Follow me on Twitter

Monday, May 18, 2009

Whose elections were these anyway?

The Times of India
15 May 2009,
Tarun Vijay

The last phase of polling ended on May 13 and Lok Sabha election results will begin pouring in on May 16 morning. In between a world of words churned heavy doses of speculation and the nation was projected as waiting with utmost anxiety to know who would rule it in the next phase of governance. The media and political circles were seen decoding numbers, debating issues of great national importance like which party and conglomeration will align with whom at what cost. "Four singles" were projected as holding keys to make dreams of two "mixed doubles" true. Words like horse trading, head counts, going for the highest bidders and deals were afloat, and very grim looking, stiff-faced thinkers and editors were on prime-time debates guiding the nation with their serious analyses.
Meanwhile, those who desired governorships, ambassadorial assignments or positions of OSDs to ministers showed up at the bungalows of the promising winners and assured them, "Sir, I have confirmed news from IB, you are winning and sahib will certainly become PM. Congratulations in advance, sir. Please do not forget me, sir, when you take oath."
Usual things in this part of the world. Corporate giants and their lackeys were present in full strength and promised all out support to their "horses" for the next round of government making -- post May 16.

This was happening when almost 50% of the Indian electorate chose not to vote.
And we shall be happy about the great vivacity, prudence and efficacy of our electorate and democratic institutions.
The second day, having returned from one such serious TV discussion on a very honestly fudged exit poll, we completed the ritual of watching Balika Vadhu at home and went out for "chaat" in Fateh Puri.
And while savouring the best mix of bhalla-papadi, I couldn't resist asking the "chaatwalla": "Kya khayal hai bhaiyya, kiski sarkar banegi (Dear brother, who you think will form the government)?"
He replied taking my serious query as a funny, unimportant one: "How does it matter to us? It matters to only those handful of people who know the leaders and are in their closer circles. Let any one form the government."
I dismissed it as a cynical answer of a semiliterate person who didn't realize the importance of his vote. The government he chooses decides the destiny of the country. Those who people parliament are called lawmakers and law is the vehicle that drives the national life.
Who was right -- the "chaatwalla" or I?
I think the "chaatwalla" was right.
Where are the voter and the nation and the interest of the disadvantaged and the distanced people of this land in the decisions that party leaders are about to make to form the next central government?
Which party or front has put up a condition to introduce the universally available health scheme, an assured health insurance to all and better public hospitals as a precondition to form a coalition? Or which leader has announced that his support is assured to the party that promises good primary schools in his area, with the best of facilities available to the children of Shah Rukh and Ambani made available to the poor and farmers? Why can't we give top priority to our common, often voiceless, citizens? Just forget the individual election manifestos released by the parties. Everything depends on the common minimum programme that will be agreed upon by winning coalitions post May 16.
These were the elections that were contested by the rich to get richer at the expense of the poor and powerless, unorganized millions. Nowhere the issues of empowering the poor and low-income groups, or earmarking housing as a fundamental right and increased facilities and ultramodern training to the police and security forces were considered a winnable election slogan or a charter to earn people's mandate. How did the parties connect or even tried to befriend and educate a rickshaw puller on issues that affect his life as a citizen? Did they feel the need for it? He would be required only in a rally of the poor to be addressed by a rich leader. He is the class, which is made to get worked up on emotive issues and used as cannon fodder. He dies in greatly publicized agitations unsung with none of the red-eyed, angry leaders who led him to death caring how his family is continuing with a life that it didn't choose. Issues of Hindu-Muslim, caste and provincialism are raised just for the limited gains of vote and then easily forgotten once the space in Lutyen's Delhi is assured.
The life of a hawker or labourer who gets his daily wages after a cut by his middleman contractor and the factory worker hasn't changed since last decade. Still in the remote villages water scarcity, famines, floods, 12-hour power cuts, bad roads and overloaded means of transportation are facts of life. The mushrooming growth of the new educational malls providing half-baked degrees to the aspiring youth and the huge number of increasing urban and rural unemployed semi-skilled work force can't get on to the agendas of any politician unless they form a usable vote bank. The urban public amenities, buses, railway stations and localities of the low-income group working people show unbelievable depths of human misery, filth, anarchical systemic failure and life in a subhuman condition.
The biggest fraud of our times has been to showcase improvement in the railways. You have to travel sleeper class to see the coaches filled with passengers like animals in a goods train with lower levels of cleanliness. Every major platform is choked with passengers squatting on the floors, as there is no proper space for the travelers to wait and board the train with dignity. The politicians do not find it necessary to look at the common citizen with respect and provide him facilities he deserves by virtue of being an Indian citizen.

A senior member of the Indian Administrative Service, Alok Kumar, in a brilliant analysis, in Garhwal Post , has reflected on how these elections might have become less relevant for the millions of people who have restricted sources of income and are living on the edge: "At 267 million [2005] , the number of poor remains unacceptably large. If you also include the fact that of the remaining population, 190 million earn between $1 and $1.25 a day and a further 170 million earn between $1.25 and $1.35 a day, it would be clear that a large number of people, 55% to be precise, cannot afford a life of dignity. The increase in per capita income (currently $575) largely reflects the income growths of the top quintile of the population. It has been estimated by the Forbes 2006 list of study that the 32 Indian billionaires have amassed assets totaling $153.7 billion, equivalent to 15.4% of the GDP of the country and at a modest rate of return of 10%, they command close to 1.5% of the national wealth of the country. It could arguably be said that a few billionaires could possibly raise the mean income; without affecting the vast majority of poor.

"The symbiotic relationship between politics & big business has worried commentators enough to contemplate upon the possibility of an oligarchic state in India. Where does this leave the "Aam Admi? -- the so called median voter? The farm loan waiver has been said to benefit the rich farmers more than the small and marginal ones, because the latter category was largely excluded from access to credit from government financial institutions and therefore relied more on private sources of credit. Schemes such as NREGP, RKVY & NRHM have been designed to reach exactly the median voter -- "Aam Admi" but in the absence of reforms in the delivery mechanism, it is not certain as to what proportion of intended benefits is reaching the median voter. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission has submitted 11 reports so far, but any change in the governance structure still remains a commitment unfulfilled. The recent return to power of incumbent governments in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Delhi was seen as the citizens' vote for good governance. I wish I could characterize it so, but I am not so sanguine. In Rajasthan, with an excellent record of implementation of NREGA entailing huge transfers of money to the rural labour, this was not sufficient to ensure reelection to the incumbent government ... The moral of the story - with due apologies to John Allen Paulos: 'It's Mean to Ignore the Median'."
It's not just true about the daily needs of an "aam aadmi", who is not touched by the politically active class, but also about the middle-income groups that form the majority of the Indian people put together. In our daily lives, from a berth reservation in the railways to getting your child admitted to a good school and having a driving licence to benefiting from the farmers' loan waiver scheme and getting a medical aid you need a political contact. Netaji's letter and his phone calls are too important for small mercies. Each neta, on an average is a controller of a few hundred crore rupees and lives a luxurious life in his green acres maintained at public money. Syama Prasad Mookerjee, a great academic and nationalist ideologue said, "No government which calls itself civilized has the right to exist unless it can so formulate and administer its policy as to keep the people under its charge free from minimum want and privation." But who cares?
The debates you see on the TV screens by intelligent people are not meant for the poor and the median.

1 comment:

Vijay said...

I understand this was written before the election results. Can you discuss BJP's irrelevance in Kerala, TN, AP, Orissa and WB? How about floating regional parties in each of these states, considering that the BJP or Jan Sangh haven't made headway even after 6 decades.

I am not sure if you read comments on this blog.