&w=3840&q=100)
Punjab becomes first state to launch evidence-based anti-drug curriculum
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) National Convenor Arvind Kejriwal and Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann will inaugurate the programme on August 1 in Arniwala, Fazilka, as part of the third phase of the state's "Yudh Nashian De Virudh" campaign.
School Education Minister Harjot Singh Bains said the curriculum will cover around 8 lakh students from Classes 9 to 12 in 3,658 schools. More than 6,500 trained teachers will deliver the programme.
The curriculum has been developed in collaboration with Nobel Laureate Prof. Abhijit Banerjee's J-PAL South Asia and leading behavioural scientists. It aims to equip students with the skills to avoid drug use and make informed decisions.
The 27-week programme consists of 35-minute interactive sessions held every two weeks. It uses documentaries, quizzes, posters, and group activities to bust myths, address peer pressure, and promote better decision-making strategies.
Randomised trials conducted in 78 government schools in Amritsar and Tarn Taran with 9,600 students showed a strong impact. Ninety per cent of students understood that even trying drugs like "chitta" once could lead to addiction, compared to 69 per cent in the control group. The belief that addiction can be overcome with willpower alone dropped from 50 per cent to 20 per cent.
Bains said this marked a shift in approach, stating, "The fight against drugs must begin in classrooms, not just in police stations."
He added that more than 23,000 drug smugglers have been arrested so far, over 1,000 kg of heroin has been seized, and properties of offenders have been confiscated, highlighting the government's commitment to protect Punjab's youth from drug abuse.
Punjab has become the first Indian state to roll out an anti-drug curriculum at this scale, starting from August 1. The programme focuses on prevention through interactive classroom learning and behavioural change.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
14 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump's 25% tariff on India could drag down GDP growth by 50-60 basis points, say analysts
US President Donald Trumps' 25% tariff on India could slash India's projected GDP growth by 50-60 basis points, dragging it below the 6%-mark. Currently, the Reserve Bank has projected the GDP growth for this year at 6.5%. read more US President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi shake hands as they attend a joint press conference at the White House in Washington, on, February 13. Reuters US President Donald Trump could deliver a hit of 50-60 basis points to the Indian GDP growth with tariffs and penalties, according to analysts. Trump on Thursday formally imposed 25 per cent tariff on India. He has also previously threatened additional penalties over India's trade with Russia. Previously, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had projected the Indian economy to grow at 6.5 per cent in 2025-26. The Union Finance Ministry had projected the economy to grow in the 6.3-6.8 per cent range. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD With Trump's 25 per cent tariff, and any additional penalties, the GDP growth could fall to 6.1 per cent and even below the 6 per cent-mark, as per analysts. Trump's tariff could slash GDP growth by 50-60 basis points, exports by 12.5% The State Bank of India (SBI) has said that a 20 per cent tariff could slash as much as 50 basis points (0.5 per cent) from India's GDP, according to CNBC-TV18. At 25 per cent tariff, this would mean a cut of around 62 basis points, dragging down India's GDP growth to around 5.87 per cent. The SBI study further said that any 1 per cent rise in tariff may lead to a 0.5 per cent decline in export volumes'. At 25 per cent tariff, this would mean 12.5 per cent decline in export volume. This could have massive implications for the Indian economy as the United States in India's largest export destination. Other analysts said that the tariff's effect could be in the range of 40-50 basis points. ANZ economists Dhiraj Nim and Sanjay Mathur said if 25 per cent tariff remained in place for the remainder of 2025-26, 'it could subtract 40 basis point from GDP growth', according to The Indian Express. Separately, Barclays has projected a hit of 30 basis points and Nomura has projected a hit of 20 basis points. 'Taking into account the sectoral exemptions, we estimate the effective tariff rate (for India) at ~20 per cent. The announced reciprocal tariff rate of 25 per cent, however, may be temporary, and might settle lower, as negotiations will continue after August 1. However, the best-case outcome would still be tariffs in the 15-20 per cent range, which is disappointing, considering India's more advanced stage of negotiations,' noted Nomura, as per Financial Express. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Hindustan Times
14 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Cash-strapped Himachal turns to lotteries for revenue
Cash-strapped Himachal turned to revival of the state-run lotteries to boost revenue. The state cabinet on Thursday gave its nod to initiate the operation of lotteries in the state that has been banned since 1999. Lottery was banned in the state by the Himachal government headed by BJP leader Prem Kumar Dhumal in 1999 and made its violation punishable under Lotteries (Regulation) Act. (File) The move aims at increasing the state's revenue amid declining central allocations and the withdrawal of GST compensation. The debt burden of the state government has already crossed ₹1 lakh crore and the state government is looking for measures to generate revenue. Lottery was banned in the state by the Himachal government headed by BJP leader Prem Kumar Dhumal in 1999 and made its violation punishable under Lotteries (Regulation) Act. Industry minister Harshwardhan Chauhan said the government expects to generate an additional income of ₹50 to ₹100 crore annually through the lottery system. Chauhan said that Punjab earned ₹235 crore and Kerala a staggering ₹13,582 crore from lotteries in the last financial year alone. 'There is no countrywide ban on lotteries. Currently, 13 Indian states, including Kerala, Goa, Maharashtra, Punjab, and Sikkim run legal lotteries. Himachal too will benefit if the scheme is regulated properly,' Chauhan said after the cabinet meeting. Officials said that the state government is likely to introduce specific legislation on lotteries in the upcoming monsoon session of the assembly, beginning August 18. 'This would ensure safeguards against fraud and protect consumers from illegal operators,' said a senior official not willing to be named. The finance department made a detailed presentation before the cabinet on the issue of starting operation of lotteries in the hill state to generate additional revenue. The decision has been taken on the recommendation of the Resource Mobilisation committee, headed by deputy chief minister Mukesh Agnihotri. Legalising lottery not in state's interest: Jai Ram Leader of the Opposition, Jai Ram Thakur, on Thursday lashed out at Sukhu government for legalising lottery. Jai Ram said, 'As a conclusion of the four-day cabinet meeting, the so-called reformist Sukhu government has legalised the lottery. Earlier, the lottery had been banned. Many families were devastated due to it—homes were auctioned off, and some people were driven to commit suicide. Now the government wants to bring back that dark era'. 'In the name of a self-reliant Himachal, the government is giving legal recognition to cannabis cultivation. It is allowing liquor sales wherever it pleases while shutting down schools and colleges. And now, going even further, it has legalized the lottery—so the government can even wipe out people's savings. This policy is not in the interest of the state, and the Bharatiya Janata Party strongly condemns it.'
Scroll.in
14 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Enforced during World War I, perfected by modern surveillance: The story of passports and visas
Like many 'extraordinary measures' implemented in times of crisis – often under the guise of security – the supposedly temporary restrictions on free movement at the start of the First World War became permanent features hindering migration. From that time onwards, a growing number of countries required identity documents, passports and visas for travel. When the war ended, negotiations failed to re-open borders. Despite Japanese, Chinese and Indian demands for the free movement of labour, the new League of Nations failed to abolish the new passport system or liberalise controls on international migration. Passports and citizen identification soon became hallmarks of the modern nation state. By the time decolonisation took place in the mid-20th century, passports and visas were widespread. New states followed the example of established ones. All of a sudden, people could no longer cross a border without a document that included their photograph, birthplace and nationality. War, nationalism and state-building required large and elaborate bureaucracies, which were tasked with regulating migration flows. Quotas as well as passports and other new forms of border control were introduced to restrict how many people entered a country, where they come from, and what rights and resources they could access. Political ideas of national security, culture, language and race became as influential for immigration and migrant flows as economic policies had been in the nineteenth century. States increasingly allocated citizenship rights on the basis of nationality, making it necessary to belong to a state to be officially recognised and so able to move and work. A growing preoccupation with managing the movement of people was entwined with exclusionary attitudes based on race and ethnicity. Economic failure and other social problems were blamed on foreigners, and migration began to be seen by some as a form of deviant behaviour. Elaborate hierarchies of race, ethnicity and nation were built across Europe and its settler colonies, drawing on a misreading of Darwin's widely publicised ideas. 'Social Darwinism' was used to justify establishing a highly stratified society with white northern Europeans at the apex. The perceived threat to social order posed by immigrants, along with pseudoscientific theories of race and media-inflamed prejudices, combined to generate a growing suspicion of 'foreigners' during the late nineteenth and early 20th century. These were increasingly given expression in discriminatory immigration policies, expulsions, savage pogroms and populist purges. In 1905, Australia implemented a 'dictation test' which required a prospective immigrant to write down 50 words in any European language of the immigration officer's choosing, including Gaelic. Anyone who failed the test could be deported. The test was used to enforce the recent Immigration Restriction Act, which became a cornerstone of the unofficial 'White Australia' policy. Other countries tightened up their entry requirements. In 1917, France started requiring all foreigners to carry a form of identification with a photograph, indicating the bearer's nationality and occupation. Germany and Britain introduced similar regulations to identify foreigners. The United States also policed its borders more aggressively; in 1917 it too introduced a literacy test that had to be passed by all migrants. In earlier centuries, governments had tried to control who left the country. Migration policies from the mid-1800s began to focus on who was allowed in. The US viewed – and still views – their populations as a valuable source of taxation, labour and military or economic power. Private employers similarly kept their workers close, often coercively. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, some European states discouraged or forbade emigration. Feudal Japan prescribed the death penalty for those who left the country without permission. While concerns over people leaving never went away, governments after the First World War became much more preoccupied with restricting entry. The change in attitude also reflected changes in the origins and destinations of migrants and their reasons for moving. With the rapid growth of industry and a gradual decline in birth rates, north-western European economies became migrant destinations rather than sources of labour. While migrants had previously travelled from wealthier countries in Europe to the less prosperous regions of the world and more distant colonies, after the First World War, a growing proportion of migrants came from poorer parts of southern and eastern Europe, typically moving north or embarking for Canada, Australia, Argentina, Brazil and New Zealand. In earlier centuries, private enterprises such as the Dutch East India Company and institutions such as the Church had helped to shape global patterns of migration. Identity cards and passports now allowed nation states to choose who got to come and go. By regulating the free movement of people, governments could also decide what resources, jobs and social services people had access to. There was another, unintended consequence: large groups of people suddenly found themselves without a state from which they could derive rights and protection. The emergence of a more rigid interstate system led to the rise of stateless people and refugees. While wars and famine may have caused them to flee, refugees were also the product of increasingly rigid legal definitions of citizenship and impenetrable borders. A combination of state sovereignty and strict identification of citizens made 'foreigners' legal outsiders, as the sociologist Saskia Sassen has highlighted in her work. Refugees became a distinct, institutionalised category excluded from the rights offered to citizens. Deprived of citizenship, they became trapped in legal limbo, denied the right by many countries to work, vote, travel or access services offered to citizens. In the interwar years, rising nationalism was coupled with protectionism. Industries that felt threatened by rival manufacturers abroad lobbied their governments to impose tariffs on imported products. Similarly, trade unions fearing competition from foreign labour sought to limit migrant numbers and curtail the rights of foreign workers to remain and access social services. In the United States, debates around 'Americanisation' and immigration have driven politics for over 150 years. Under the Burlingame Treaty of 1868, an early version of the 'guest worker' programmes that would appear in other parts of the world, Chinese workers were given the right to work in the US – albeit under certain restrictions. Shifting public attitudes towards foreigners were accompanied by more stringent legislation in the decades that followed. In 1882, the US passed laws curbing the entry of Chinese workers, as well as those perceived to pose potential threats to 'national interests', including 'convicts, lunatics, idiots, and persons likely to become public charges'. Immigration policy became more centralised under institutions dedicated solely to the task of identifying and preventing the entry of a growing list of people deemed unsuitable for entry. The Immigration Act of 1924 charged American consuls overseas with administering quotas, including submitting applicants to financial checks and medical examinations before issuing visas. In practice, the legislation extended the reach of border control to other countries, allowing the United States to restrict entry long before prospective migrants embarked in Europe or elsewhere. This was framed as benefitting travellers and protecting them from having to sell their possessions before attempting futile journeys. As immigrants increasingly attempted to cross into the US by land as an alternative to arriving by sea or by air (planes began to carry commercial passengers soon after the First World War ended), the US Border Patrol was created in 1924.
