binding.

“The Charter Act 1833 made further changes to the structure of the Council. The Act was the first law to distinguish between the executive and legislative responsibilities of the Governor-General. As provided under the Act, there were to be four members of the Council elected by the Court of Directors. The first three members were permitted to participate on all occasions, but the fourth member was only allowed to sit and vote when legislation was being debated.”1

In 1858, the Court of Directors ceased to have the power to elect members of the Council. Instead, the one member who had a vote only on legislative questions came to be appointed by the Sovereign, and the other three members by the Secretary of State for India.
1. Maniruzzaman, Talukder; The Bangladesh Revolution and Its Aftermath; 1st Edition; p-54; Bangladesh Books International limited, Dhaka, 1980
The Indian Councils Act 1861 made several changes to the Council's composition. Three members were to be appointed by the Secretary of State for India, and two by the Sovereign. (The power to appoint all five members passed to the Crown in 1869.) The Governor-General was empowered to appoint an additional six to twelve members. This was changed to ten to sixteen members in 1892, and to sixty members in 1909. The five individuals appointed by the Indian Secretary or Sovereign headed the executive departments, while those appointed by the Governor-General debated and voted on legislation.

As a result of the Government of India Act 1919, an Indian legislature, consisting of a Council of State and a Central Legislative Assembly, took over the legislative functions of the Governor-General's Council. The Governor-General nonetheless retained significant power over legislation. He could authorise the expenditure of money without the Legislature's consent for "ecclesiastical, political and defence purposes, and for any purpose during "emergencies." He was permitted to veto, or even stop debate on, any bill. If he recommended the passage of a bill, but only one chamber co-operated, he could declare the bill passed over the objections of the other chamber. The Legislature had no authority over foreign affairs and defence. The President of the Council of State was appointed by the Governor-General; the Central Legislative Assembly elected its own President, apart from the first, but the election required the Governor-General's approval. The post 1920 Council of State was replaced by the Rajya Sabha in 1952.


Indian Councils Act of 1861: The Indian Councils Act was a piece of Legislation passed by the Parliament of Great Britain in 1861 that transformed the Viceroy of India's executive council into a cabinet run on the portfolio system.2 This cabinet had six "ordinary members" who each took charge of a separate department in Calcutta's government: home, revenue, government, law, finance, and (after 1874) public works. The
 

2. Encyclopedia Britannica article, pp 53-54, 2001
military commander in chief sat in with the council as an extraordinary member. The Viceroy was allowed, under the provisions of the act, to overrule the council on affairs if he deemed it necessary - as was the case in 1879, during the tenure of Lord Lytton.

The advantages of this act were that the members of the legislative council could discuss legislation and put forward suggestions, however the drawbacks of this were that they could not actually enact any legislation. The Secretary of State for India at that time, Sir Charles Wood, believed this act was of immense importance: “the act is a great experiment. That everything is changing in India is obvious enough, and that the old autocratic government cannot stand unmodified is indisputable”.

This Act restored the legislative power taken away by the Charter of 1833. The Legislative Council of the Calcutta, Bombay and Madras Presidency was given the power to make laws for the good government and peace.3

The main provisions of Indian Councils Act of 1861: In 1861 the British government decided to expand the legislative Councils. This was done through the Indian Councils Act of 1861. the main provisions of the Act were as follows:-
1. The Governor-General’s Council was expanded for legislative purposes by adding 6-12 new members to be nominated for two years.
2. Prior sanction of the Governor-General was essential for introducing some measures.
3. Every Act passed by the legislature in India was subject to approval of Her Majesty acting through the secretary of State-in-Council.
 

3. "History of State Legislature". Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, Government of Tamil Nadu, 2009
4. The Governor-General was authorized to exercise a veto and issue ordinances in an emergency and
5. The strength of the Governor-General’s Council for executive purposes was raised to five by addition of one more member.

The Significance of the Indian Councils Act of 1861: The significance of the Indians Councils Act of 1861 lies in the facts that are as follows:-
(a.) It laid down the gradual construction and consolidation of the mechanical framework of the government.
(b.) Due to this Act three separate presidencies were brought into a common system.

 (c.) The legislative and the administrative authority of the Governor-General in-Council, was asserted over all the provinces and extended to all the inhabitants.
(d.) By this act the local needs and the growth of the local knowledge were emphasized.
(e.) The Act of 1861 vested the legislative authority in the Governments of Bombay and Madras.
(f.) It also laid the provision for the creation of similar legislative council in other provinces too. As a result it laid the foundation of legislative devolution culminating in the grants of autonomy to the provinces by the Government of India Act, 1935.

Criticism of the Indian Councils Act of 1861: The character of the Legislative Councils established by the Act of 1861 was not fulfilled properly. Moreover, the legislative Councils could not function like the true legislatures neither in the composition nor in the function.
The Council Acts of 1861, in no way established representative government in India on the model of the government prevalent in England. By the Act of 1861, it was declared that in the colonial Representative Assemblies there would be the discussions of the financial matters and taxation. Regarding this Sir Charles Wood, the Secretary of the state, while introducing the Bill made it clear in the unequivocal terms that Her Majesty’s Government had no intentions to establish a representative law makings body normally. However, the Indian council Act of 1861 led widespread public disaffection and agitation.


Indian Councils Act of 1909: Indian Councils Act of 1909, commonly known as the Morley-Minto Reforms, began when John Morley, the Liberal Secretary of State for India, and the Conservative Governor-General of India, and Earl of Minto believed that cracking down on terrorism in Bengal was necessary but not sufficient for restoring stability to the British Raj after Lord Curzon's partitioning of Bengal. They believed that a dramatic step was required to put heart into loyal elements of the Indian upper classes and the growing Westernised section of the population.

They produced the Indian Councils Act of 1909 (Morley-Minto reforms), these reforms did not go any significant distance toward meeting the Indian National Congress demand for the system of government obtaining in Self-Governing British Colonies.4

In 1906, Lord Morley, the Secretary of State for Indian Affairs, announced in the British parliament that his government wanted to introduce new reforms for India, in which the locals were to be given more powers in
4. Constitutional History of India; Kapoor  A. C; 1st Edition; pp 63-64; S. Chand & Company Ltd; New Delhi; 1997
legislative affairs. With this, a series of correspondences started between him and Lord Minto, the then Governor General of India. A committee was appointed by the Government of India to propose a scheme of reforms. The committee submitted its report, and after the approval of Lord Minto and Lord Morley, the Act of 1909 was passed by the British parliament. The Act of 1909 is commonly known as the Minto-Morley Reforms.

Main Features of Indian Councils Act of 1909: The following were the main features of the Act of 1909:
1. The number of the members of the Legislative Council at the Center was increased from 16 to 60.
2. The number of the members of the Provincial Legislatives was also increased. It was fixed as 50 in the provinces of Bengal, Madras and Bombay, and for the rest of the provinces it was 30.

3. The member of the Legislative Councils, both at the Center and in the provinces, were to be of four categories such as:-
(a.) ex-officio members (Governor General and the members of their Executive Councils),
(b.) nominated official members (those nominated by the Governor General and were government officials),
(c.) nominated non-official members (nominated by the Governor General but were not government officials) and
(d.) elected members (elected by different categories of Indian      people).
4. The right of separate electorate was given to the Muslims.
5. Official members were to form the majority but in provinces non-official members would be in majority.
6. The members of the Legislative Councils were permitted to discuss the budgets, suggest the amendments and even to vote on them; excluding those items that were included as non-vote items. They were also entitled to ask supplementary questions during the legislative proceedings.
7. The Secretary of State for India was empowered to increase the number of the Executive Councils of Madras and Bombay from two to four.
8. Two Indians were nominated to the Council of the Secretary of State for Indian Affairs.
9. The Governor General was empowered to nominate one Indian member to his Executive Council.

The Significance of Indian Councils Act of 1909: The Act of 1909 was important and significant for the following reasons:-
1. It laid down the gradual construction and consolidation of the mechanical framework of the government.5
2. Due to this Act three separate presidencies were brought into a common system.6
3. The legislative and the administrative authority of the Governor-General-in-Council, was asserted over all the provinces and extended to all the inhabitants.
4. By this act the local needs and the growth of the local knowledge were emphasized.
5. It effectively allowed the election of Indians to the various legislative councils in India for the first time. Previously some Indians had been appointed to legislative councils. The majorities of the councils remained British government appointments. Moreover, the electorate was limited to specific classes of Indian nationals.
5. Mehith, A. M. A; Bangladesh: Emergence of a Nation; 1st Edition; p 16; University Press Ltd.; Dhaka; 2992
6. Constitutional History of India; Kapoor  A. C; 1st Edition; p 67; S. Chand & Company Ltd; New Delhi; 1997.

 
 

6. The introduction of the electoral principle laid the groundwork for a parliamentary system even though this was contrary to the intent of Morley.7
7.  Muslims had expressed serious concern that a ‘first past the post’ British type of electoral system would leave them permanently subject to Hindu majority rule. The Act of 1909 stipulated, as demanded by the Muslim leadership.8
8.  That Indian Muslims be allotted reserved seats in the Municipal and District Boards, in the Provincial Councils and in the Imperial Legislature.
9.  That the number of reserved seats be in excess of their relative population. and,
10. That only Muslims should vote for candidates for the Muslim seats (separate electorates).

Criticism of Indian Councils Act of 1909: Though the Indian Councils Act of 1909 was an improvement over the Indian Councils Act of 1892, but it did not satisfy the Indians, especially the extremists. The enlargement in the size and the power of the legislative councils was too late and too little. Moreover, the Act of 1909 was no nearer to the congress’s demands of Swaraj. The narrow restrictive and discriminatory franchise created no admirers among the Indians. The Act of 1909 created, to a great extent, a bureaucratic state. In the Act, the officials were either in majority in the legislative councils or could be made so. Thus, the Act of 1909 provided the people only a shadow of reforms.

“The greatest demerit of the Act of 1909 was the introduction of the system of separate electorates on grounds of religion. The Act sought to divide the people of India into Hindus and Muslims, into watertight compartments, putting one religion against the other. As a result, there arouse demands of separate electorates by other communities.”9 The act of 1909 made the
7. Maniruzzaman, Talukder; The Bangladesh Revolution and Its Aftermath; 1st Edition; p-66; Bangladesh Books International limited, Dhaka, 1980
8. Maniruzzaman, Talukder; Ibid, p 67
 
 

beginning of what had happened in 1947 when the country was divided on communal grounds India and Pakistan. The Act sowed a crop whose taste was very bitter.


The Government of India Act of 1919: The Government of India Act 1919 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It was passed to expand participation of the natives in the government of India. The Act embodied the reforms recommended in the report of the Secretary of State for India, Edwin Montagu, and the Viceroy, Lord Chelmsford. The Act covered ten years, from 1919 to 1929. This retraction of British imperialism was a result of India's enthusiastic participation in World War I.

The Act provided a dual form of government for the major provinces. In each such province, control of some areas of government, the "transferred list", were given to a Government of ministers answerable to the Provincial Council. The 'transferred list' included Agriculture, Health and Education. The Provincial Councils were enlarged.

At the same time, all other areas of government “the reserved list” remained under the control of the Viceroy. The 'reserved list' included Defence, Foreign Affairs, and Communications.

The Imperial Legislative Council was enlarged and reformed. It became a bicameral legislature for all India. The lower house was the Legislative Assembly of 144 members, of which 104 were elected and 40 were nominated and tenure of three years. The upper house was the Council of States consisting of 34 elected and 26 nominated members and tenure of five
 9. Barmon, Rakhi; Government & Politics in Bangladesg; 2nd Edition; p 44; Azizia Book Depo; Dhaka, 2009
years.10
The Features of the Government of India Act of 1919: During the First World War, Gandhiji had requested the nation to help the allies in their war efforts because they were fighting for the cause of democracy. After the war was over, the people were feeling that they would also get democratic reforms. The Government of India Act of 1919 was enacted to satisfy the people of India to some extent.

The salient features of the Act were as follow:-

1. Preamble: The Act provided for a preamble that laid down the basic principles and policies upon which it was based. According to it, the policies of the British Parliament were as follows:-

(i) To provide for the increasing association of Indians in every branch of Indian administration.
(ii) To develop self governing institutions with a view to the progressive realization of responsible government in British India as an integral part of empire.

(iii) The time and manner of gradual advance towards this goal was to be decided by the British parliament. and                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

(iv) Accordingly, the Preamble suggested for a decentralized unitary form of
10. Uttamabahādura Siṃha, Administrative system in India: Vedic age to 1947; pp 85-86; Sterling Publishers Private Ltd.; New Delhi, 2008
government.

2. Distribution of Functions: The Act divided the functions of government in two categories: central and provincial. The provincial subjects were sub-divided into transferred and reserved. In the transferred subjects the Governors were to be assisted by the ministers responsible to the legislature while in the reserved subjects the Governors were to be advanced by the councilors who were not accountable to the legislature. Thus, in the provinces a new form of government, diarchy was introduced. Diarchy means dual set of governments, e.g. accountable and non-accountable.


3. Categories of Members: The Act provided for three categories of members: elected, nominated officials and nominated non-officials. The first category had about 70% members, the second had about 10% and the third category had about 20% . There was majority of elected members.


4. The constituencies and franchise: The Act provided for restricted franchise and communal electorate. The voting qualification varied from province to province and within the same province it differed from rural to urban areas. The constituencies were divided into two categories: general and special. The general constituencies were demarcated to return Hindus, Christians, Anglo-Indians, and Sikhs etc. Special constituencies were devised to give reorientation to land holders, universities, chambers of commerce etc.
5. Strength of Central Legislature: The Act introduced bicameral at the centre comprising the Council of states and the Central Legislative Assembly. The former had 60 members, of whom 33 were to be elected and 27 to be nominated. The latter consisted of 145 members, of whom 104 were to be elected and 41 to be nominated.


6. Powers of Central Legislature: The central legislature was empowered to consider, pass or reject legislation on any of the subjects enumerated in the Central list. But the governor-General had the last word on any Bill passed by the Legislature. He possessed the power to prevent the consideration of a Bill or any of its part, on the plea that it was injurious to the peace and tranquility of the country. He could disallow a question in the legislature. He had the power to withhold his assent to any Bill passed by the legislature without which it could not become an Act. He also had the power to disallow an adjournment motion or debate on any matter. He could enact a law, which he considered essential for the safety and tranquility of the empire even if the legislature had refused to pass it. The financial powers of the central legislature were also very much limited. The budget was to be divided into two categories Such as-
(i). Votable and
(ii) Non-votable.
The votable items covered only one-third of total expenditure. Even in this sphere the Governor-General was empowered to restore any grant refused or reduced by the legislature, if in his opinion the demand was essential for the discharge of his responsibilities.
7. Powers of Provincial Legislatures: The strength of provincial legislatures differed from province to province. The provincial legislative councils were empowered to legislate on provincial subjects. However, the Act armed the Governor with the extensive powers of legislation. He could stop at any stage the consideration of a bill on the ground that it was injurious to safety and peace of the province. He was empowered to return any bill to the house for reconsideration or reserve it for the consideration of the Governor-General who in his turn could reserve it for the opinion of the Crown. The Governor could also veto any bill passed by the Legislative Council. If the Council refused to introduce or failed to pass a bill relating to a reserved subject, the Governor by his power of certification could pass it on the plea that it was essential for the discharge of his responsibility. The Act gave the legislative councils some measure of control over the finance of the province but its financial powers were very much narrowed and circumscribed by the special powers of the Governor. The budget was divided into two parts. There were about 70% not-votable items on which only discussion could take place in the house. The remaining 30% of the budget included such demands for wants as could be reduced or rejected by the house, but the Governor retained the power to restore such demands by certifying that it was essential for the discharge of his responsibilities. In case of emergency, the Governor had the power to sanction any expenditure on any item.
8. The Executive Council: It was responsible to the Secretary of State and not to the central legislature. The maximum limit imposed on the membership of the Governor-General’s Executive Council was removed. Of the six members of the Governor-General’s Executive Council, other than the Commander-in-Chief, three were required to be Indians. A pleader of the Indian High Court was also made eligible for appointment as the law member.


9. Secretary of State for India: The control of the Secretary of State for India over the central and provincial administration was reduced.



Significance of the Government of India Act of 1919: The Government of India Act was a significant advance in India’s freedom movement. The Government of India Act of 1919 was important and more significant for the following reasons:-

1. The Act of 1909 was important because it allowed the election of Indians to the various legislative councils for the first time.

2. The chief purpose of the Government of India Act of 1919 act was to allow the people of India in greater participation in their own government. As a result, the participation of Indians in both levels were increased.11

3. The Government of India Act of 1919 relinquished to provincial councils Britain's control of some areas of government, such as agriculture, education, and health etc were transferred to the Indians. Thus India was
11. Barmon, Rakhi; Government & Politics in Bangladesg; 2nd Edition; p 53; Azizia Book Depo; Dhaka, 2009
forwarding to the independence.
4. The act also enlarged and reformed the Imperial Legislative Council, transforming it into a bicameral.
5. This structure allowed Britain to use the Princely States (who were directly represented in the Council of States) to offset the growing power of the native political parties. So this was a horizon for the Indians to be independent from the British control as they have gotten the power to govern themselves.12
6. The Act also provided for a High Commissioner who resided in London, representing India in Great Britain.
7. Some of the functions of Secretary of State were taken away and given to the High Commissioner of India who was to be appointed and paid by the Government of India. Thus, the symptom of freedom was rising.13
8. This Act increased the size of the provincial legislative council, and increased the  number of the elected members in each provincial legislative council, which facilitated the way of widening of the democracy.
9. The number of the Indians in the Governor General's Executive Council was raised to three in a Council of eight. The Indian members were entrusted with departments like that of law, education, labour, health and industries.


Criticisms of the Government of India Act of 1919: The Government of India Act of 1919 is criticized for the following reasons:-
12. Maniruzzaman, Talukder; The Bangladesh Revolution and Its Aftermath; 1st Edition; p-66; Bangladesh Books International limited, Dhaka, 1980
13. Constitutional History of India; Kapoor  A. C; 1st Edition; p 72; S. Chand & Company Ltd; New Delhi; 1997.
 
          The Indian National Congress was unhappy at these reforms and termed them as ‘disappointing’. A special session was held in Mumbai under Hasan Imam and the reforms were condemned. The Government of India Act of 1919 incorporated the idea of a dual form of government referred as

diarchy, for the major provinces. The Act involved a complex set of instructions. An example can be set as the provincial legislative council of each major province was instructed to monitor the activities of provincial ministers. The Government of India Act of 1919 also stated that a High Commissioner who resided in London and would represent India there in Great Britain. Thus, it created a diarchy or a dual form of government in India's provinces, with power shared by the Crown and local authorities.

So far as transferred subjects in the provinces were concerned, the power of superintendence, direction and over local Governments, vested in the Governor General in Council could be exercised only by specific purposes mentioned in the rules.
.
“The members of Provincial Councils were elected by a process of direct election, in hope that the people will choose these members to represent them. Thus Hindus started to elect Hindus and Muslims elected Muslims and also there was communal representation. As a result, this Act created an opportunity of an communal assault.”14

The act of 1919 did not introduce federalism in India.
Governor General in council got the power and authority to decide whether a particular subject was central or provincial subject. Specifically, the Governor-General was vested all types of power indirectly. He could do everything according to his wills. Although it is said that representation were increased but actually it was only a fashion of the British. The Governor-General was given the autocratic power.


The Government of India Act of 1935: The Government
14. Uttamabahadura Siṃha, Administrative system in India: Vedic age to 1947; p 87; Sterling Publishers Private Ltd.; New Delhi, 2008
 
 

of India Act 1935 was the outcome of a long constitutional development. “The act of 1935 was also itself the product of the three elaborate sessions of the Round Table Conference, held in London, and at least five years of bureaucratic labor, most of which bore little fruit.”15 There were several Governments of India Act before The Government of the India Act 1935 was introduced. The Government of India Act 1858 was the first Act to be introduced. It was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. After the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857, the British government took over administrative powers from the British East India Company. The British East India Company had to transfer its function because of the provisions of the liquidation. As a result, India became a formal crown colony. which meant the British Overseas Territory. The Government of India Act 1909 is generally known as the Morley-Minto Reforms. The Act of 1909 was important because it allowed the election of Indians to the various legislative councils for the first time. It laid the groundwork for the parliamentary system.

The Government of India Act 1919 incorporated the dual form of government, referred to as a dyarchy. “The rules were a complex set of instructions. For example, the provincial legislative council of each major province acted to monitor the activities of the provincial ministers.”16 It also allowed a high commissioner, to live in London who represented India in Great Britain, to live in London. The Government of India Act 1919 lasted for 10 years, from 1919 to 1929. After the genesis of Acts, Indian Round Table Conferences were held in 1930-1932. Through the three Round Table Conferences, British India and the Princely States could be integrated into the federated Dominion of India. However, Congress and the Muslims had different opinions on the structure of this federation. “This lack of agreement left the Conservative-dominated British government free to draft legislative proposals (the white paper) in line with its own views.”17
After that, the British government let the Joint Committee, of which the chair was Lord Linlithgow, to formulate the new Act of India. The Committee comprised of both members of the House of Commons and House of Lords and representatives from British India and the princely
 


states. The Committee came out with the draft Bill on February 5, 1935 and the House of Commons reviewed it. Finally, the Government of India Act 1935 was proclaimed in July, 1935.


Main Features of the Government of India Act of 1935:
The three Round Table Conferences convened in London during 1930-32 had made a number of recommendations regarding constitutional reforms in India. The Government of India Act, 1935 was the result of these recommendations. The main features of this Act were as follows:-

(a) It was a comprehensive and detailed document. It consisted of 321 Sections and 10 Schedules. It described, in detail, not only the machinery of the centre but also of the units.

(b) It, for the first time, introduced a federal form of polity in India. The units of federation fall into two categories: the (British) Indian provinces and the princely states (also known as native states)

(c) The Act divided the functions of the government in three categories. The federal list contained 59 subjects, the provincial list had 54 subjects, while the concurrent list comprised of 36 subjects. While the federal and provincial lists respectively, both the federal and the provincial governments could legislate on the subjects in the concurrent list. It is interesting to note that the jurisdiction of the federal legislature did not extend to all the subjects mentioned in the federal list in the native states. According to the Act, the ruler of every state was required to sign an Instrument of Accession mentioning therein the extent to which it consented to surrender its authority to the federal government.

(d) The Act also provided that such a federation could come into existence only if as many princely states (which were given the option to join or not to join the federation) would accept to join it as were entitled to one-half of the states seats in the upper house of the federal legislature and having one half of the total states population.
 
(e) The proposed federal polity was to have a bicameral legislature at the centre. The upper house was to be called the Council of States. It was to consist of 260 members, of whom 156 were to represent the provinces and 104 the native states. Out of these 156 representatives of the provinces 150 were to be elected on communal lines. While the seats fixed for Hindus, Muslims and Sikh were to be filled by direct elections, the seats reserved for Europeans, Anglo-Indian Community and Indian Christians were to be filled by an indirect method through an electoral college consisting of the members of their community in the provincial legislatures. The remaining six members were to be nominated by the Governor-General. It is interesting to note that the number of seats allotted to a state depended not on the strength of its population but on the relative rank and importance of that state. The Council of States was to be a permanent house. One-third of its members were to retire every third year. The lower house was to be called the Federal Assembly. It was to consist of 375 members, out of which 250 were to represent the provinces and 125 to represent the princely states. While the representatives of the princely states were to be nominated by their rules, those representing the provinces were to be elected indirectly by the provincial legislative councils on communal lines. It is interesting to not that the seats allotted to the princely states were disproportionate to their population. Similarly, the seats allotted to the various communities in the provinces were also disproportionate to their population. The term of the Assembly was five years but it could be dissolved earlier also.
 
(f) The federal legislature could make laws on all the subjects included in the federal and the concurrent list. It was also empowered to legislate on provincial list in an emergency or when two or more provinces requested it to do so. However, its authority over princely states extended to those subjects only which were mentioned in their Instrument of Accession. No Bill could become an Act unless both the houses passed it and also approve by the Governor-General. In case of differences between the two houses, provision for a joint session of both the houses was made. The Governor-General had the authority to approve or disapprove any Bill passed by the federal legislature. Though both the houses exercised some control over the executive, by putting questions and passing adjournment motions and other resolutions, the Assembly alone could pass a vote of no confidence against the ministers. Both the houses possessed almost equal financial powers excepting that the Money Bill could be introduced only in the Assembly. But the Act granted only limited financial powers to the federal legislature. The Act divided the budget into two parts. The first part covered 80% of the expenditure that was beyond the control of the federal legislature. The remaining 20% required the sanction of the legislature, but the Governor-General was empowered to restore the reductions or sanction any amount rejected by the legislature.

(G) The Act introduced diarchy at the federal level. The federal subjects were divided into two categories: the reserved and the transferred. The reserved subjects included Defense; External Affairs; Ecclesiastical Affairs and Tribal Areas. In these matters the Governor General possessed discretionary powers i.e., he acted on the advice of the councilors to be appointed by him. He was not even required to consult the council the council of ministers in these matters. Subjects not included in the above list comprised the transferred subjects. These subjects were under the charge of ministers responsible to the federal legislature. But, there were certain matters wherein the Governor-General possessed the powers relating to individual judgment. These were the powers wherein the Governor-General was required to consult the council of ministers but was not bound by their advice.

(h) The Act also provided for a Federal Court that was to consist of a Chief Justice and not more than six other judges. They were to be appointed by Her Majesty and retired at the age of 65. They could be removed earlier also on charges of miss behavior or infirmity of mind or body by King of England on the recommendation of the judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Court had Original, Appellate and Advisory jurisdictions. It was also a Court of Record. But the Court was not the highest Court of Appeal. Appeal could be filed against its judgments to the Privy Council of England.
(i) The Act did away with the diarchy introduced by the Government of India Act, 1919 and introduced provincial autonomy in the provinces. Accordingly, the Governors were required ordinarily to act on the advice of council of ministers responsible to the provincial legislature excepting when they exercised their discretionary powers or powers of individual judgment. It is interesting to note that the Act did not enumerate the discretionary powers of the Governor. The Governor, at his discretion, decided as to what were his discretionary powers. Thus, the Governor could misuse his authority and make the provincial autonomy a mockery.
  
(j) The Act provided for bicameral legislatures in six provinces and unicameral in five provinces. The lower house was to be called Legislative Assembly and the upper house, Legislative Council. The strength of the upper and lower houses varied from province to province. While the Act completely abolished the categories of the nominated members from Assemblies, it continued to have a few nominated members in the Councils. The Act suggested direct elections for both the houses. The basis of the allotment of the seats to various communities was on the notorious communal award, given by Ramsey Macdonald, as amended by Poona Pact. The basic principle of the scheme was that the seats reserved for a community were to be contested only by persons belonging to that community and they were to be elected by members of that community alone.

(K) The provincial legislatures were empowered to legislate not only on the subjects included in the provincial list but also on those included in the concurrent list. But a provincial law on a concurrent subject held well in so far as it did not go against a federal law on the subject. In case of a conflict, the federal law was to prevail. There were certain limitations on the legislative powers of the provincial legislatures. In some cases prior permission of the Governor-General was needed before a Bill could be introduced in a legislature. Bills relating to an Act of the British Parliament or that of the Governor-General or Governor or affecting the discretionary powers of the Governor fall in this category. Both the houses could exercise some control over the executive of the province by putting questions, supplementary questions or moving adjournment motions etc. The control of the Assembly, however, was substantial in the sense that it could pass a vote of censure against the council of ministers. The legislatures also enjoyed some limited financial powers. The budget of the province was divided into notable and not-notable categories. Notable items constituted 30% of the expenditure while non-notable items comprised 70% of the budget. Even in the notable category, the Governor could restore any reduction or cut passed by the legislature if he considered it necessary for efficient administration of the province,

(l) Besides the above, the Act also provided for the abolition of India Council, separation of Burma from India, creation of Federal Railway, appointments of an advocate General and a Financial Adviser.

(m) There were other features that showed great developments compared to the past. First, the provincial assemblies changed to include more elected Indian representatives, who in turn could lead majorities and form governments. But Governors tried to retain powers concerning the summoning of legislatures, assenting to bills and administering certain regions.         


 “The Government of India Act 1935 expanded the powers of the elected provincial and national legislatures and helped lay the groundwork for full independence.”18 “The Act continued and extended all the existing features of the Indian constitution. Popular representation which went back to 1892, diarchy and ministerial responsibility, which dated from 1921, provincial autonomy, whose chequered history went back to the eighteenth century presidencies, communal representation, which first received overt recognition in 1909, and the safeguards devised in 1919, were all continued and in most cases extended. But in addition, certain new principles were introduced.”19 Like this, there were several main features and changes of the Government of India Act 1935.



The Significance of the Government of India Act of 1935: The Government of India Act 1935 was the last pre-independence constitution of the British Raj. This Act was significant and very important in the following aspects:-

1) It granted Indian provinces autonomy and ended the dyarchy introduced by the Government of India Act 1919.
2) It provided for establishment of an All India Federation.
 


3) Direct elections are introduced for the first time. The right to vote was increased from seven million to thirty-five million.
4) Sind is separated from Bombay. Orissa is separated from Bihar. Burma is separated from India.
5) Provincial assemblies were to include more elected Indian representatives, who in turn could lead majorities and form governments. But Governors retained discretionary powers regarding summoning of legislatures, giving assent to bills and administering certain special regions (mostly tribal).



The Criticism or Defects of the Government of India Act of 1935:20The Government of India Act was a milestone event in the history of British-India. Though this Act was so important, but there were a huge defects of this Act which are as follows:-


(a.) It seems desirable to state the important points of criticism leveled against the Act of 1935. According to Pandit Nehru, the new Indian constitution was a “machine with strong brakes and no engine”, According to another critic, “the India Act of 1935 test to the full Indian capacity for administration and government exactly as a man’s capacity for swimming is tested to the full by throwing him into a river with his hands and feet tied”. According to Pandit M. M. Malviya, “The new Act has been thrust upon us. It has a some what democratic appearance outwardly, but it is absolutely hollow from inside”. According to C. Rajgopalachariar, “The new constitution is worse than diarchy”. According to Mr. M. A. Jinnah, the
 

20. V. D. Mahajan; History of India Constitution; pp 168-171; 4th Edition; S. Chand, New Delhi; 1960
scheme of 1935 was “thoroughly rotten, fundamentally bad and totally unacceptable”. Dr. Keith denounced the proposed Federation as “bastard Federalism”.

(b.) The Indians were not given control over the Government of their country. They could not change or amend their constitution. The White Hall framed the policy which was followed by the Government of India. The Indians detested the control from London.

(c.) Indian detested the diarchic form of Government at the centre. It was pointed out that the evils of diarchy which were found in the provinces under the Act of 1919 were bound to be repeated at the Centre also.

(d.) The inauguration of the All-India Federation depended upon the condition that a specified number of States joined the Federation. However, the Act gave the Indian states the choice to join or not to join the Federation. This was a serious drawback.
    
(e.) The Indian States were given a privileged position under the constitution. The representation given to them both in the Council of State and the Federal Assembly was more than what was due to them on the basis of their territory, population or the contributions to be made by them to the revenues of the Federal Government. While the members from British India were to be elected by the people, the Indian princes were allowed to nominate their quota. The critics pointed out that as the Indian princes were absolutely under the control of the political Department of the Government of India and did what they were directed to do, the representatives from the Indian States will be under the control of the British Government. They dare not vote against their masters. The nominees from the Indian States could be used by the British Government in India to serve their own interest and stop the progress of the country.  
(f.) The Indians protested against the indirect elections to the Federal Assembly. It was contended that indirect elections were against the very canons of democracy. They were against the spirit of the times.

(g.) The Indians protested against the control which was to be exercised by the Secretary for State of India over the Indian Civil Service, the Indian Police Service and other All-India Services.

(h.) The Indian Army got the lion’s share out of the Indian budget, but the Indians were given absolutely no control over it as Defense was made a reserved subject. The Indians also protested against the pace at which the Indianisation of the Army was going on.

(i.) The seats in the Legislatures were to be filled on the basis of the Communal Award. The result was that the constitution was communalism-ridden. The Communal Award cut at the very root of Indian nationalism and solidarity and was consequently the most dangerous. It was pointed out that longer the period, for which the Communal Award worked, the greater will be the difficulty in keeping the unity of the country.

(j.) According to Fazl-ul-Huq, premier of Bengal, under the Act of 1935, there was to be neither Hindu Raj nor Muslim Raj but the British Raj.

(k.) Commenting on the Government of India Bill, 1935, Mr. Attlee remarked thus, “The keynote of the Bill is mistrust”. The Indian National Congress condemned the Federal Scheme on many grounds. It was pointed out that the scheme did not envisage any real transfer of power into the hands of the Indians. Moreover, the Federal Legislature was saddled with an element of conservatism in the form of the nominated representatives of the States. It was contended that the constitutional advancement of India would always be vetoed by the Indian States.

(l.) The rulers of the Indian States criticized the Federal Scheme on the ground that it did not give them any power or authority to leave the federation if once they joined it. The Federation had great power of coercing them. The representatives from British India were bound to predominate the Federal Legislature and Federal Executive and thereby influence the Viceroy to take steps, which might impair their sovereignty.

(m.) The discretionary powers of the governors reduced Provincial Autonomy to a farce. Those powers and responsibilities “Combine, crib and confine” the powers of the Provincial Legislature and executive. Some of these powers and responsibilities were so vaguely defined that those could be interpreted to mean anything according to the exigencies of the moment. The Governor was made the sole judge to decide whether any particular matter fell within his discretionary scheme or affected any of his special responsibilities. The Governor could become a virtual dictator of the province within the letter of the law.

(n.) The powers of the Provincial Legislatures were very much restricted. The Upper Chambers were deliberately made reactionary bodies.




Conclusion: After all we can say that the British were governing this sub-continent from 1757 to 1947 for their commercial purposes. At first they were governing this according to their wish. The people of this sub-continent were not aware about their real rights. So they were compelled to be governed by the others. But with the pressure of time the people of this sub-continent were becoming aware about their real rights. So they raised many demands by their representatives from time to time and sometimes would take various revolutionary programs for achieving their demands. So the British enacted various Acts from time to time to mollify these terrorist activities to some extents. Thus, they enacted Indian Councils Act, 1861; Indian Councils Act, 1909; the Government of India Act, 1919; the Government of India Act, 1935; the Quit India Movement, 1942 and so on. But most of these Act were in support of the British. Although these Act were in support of the British, but the Indians were also benefited to some extent. For example, by the Government of India Act of 1919, the Indians were allowed to do direct election in various legislative councils. Thus, the Indians were given the state authority gradually. So these Act carried many significance in the perspective of the British removal from this country. Thus, step by step the Indians kicked out the British from this state and the took the responsibility of their own state for ensuring their development and good governance. 




এর দ্বারা পোস্ট করা এই সময়ে কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
এতে সদস্যতা: পোস্টগুলি (Atom)