Dr. Jayaprakash calls for justice to Telengana

Dr. Jayaprakash Narayan, National Coordinator of the Lok Satta Party, today demanded that constitutional status be provided to regional development boards, the 610 GO be implemented in letter and spirit and that the next river water tribunal go into disparities in water allocation within different regions of the State. These issues should be sorted out whether Telanagana was going to be formed or not.

Addressing a media meet, Dr. Jayaprakash pointed out that regional development boards recently constituted did not enjoy any constitutional status of Article 371D of the Constitution. The Constitution should be amended to provide them constitutional status, powers and resources. In fact, the Telangana Regional Development Board could be entrusted with the implementation of Government Order No. 610.

Dr. Jayaprakash pointed out that neither the Congress nor the Telugu Desam Government had the political will to implement the G.O. issued as early as in 1985. The Congress was in power between 1989 and 1994 and again since 2004 while the Telugu Desam was in power during the other periods. The GO involved the repatriation of just 28000 of the 9.5 lakh Government employees from Telangana to Andhra.

Referring to regional disputes on the sharing of the Krishna and the Godavari river waters, Dr. Jayaprakash said the next river waters tribunal should go into allocation of waters among different regions within the State. Thanks to Sir Arthur Cotton, some coastal Andhra districts had benefited while Telangana and Rayalaseema did not get adequate waters. The Godavari and the Krishna should be treated as one basin since the Krishna waters cannot be diverted to the Rayalaseema region unless the Godavari waters are diverted into the Krishna basin downstream.

Dr. Jayaprakash called for a national debate on caste-based reservations in the context of the raging disputes between Malas and Madigas in Andhra Pradesh and Gujjars and Meenas in Rajasthan. Treating castes as vote banks, most political parties were indulging in cynical and manipulative games. He made it clear that the Lok Satta was totally in favour of reservations so long as birth-based discrimination continued. He, however, wanted the reservation system to be refined. Any scientific system should give weightage to factors like caste, economic status, parents' educational status, rural or urban background, education in Government or private school and medium of instruction.

On Special Economic Zones, Dr. Jayaprakash said that they should not be constituted in agriculturally prosperous land except in rare circumstances. He suggested that farmers be paid more than market rates for their lands and be given one acre of developed land for every two acres acquired for them. This can be done if more land than is required for an SEZ is acquired.

A great opportunity squandered

Mr. Chidambaram enjoyed great advantages while presenting this year’s budget. The growth rate is impressive, and by all accounts sustainable in the medium term. Revenue increase is the highest in recorded history. Fiscal deficits are at last being contained. Savings rate is almost one-third of GDP. And the government is politically stable.


Considering these advantages, the FM seems to have squandered a priceless opportunity to set a new direction, and give concrete shape to the vision of inclusive growth. There are no serious errors of commission, but errors of omission are aplenty. True, there are no new taxes except the 1% additional surcharge on all taxes for secondary and higher education. Import duties have been slashed. The emphasis on agriculture is necessary and justified, but not matched in action.


What are the errors of omission?


First, the actions on agriculture are inadequate. Focus on seeds, more credit and replenishing ground water reserves and improving water harvesting is welcome. But there are other glaring areas which remain unaddressed. Most farmer suicides pertain to cotton growers. The unfair advantage to OECD farmers on account of high farm subsidies ought to be neutralized by increasing import tariff on cotton. The real challenge of agriculture is establishing market linkage and creating value addition to agricultural produce to enhance rural incomes. Credit cooperatives are still under stultifying government control, and over 60% of farmers have no recourse to institutional credit. Aggressive measures to restructure and liberate cooperatives along with cash support are necessary. The Budget failed to act on all these fronts.


Second, the effort to improve ITI’s infrastructure is welcome. But there are millions of educated youngsters who lack skills and are unemployed. Despite high growth rate, employment in organized manufacturing sector remains stagnant. Even I.T. and other sectors are handicapped for want of skilled workers. A massive national programme for skill promotion is vital today. The FM failed to address this issue of employment and skill promotion.


Third, FM did initiate a modest social security scheme for the unorganized poor. But it is too modest to make an impact. 92% of our work force is in unorganized sector. Out of the nearly 40 crore such workers, FM’s proposals touch only 15 million families, of which 7 million will get support this year. This is too anaemic an approach to make a serious impact on the plight of the unorganized workers.


Fourth, while Education allocations have increased, and school enrolment has improved, outcomes are far from satisfactory. In healthcare, even allocations are paltry, still stubbornly remaining below 1% of GDP. And there is no effort to create new incentive mechanisms to guarantee quality healthcare to all. As a result, despite rhetoric on social sector, allocations are insufficient and outcomes are poor. The Budget failed to address these fundamental issues.


In infrastructure sector, power and urban transport pose formidable challenges. Power sector net losses are about Rs. 26,000 cr. per year, and subsidies touch almost Rs. 40,000 crore. Distribution improvement with local participation is the key. The budget indicates that the government has thrown up its hands in despair in this vital sector. In urban transport, low cost, effective choices need to be given incentives and promoted. No such effort is discernible in the Budget speech.


Handicrafts sector has been plagued by years of neglect and decay. Support to a few handloom clusters is welcome, but insufficient. A national programme of diagnostic survey of all handicraft clusters, and support by way of credit, technology, infrastructure, skills and marketing are critical. If revival of certain handicrafts is unlikely, then promotion of alternative skills and reemployment are necessary. The Budget does not explore these options.


There is huge migration to big cities, and villages are getting depopulated. A concerted effort to promote in situ urbanization to provide amenities and services and encourage local migration through market incentives is necessary. The Budget simply ignores this mounting challenge of unchecked migration and rise of urban poverty.


The real estate boom has further boosted the black economy. A comprehensive approach to provide house sites and housing to urban population, and promote open transactions to curb the menace of black money is needed. For instance, long-term capital gains tax on land can be significantly reduced. The FM left this whole sector to realtors and land grabbers, allowing serious distortion of market prices and continued real estate bubble which could seriously undermine our economic gains.


Finally, the Budget did not pay any attention to the economic aspects of governance challenges. A nation-wide land survey and digitization of records are needed; the police forces needed to be modernized to meet the growing challenges in a humane and effective way; the court system needs to be expanded and made accessible. All these need significant investments and incentives and support to states. The Budget ignored these sectors while making allocations.


All in all, a great opportunity has been squandered.


Jayaprakash Narayan