Seventh Schedule The Seventh Schedule is not cast in stone. Todays Seventh Schedule is not what it was in 1950: The Union list has expanded, as has the concurrent list, while the state list has shrunk. There wasnt a single amendment in the reverse direction, the direction of decentralisation and devolution. This tendency to over-centralise, and not just through changes in the Seventh Schedule, has been commented on in several reports. The 2010 report of the Commission on Centre-State Relations is one such. Yes, in 1968, the first Administrative Reforms Commission didnt want a review of the Seventh Schedule. But the Rajamannar Committee of 1971 did health is not the Union governments natural constitutional mandate. It is in the state list, under Entry 6.And Medical education and professions figure in the concurrent list. There is a furore over land as well. Entry 18 on the state list makes land squarely a state subject. It is justified under Entry 42 of the concurrent list, which is about the acquisition and requisition of property. Read Entry 6 in the concurrent list, too, which is about the transfer of property other than agricultural land I think the Union government should legislate on items in the Union list. If it is an item on the concurrent list, the Union government should only legislate when state governments ask it to, not otherwise In international negotiations, be it labour standards or environmental norms, our argument has been the following. Do not impose standards evolved in developed countries. Different countries are at different levels of development. By the same token, different states are at different levels of development. Their land, labour and natural resource markets differ. So what is wrong with allowing states to decide? Whats wrong with Delhi letting go? Whats wrong with labour moving to the state list? As long as the present Seventh Schedule continues, there is great temptation for Parliament to legislate on items on the concurrent list. Thats the reason it is important to amend the Seventh Schedule and reverse the trend, witnessed especially in the mid-1970s, of moving items from the state list to the concurrent list, and from the concurrent list to the Union list. Because of the recommendations of the 14th Finance Commission, some fiscal devolution has automatically happened. The fiscal devolution isnt only Union to state. It is also about state to local bodies and intra-state differences. Decentralisation and devolution arent purely fiscal. The non-fiscal elements are more important and also require a change in mindset.