I&B Ministry
Jaipal Reddy calls for doing away with MIB
MUMBAI: Junk the ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB). That’s the call that once MIB minister Jaipal Reddy – who held the portfolio during the Congress I regime in the previous decade – is giving these days. Writing a column in The Hindu last week, he said “It is important to note that no advanced democracy, be it in western Europe or in North America, has a ministry called I&B. Those democracies instead have independent commissions. In the US, for example, the Federal Communications Commission has been effective in regulating the functions of television companies for more than a half a century.”
Reddy points out in the column that “Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel briefly handled the home ministry after India attained independence, and he also handled the MIB. He used the MIB portfolio to reach out to the people with urgent messages during the country’s formative and most difficult period.”
He highlights that the “the political demand for conferring autonomy of DD gained volume only in the 1970s, because of which the BG Verghese Committee went into the question and submitted its recommendations. But it assumed the shape of a specific statute only in 1990 when leaders from all parties, including Rajiv Gandhi as the opposition leader, reached a consensus. It fell on me as the I&B minister in 1997 to notify the Act — the Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990. At that time, I made a public statement that the time had come for abolishing the I&B Ministry.”
According to Reddy, Prasar Bharati can truly enjoy independence when it is given financial independence. Says he in the column: “The BBC enjoys financial autonomy as the citizens pay fees compulsorily and directly to it. As a consequence of this freedom, the BBC sometimes takes on the British Prime Minister as well, not to speak of the government.”
So why garbage the ministry? Reddy has his reasoning. Says he: If a minister is there for the portfolio, he/she cannot sit idle; they poke their nose into the functioning of such institutions by way of self-employment. Hence, the urgency to abolish this portfolio.”
There’s nothing really new about his yelling about this from the rooftops – he’s done it in the past too – as he mentions in his column. He was instrumental in the drafting of the Broadcasting Regulatory Authority of India Bill in 1998. Nothing came of it then. Will someone in the Modi government listen to him this time?
I&B Ministry
Government sets up AI governance group to steer policy
AIGEG to align ministries, assess jobs impact, guide AI deployment.
MUMBAI: If artificial intelligence is the engine, the government is now building the dashboard and making sure everyone reads from the same screen. The Centre has constituted a new inter-ministerial body to coordinate India’s approach to AI, formalising a key recommendation from its governance framework and the Economic Survey. The AI Governance and Economic Group (AIGEG), set up by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, will act as the central platform to align AI-related policy across ministries, regulators and departments, an attempt to bring coherence to what has so far been a fragmented and fast-evolving landscape.
The group will be chaired by union minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, with minister of state Jitin Prasada as vice chairperson. Its composition reflects both technological and economic priorities, bringing together the principal scientific adviser, the chief economic adviser, and the CEO of NITI Aayog, alongside key secretaries from telecommunications, economic affairs and science and technology. A representative from the National Security Council Secretariat is also part of the group, while the MeitY secretary will serve as member convenor.
At its core, AIGEG is designed to do two things: coordinate and anticipate. On the policy front, it will review existing regulatory mechanisms, issue guidance across sectors and ensure companies remain compliant with evolving legal frameworks. Beyond that, it will oversee national initiatives on AI governance, with a focus on enabling responsible innovation rather than merely regulating it.
The economic dimension is equally central. The group has been tasked with assessing how AI-driven automation could reshape jobs identifying which roles are most at risk, where those impacts may be geographically concentrated, and whether technology will augment or replace human labour. Based on these assessments, it will develop mitigation strategies and transition plans, signalling a more proactive stance on workforce disruption.
In parallel, AIGEG will work with industry stakeholders to chart a long-term roadmap for AI adoption, categorising use cases into “deploy”, “pilot” or “defer” buckets depending on readiness factors such as data availability, skill levels and regulatory clarity. The aim is to move from broad ambition to structured execution deciding not just what can be built, but what should be built now.
The group will function as the apex layer in India’s AI governance architecture, supported by a Technology and Policy Expert Committee that will track global developments, emerging risks and regulatory priorities. Together, the two bodies are expected to shape both the pace and direction of AI adoption in the country.
In a landscape where technology often outruns policy, the creation of AIGEG signals an attempt to close that gap ensuring that India’s AI journey is not just rapid, but also coordinated, accountable and economically grounded.
