Statement: The Union Government needs to give greater attention to, and provide larger resources for, primary education and primary health. Assumptions: I. Primary education and primary health are presently inadequate and need strengthening in our country. II. Primary education and primary health are essential levers for improving overall living standards. Choose the option that best identifies which assumption(s) is/are implicit.

Introduction / Context:
The statement recommends higher governmental attention and resources for two foundational sectors: primary education and primary health. We must uncover what the speaker takes for granted for this recommendation to be reasonable.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• There is a perceived gap between current provision and desired provision in primary education/health.
• Improving these sectors materially improves societal welfare.

Concept / Approach:
Policy recommendations usually rest on two pillars: (1) importance (the sector matters for outcomes), and (2) insufficiency (current inputs/attention are not enough). Without (1), prioritization is unmotivated; without (2), extra resources are unnecessary.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Assess I: The call for “greater attention” and “larger resources” implies that current attention/resources are inadequate relative to needs or goals. Even if conditions are not “deteriorating,” they are at least suboptimal; otherwise, no increase would be urged. Hence I is necessary.Assess II: The argument also presupposes that primary education/health significantly affect living standards; if they did not, diverting scarce public resources would be illogical. Hence II is necessary.

Verification / Alternative check:
If I were false (current provision already optimal), additional resources would be wasteful. If II were false (no impact on living standards), prioritization would lack rationale. Therefore both are needed.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Any option excluding either I or II neglects one of the two necessary pillars (need and importance). “Neither” contradicts the core logic of the recommendation.

Common Pitfalls:
Reading “inadequate” strictly as “deteriorating.” The assumption required is insufficiency relative to goals, not necessarily a downward trend.

Final Answer:
if both I and II are implicit.