The Master Plan’s ‘Vision 2026’ aims to make Chennai a “prime metropolis which will be more livable, economically vibrant and environmentally sustainable, and with better assets for the future generations.”

The objective of Chennai’s urban plan therefore is to “provide the citizens a better quality of life through environmentally sustainable, economically progressive, technologically innovative, proactive, development oriented urban planning and management policies, programmes and practices with equitable public participation,” and not just real-estate oriented big-ticket projects and structures.

It is in this context that one should look at Mercer’s worldwide ‘livability ranking’. Mercer is the global leader for trusted human resource and related advice, products and services. Their ‘Quality of Living Survey’ annually ranks world’s cities by evaluating local living conditions based on 39 factors, grouped in 10 categories.

These are: political and social environment (political stability, crime, law enforcement); economic environment (currency exchange regulations, banking services); socio-cultural environment (censorship, limitations on personal freedom); health and sanitation (medical supplies and services, infectious diseases, sewage, waste disposal, air pollution); schools and education (standard and availability of quality schools); public services and transportation (electricity, water, public transport, traffic congestion); recreation (restaurants, theatres, cinemas, sports and leisure); consumer goods (availability of food/daily consumption items, cars); housing (housing, household appliances, furniture, maintenance services) and natural environment (climate, record of natural disasters).

For 2008, Mercer ranked 215 cities worldwide. Chennai was 152nd - at the bottom among Indian cities. Bangalore was ahead at 142nd place, followed by Delhi at 145 and Mumbai at 148. Apparently, Chennai, which aspires to be a ‘Global-city’ through the real-estate route, is way down the ladder on the global ‘livability’ standards by which urban settlements are judged.

The SC had earlier (Dec 2006) castigated the city thus: “The whole city of Chennai is now unlivable because you allowed unauthorised constructions to flourish in violation of all building laws. Let the people live in peace. Let there be some discipline.” Though this stricture was issued in the context of the State Government protecting those who indulge in gross violation of building rules and regulations, it does apply in a general sense to the livability and quality of life in Chennai.

Let us look at it from the perspective of just three of the 10 categories listed by Mercer - health and sanitation; schools and education; and housing. Though trumpeted as the ‘healthcare capital of India’, the state of health and sanitation in the city is near dismal. Though for the well-heeled there are star-hospitals run as corporate profit centres, the poor are left in the lurch even for basic healthcare services. Accessing government hospitals and its competent doctors are traumatic experiences for those without money or influence. At every stage corruption is rampant. As for preventive care, it practically does not exist.

Regarding sanitation, less said the better. One look at the appalling state of the city’s slushy slums, garbage-ridden lanes, stinking waterways, rotting vegetable markets, and un-hygienic fish/meat stalls can speak volumes of the dirt and filth that exists. Open defecation and urination, even by women, that takes place on the city’s roads and streets, river banks, beaches and railway tracks is a shame for any civilised society!

Coming to schools and education, it has become a money-power game. In the garb of privatising education, unfettered commercialisation has crept into this sphere. The quality of schools, barring exceptions, is low both in learning and sport. Character building and lessons in honesty and integrity have become a rarity. There is huge disparity between the standards of education available to the rich, middle-class and the poor. Infrastructure and facilities available in most of the government and corporation schools is near dismal. Most of the private schools are no more than rote-based ‘teaching’ shops.

Housing deficit among poorer and economically disadvantaged sections is huge and their environmental condition is worsening by the day. Public housing and rehabilitation agencies - Housing Board and Slum Clearance Board - are operating in an impersonal and sometimes inhuman manner, often stuck on ‘tokenism’. The private sector is uninterested in housing for the poor and low-income groups and rental housing for this segment is almost non-existent. With the urban land beyond the reach of the low-income, the non-affluent and non-privileged groups, the housing crisis is simmering.

There is nothing wrong in aspiring to become a ‘Global-city’. But first things first and that is ‘quality of life and livability’. This is where tax-payers money should go.