Why the fast weapon works

The midnight police action against Baba Ramdev and his followers at Delhi’s Ramlila Maidan may cost the ruling Congress Party dearly. And surely they are not unaware of this.

Having said that, we must also concede the fact that the Congress showed guts by taking the risk to finally show the world who really calls the shots.

When Anna Hazare, and then Baba Ramdev, entered the political theatre without wearing any party badge and started coercing the administration with their diktats, the government initially gave in for some time.

It even accepted Hazare’s demand of participation in the Bill drafting process, though in fact that is the job of the government and Parliament. It also held several ministerial level dialogues with Baba Ramdev. But it was all in vain, with the yoga guru remaining adamant about his scheduled fast. This finally forced the government to act against him.

Thanks mainly to the immature media, which thrives on drama and entertainment, Hazare and Ramdev became instant national heroes.

But though it played a crucial role, one cannot blame just the media. One must understand that the media has a limited role and impact. The issues have to be sufficiently hot and appealing to the public for sustained media coverage.

Image: Javed Choudhary

The method of agitation also plays a critical role. A public meeting or a morcha has limited exposure as it gets over in a few hours, as against a dharna or a fast which can go on for days, ensuring prolonged media coverage.

A fast is even much more effective, since it creates an image of someone willing to sacrifice everything, even life, for a social cause. And since no government can risk being seen as apathetic towards someone willing to risk his life for a cause, the chances of success are high.

Hence an indefinite fast has become the preferred weapon of such activists because it generates prolonged media publicity on one hand and puts pressure on the government to accede to their demands on the other.

In order to extricate itself from such situations, sometimes the government gives in to the demands, without really considering whether the cause is really just for everybody concerned.

Take the case of Medha Patkar’s recent fast in Mumbai for Golibar slum colony people. The Maharashtra government accepted all her demands, only to face another group of people from the same colony taking out a morcha protesting against Patkar’s role and the state government for acceding to her demands.

Which is why such fasts and other coercive tactics are now being viewed with increasing scepticism by both the public and the government.

But the real reason for the rise of people like Anna Hazare and Baba Ramdev is the complete vacuum in the real political arena caused by the complete erosion of credibility of all parties and their leaders.

No political party can really organize and lead such an agitation against corruption. Even if they did, they would not garner the same level of public support.

The people have no faith in political parties and leaders, and hence they are moving towards such non-party leadership.

For instance, the BJP has openly supported Ramdev. But the question is, why didn’t the party organize such an agitation or fast on its own? The answer is simple: its past while in power at the centre will haunt it, and so will the situation in Karnataka. And that is the weakness of every party in the country.
The inability of mainstream political parties to launch such agitations with popular support, and the growing support for such movements by non-party leaders is not a good sign.

In a democracy, people elect their representatives to enact laws and to look after their problems. Civil society, different organizations, independent leaders do have a role to play in highlighting certain issues and problems. But this is a limited role. Crossing those limits can undermine the democratic institutions, which will create new problems.
If the babas and other gurus are to be stopped from taking centre-stage with popular public support, political parties and leaders of all shades will have to indulge in some serious introspection. They will have to bring in changes within to instil confidence among the people, make them believe that they are reliable, trustworthy, non-corrupt. They will need to leverage their bonds with the masses, and make them believe that they –and the system—work for the public good.

It is time the political parties took serious steps to re-establish their credibility. Only then the people will turn to them once again.

How Binayak Sen changed my mind

Let me confess that my initial reaction to the media furore over the arrest of Dr Binayak Sen for sedition was less than positive.

Looking at the various mails and online forums supporting the man and attacking the Chattisgarh government for jailing him, my first reaction was that this was yet another instance of human rights activists going berserk over someone who had been convicted of a crime.

I did not like it because I strongly believe that when a court gives a judgment, the only option is to appeal against it in a higher court, and not a trial by media.

Hence the overwhelming support for Dr Sen and against the court verdict in the public domain raised reservations in my mind about him.

But all that changed dramatically when I heard Dr Sen for the first time yesterday at the Mumbai Press Club.

Addressing a large gathering of journalists, Dr Sen, who is out on bail following a Supreme Court order, systematically explained the three serious, interconnected issues which are at his heart, and how they led to his arrest.

The issues are: hunger, displacement and sedition.

Over 37 per cent of India’s adult population suffers from hunger and chronic malnutrition. One of the main reasons for this is the common man’s lack of access to land and other common resources.

Large scale displacement of people due to acquisition of land by the government for private institutes is a major factor here. And any attempt to raise any voice against this is suppressed by using sedition laws.

Dr. Sen’s remarks on displacement come at a time when when land acquisition in Uttar Pradesh for a highway project has become controversial, with the Congress party and the ruling BSP crossing swords over it. At the same time, National Advisory Council (NAC) has issued a new blueprint for land acquisition as well as resettlement and rehabilitation, which is scheduled for discussion in Parliament during the monsoon session in July.

Dr. Sen is disturbed by the current state of affairs. Land has been acquired in the past too. But his contention is that now the government is increasingly acting as a guarantor in the process of handing over such resources to private interests. This, he says, not only increases inequity in society but is also against the directive principles of the constitution.

The facts are on his side. Thirty seven per cent our total adult population, 60 per cent of SCs and 50 per cent STs and 47 per cent children below five years have a biomass index of less than 18.5, meaning they face chronic malnutrition. And this is not due to lack of food, but people’s inability to access it.

But there seems to be an inherent contradiction when Dr. Sen speaks against land acquisition.

Removal of hunger can be achieved by two ways – making foodgrain accessible to the poor at subsidized rates, or enhancing the purchasing power of poor families by providing jobs.

The first option has been plagued by rampant corruption, and non-eligible families misusing the privilege. Job creation and development involves projects, which in turn requires land.

Bringing people above the real poverty line and equipping them with adequate purchasing power is the only permanent solution.

Dr Sen, however, is quick to clarify that he is not opposed to taking away land for public purpose. But he feels that the government should have a dialogue with the landowners before that.

“Democracy is not limited to elections, but it is about governance by consensus. Democracy demands that people be taken into confidence. In a Sovereign state, it is the people who are sovereign,” he argues.

Our government’s record on this count is pathetic. There seems to be a policy of concealment, of wishy-washy responses, forcible action and sneaky, corrupt deals, and total lack of credibility.

But social actions groups and NGOs are no exception at times in making tall claims. The recent case in point here is Supreme Court’s serious reprimand of Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) for giving wrong information to the apex court.

But all is not lost. There is a slow but definite change in governments’ attitude. People like Dr. Sen and his friends can exert pressure to further this process of openness, dialogue and enhanced compensation.

But they must also understand that vehement, violent opposition to a project itself at times compels the government too to take hard line.

If legitimate demands over compensation by the project affected people and other related issues are met, how many activists or organizations are willing to work on the government’s behalf to convince people to give their land? Can we guarantee that no politics is involved in opposition to such projects?

Dr. Sen asserts that he is against violence —both by the state and non-state actors. But he also asserts that the whole phenomenon of structural violence should be addressed from the root cause- widespread malnutrition and the displacement of malnourished communities from their resource base, putting their survival at risk. Pushed against the wall, at times they have no recourse other than violence. And that is where the Naxals come in.

Speaking of Naxals, Dr Sen is quite categorical: “Neither I am Naxal supporter, nor oppose. I am only an observer and analyst of situation on ground and in my role as public health and human rights activist, I react to the situation.”

Who can argue with such a position?

Superpower? Not just yet

The Good News: India is on the list of six major economies which will account for more than half of global growth by 2025.

The Bad News: Corruption, inefficiency and poverty in India will get a lot worse before they start getting better.

In its Global Development Horizons 2011 report, titled: Multipolarity: The New Global Economy, the World Bank says the global GDP share of Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, South Korea, and Russia will increase from 36 to 45 per cent.

The news may have given India Inc and Dalal Street a cause to celebrate, and the Sensex a boost. But even as we join in the celebrations, we must ponder one fundamental question: Can a nation’s progress be measured only by it economic growth?

Several economists, sociologists and social thinkers have always replied in negative. In fact, that is the idea behind the Human Development Index, (HDI) which measures a nation’s real progress and not only its capitalization growth or soaring share index or the growth in wealth of a few selected hands.

Superpower in waiting?

And therein lies the rub. Because according to the 2010 HDI figures, India falls in the medium category, ranking 119 among among 169 countries. Its HDI is 0.519 when the highest HDI is 0.938 and the lowest is 0.140.

Compare that with the five others on the list of nations who are supposed to lead global growth in the next decade: South Korea is ranked 12th, (0.877 – very high human development), Russia is at 65 (0.719 – high human development), Brazil – 73 (0.699 – high human development), China is 89 (0.663 – Medium human development), and Indonesia is 108th (0.600 – Medium human development).

India, which has more than 37 per cent of its population of 1.35 billion still living below the poverty line, comes last by a long shot. As per 2010 figures, more than 22 per cent of the entire rural population and 15 per cent of the country’s urban population exists in this difficult physical and financial predicament.

Yet, according to the World Bank’s new global poverty estimates, India has shown a continuing decline in poverty. The revised estimates suggest that the percentage of people living below $1.25 a day in 2005 (which, based on India’s Purchasing Power Parity rate, works out to Rs 21.6 a day in urban areas and Rs 14.3 in rural areas in 2005) decreased from 60 per cent in 1981 to 42 per cent in 2005. Even at a dollar a day ( Rs 17.2 in urban areas and Rs 11.4 in rural areas in 2005 ) poverty declined from 42 per cent to 24 per cent over the same period.

But statistics can be deceptive. In 2005, thought the World Bank revised the international poverty line up from $1 a day to $1.25 a day, individual countries were allowed to set their own national poverty line.

Accordingly, our Planning Commission set India’s national poverty line at Rs 578 a month, the equivalent of 43 US cents a day. The World Bank believes that this is too low, and that a more realistic level would be $1.17 a day. If one goes by that figure, India is estimated to have about 600 million poor who go hungry to bed each night. By setting the poverty line at 43 cents, India magically brought down this figure considerably.

But since statistics and figures can be deceptive, let us keep them aside for a moment.

What we see as on ground realities? Increasing number of farmers committing suicide. More children dying each day due to malnutrition or lack of access to health facilities. Rural children unable to write their own name or do some simple calculations despite attending school. Women walking up to six km every day to fetch drinking water in rural areas, which reel under 16 to 20 hours of power cuts each day.

Urban areas are full of slums where people live in sub human conditions. Long queues in front of fair price food grain shops, with no grains in them. Thousands of street children, wandering, begging or working as child labourers with no hope for education.

This is the picture of one India, which is far larger than the India with malls, stock exchanges, corporate high flyers, cars, appliances, gadgets and restaurants. These, no doubt, will boost growth.

After all, as the World Bank says in its latest report: “with the emergence of a substantial middle class in developing countries and demographic transitions underway in several major East Asian economies, stronger consumption trends are likely to prevail, which in turn can serve as a source of sustained global growth.”

Economic growth no doubt plays an important role in development as it creates surplus wealth for investment, more jobs, growing affluence. More demand leads to more production, more industries mean more jobs, more affluence, and even more demand.

This circle, if drawn properly, can encompass the entire nation. But if not, wealth and affluence does not percolate downwards, and is concentrated among a few. The poor get poorer, and this in turn lead to social tensions.

India is land of such contradictions, where we have incredible poverty and squalor on one hand, and a growing number of citizens making it to Forbe’s Rich List. Where we have eight people sharing a tiny shack without any basic facilities, living right next to a 25-floor building built for a family of five.

Lack of transparency and governance and large scale corruption add to this dichotomy . Further growth without overcoming these evils is bound to widen the gap.

Which is perhaps why the World Bank, while predicting incredible growth for these six nations by 2025, has also warned that four of them–China, Indonesia, India, and Russia– face major institutional and governance challenges. Human capital and ensuring access to education is also a concern Brazil, India, and Indonesia.
India figures in both groups.

So even as we celebrate our new-found path to the world’s top table, it is important to remember the growing fault lines that could tear us apart before we get there.

Narmada and our National Shame

The scathing censure of the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) by the Supreme Court on Thursday might force the organize to change its name to “NBA Bachao Andolan.”

While the court’s strictures were aimed at the NBA in particular, it indirectly ensures that other credible pressure groups will now be looked at with suspicion.

Eulogised by the media, the andolan, spearheaded by social activist Medha Patkar, had achieved an iconic position in civil society. Politicians and celebrities, intellectuals like Arundhati Roy to celluloid stars like Amir Khan flocked to align themselves with NBA at some time or the other.

Praying for a cause

Patkar became such a celebrity that she was invited to lead many other protests, while some protests were even run using her name, without her endorsement or knowledge. The intention was two-fold: one, to browbeat the authorities with the credibility that her name brought, and of course to attract media attention to their cause.

Even those opposed to Patkar or her NBA could not dismiss her lightly. The NBA’s agitations, particularly Patkar’s hunger strikes (or Jalsamadhi Andolans) shook various state and federal governments, forcing them to offer compromise after compromise.

Any organization that achieves such stature is bound to have opponents, critics and controversy. Most organization leaderships make allowances for this. The NBA too had its share of criticism from the government and other quarters.

In April 2006, a popular blog called ‘Prajatantra’ posted a strong critique of the outfit titled “Narmada Bachao Andolan” se bachao (Save us from the NBA). While accepting its basic demand for proper compensation and rehabilitation of families affected by the mega-dam project, many others criticized it for the ways and means promoted by the outfit to press its cause.

But its mass credibility and popularity ensured that the NBA balance sheet always had far more assets than liabilities.

But all it took for that to turn turtle, like the erstwhile Sathyam balance sheet, was a few strong words from country’s Apex court. Admitting that it’s credibility had led the court to accept some of its arguments without challenge, it said: declared: “In the instant case, it (the NBA) stands discredited totally in the eyes of this court.”

This is not a jolt to the NBA alone, but for civil society as a whole. Because now, the claims of every civil organisation will be examined under a magnifying glass, particularly by the judiciary. Regardless of whether the cause is human rights, pollution, poverty or corporate malfeasance, all claims made by social outfits will now invite suspicious scrutiny.

Of course, the NBA is not the first powerful social movement caught fudging its claims. At the international level, Greenpeace and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had made exaggerated claims on oil spillage and the melting of Himalayan glaciers. Both had to eat their words, with IPCC lamely blaming a ‘printing error.’

Some two decades ago, a leading social activist from Maharashtra’s Thane had accused a religious trust, against whom he was agitating, of carelessness while distributing free utensils and blankets to tribals, leading to a stampede which claimed five lives. The incident never happened. Releasing the news to media without verification led to the leader and his organization losing its credibility, painstakingly built up over years.

Pressure groups and social activists must understand that in their fight on behalf of the common man and the poor, credibility is their strongest weapon. That is the one and only reason why the media and the civil society rally behind their cause.

Making exaggerated claims, knowingly or not, to buttress their cause not only jeopardizes them and their leaders, but every social group or civilian agitation. Even genuine causes will be looked at suspiciously.

And in the end, it is the poor and the oppressed who will suffer.

PAs, peons and the great Maharashtra debt trap

Is Maharashtra, once known as one of the richest states in the country, spiralling into a dangerous and vicious debt trap?

The Comptroller and Auditor General certainly thinks so.

In its latest report for the year ended march 31 2010, the CAG slams the state government for gross mismanagement of its funds.

Nearly 20 per cent of the state’s total debt will have to be returned in coming five years, which might force the state to take another loan to repay the earlier loan.

The main reason for this dismal situation is that the government gets a meagre 0.13 per cent returns on its investment, while it pays 8 to 8.5 per cent interest for debt servicing.

So unless drastic changes are made, this could soon spiral totally out of control.

One key area which requires a major rethink is the government’s salary expenses. The state is expected to spend Rs 48,761 crore on salaries this financial year, which is 13.79 per cent more than the previous year.
Salaries thus eat up a whopping 40.13 per cent of revenue receipts. With other administration expenses taking up another 20 per cent, there is barely 40 per cent of the state’s revenue left for development work. Yet even after spending 40 per cent of its income on salaries, the services provided by the state are abysmal, and getting worse by the day.

The Mantralaya needs a new mantra

To address this issue on a war footing, the government will have to revamp and rethink several methods, keeping in view various factors that impact the working environment like technology, output audit, and the redundancy of certain positions.

But fundamentally, a cap on recruitment and reduction in workforce are the only options to reduce salary expenses, since unlike in the corporate world, the government cannot stop DAs, bonuses, increments or impose wage cuts.

Apart from legal issues, such acts require guts and political will which no recent government has shown so far.

One step that could yield instant rewards is the removal of personal assistants, or PAs. In our bureaucracy, it is not just the chief secretary, but all secretaries and deputy secretaries are alloted PAs. These assistants not only consume financial resources but also occupy space in Mantralaya, the state government headquarters.

And what do they do? They basically screen visitors and phone calls to the boss, take dictation and maintain an inward/outward register. Personal computers and modern telecommunication systems have made their role totally redundant. PAs can thus be removed in phased manner starting from the lower levels, ie the deputy secretaries first.

In 1995, on a trip to Washington DC, I called a Maharashtra state government secretary I knew, who had been posted there on deputation to the World Bank. The call went to an answering machine, but the moment I introduced myself, he picked up the phone to speak with me. So a secretary at the World Bank can do without a PA, but a deputy secretary, three rungs below him in the state government, cannot?

Mantralaya is full of deputy secretaries, additional secretaries, and joint secretaries, apart from other senior officials and ministers who enjoy the privilege of not just one, but at times several PAs. Laws restricting this remain on paper, but are blatantly waived, increasing the financial pressures on the state and of course, the tax payer.

Maharashtra is also home to the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC). Here, bar the top two or three positions, everyone else shares a secretarial pool, which is equipped with PCs and other modern equipment. If the country’s premier nuclear research centre can do this, why can’t the state government?

Besides, the government has been spending a lot of money over the years on PCs, laptops, hardware, software, networking and computer training. It has even been giving incentives to officers and staff for taking computer training, and talking about promoting e-governance. But if the officers still depend on PAs to get their work done, e-governance will remain just a dream.

Then there are the peons, another legacy of the British Raj. Our government offices are full of them. Some officials have more than one peon assigned to them. Basically, their job is to carry their bosses bags or briefcase and screen visitors.

Thus the government needs to seriously review not just the manpower perks and privileges currently available to its officials, but also the responsibilities of these personnel. If a PA is provided to the officer, he or she should not be paid for swatting flies most of the time, and be worth his or her salary.

Another major area to cut costs is space utilization. Every senior government official is provided with big cabin, huge tables, chairs and other furniture occupying large amounts of space. Do they all need so much of space and furniture? In modern private offices, barring a few top officials, all others are given open cubicles with a small worktable and two chairs. This also promotes an open culture and transparency, which the government desperately needs.

During British rule, the English used the system of PAs and peons to impress and intimidate the natives. Independence should have changed it, but instead, the white sahibs were replaced by brown ones.

Post globalization and liberalization, our babus who wish to enjoy corporate luxuries and perks must also learn to function in the same manner. If they want sleek cars, air-conditioned offices, and the benefits of technology, they must give up on unnecessary luxuries like PAs and peons. They can’t have their cake and eat it too.

But as always, the question remains: Who will bell the cat?

Such decisions will always be very difficult for any government to take, since it involves a) asking babus to sacrifice perks and privileges hitherto taken for granted, b) loss of jobs, and c) Union anger over job/position cuts.

But if planned expenditure, which ideally should be 35 to 40 per cent of the budget, keeps on reducing due to hikes in unplanned expenditure, the state’s growth will be affected, which in turn will hit revenues.

The government cannot increase revenue by hiking tax rates, since the state already has the highest taxes in the country, and any increase would prove counterproductive. A drop in revenue coupled with mounting debts is a one way ticket to a debt trap.

Caught between a rock and hard place, the Maharashtra government has two clear options before it.

One, cut unnecessary expenses now, and face the consequences.

Two, continue with these expenses, and prepare for bankruptcy or worse.

Which one will it choose?

Corruption: Are we fighting ourselves?

As Anna Hazare ended his fast against graft, the media went into a frenzy over how social media and two segments of our society – the middle class and youth – had played a key role in the success of his agitation.

Comparisons were made with the contribution of social media sites to the successful revolution in parts of the Arab world. Some even dreamt of a revolution in India, similar to those in Libya and Egypt.

But that dream is unfortunately not based on reality.

Perhaps it is difficult to expect observations based on reality from the people who live continuously in the cyberworld. But those who don’t, cannot afford to make such a mistake about India, whose sheer size and population defies conventional equations applied to other nations.

While studying the relationship between social media and people’s movements, it is important to understand the difference between cyber reality and on-ground movements.

Social networking sites can spread the word about a meeting, or argue eloquently for a cause. But they cannot make people act on such information. That requires other factors like inspiring leadership, a burning issue, people’s will and powerful emotions about a cause or event.

Social networking sites cannot replace an inspiring leader. It is particularly difficult in a vast country like India, where Internet penetration is still nominal. Revolutions here still needs people who are willing to sacrifice even their lives, a set objective(s) and a guiding leadership.Social media cannot provide this.

Unlike in pre and post-independence India, when it was in the forefront of various and at times violent agitations, today’s middle class seems to be believe more in symbolic acts. Like lighting candles and sharing messages using their cell phone or computer.

But while symbolism is important, it plays a limited role.

The much tom-tommed role of the middle class and youngsters in Anna Hazare’s recent agitation raises certain important questions. Though the agitation was to press for a particular draft of the Lokpal Bill, its overall objective was to root out corruption in our society.

Now corruption takes place at two levels – one, at the level of decision makers, and two, at the level where the common man has to deal with the government machinery.

The authorities in some developed nations have managed to restrict the corruption to higher levels. In these nations, common people don’t have to bribe government officials to get their regular work processed. Naturally, the same middle class working in government offices does not pay bribes, and corruption is thus usually restricted to the upper enclaves of the society.

Unfortunately that is not the case with India, where corruption is spread from top to bottom. But more people are fed up with the corruption at the lower levels of bureaucracy and government, which involves bribes for getting routine work done, rather than the huge multi-crore scams, simply because it impacts them at a more fundamental level.

This adds an interesting twist to the issue, because the people taking and giving bribes belong to the same middle class.

A linesman or a junior engineer of the local electricity board takes a bribe for giving an power connection to a teacher or a doctor. The same linesman or engineer has to bribe a government hospital staff or a doctor to obtain some services or certificates. The doctor or hospital staff has to bribe people at the Regional Transport Authority to get a driving license. And the RTO staff bribes a civic employee for a water connection or sanctioning plan for his house.

Notice that the roles above are restricted to public sector or government staff.

There is thus this rather piquant situation where government employees on one hand accept bribes to provide services which are under their jurisdiction or domain, and on the other pay bribes to receive services which are under some other domain.

And they are all mostly, invariably, middle class. Not VVIPs or CEOs, but often our own relatives.

It could be your cousin, who’s a junior engineer with the electricity board, or that uncle who works at the license department of a municipal corporation, that aunt working in some dreary government office, that sister-in-law who teaches at a government school. It could be you.

With parents like these, today’s youngsters are obviously no strangers to corruption. How many of them are bold enough to protest against corrupt family members? How many of them are willing to at least open a discussion in the house over the source of suspect funds? How many reject fancy, expensive weddings in favor of simpler ones, despite knowing that the money for such extravagance cannot be raised legally?

Apart from financial corruption, there’s also moral corruption, which comes in the form of cleverly bypassing or circumventing rules, or using “influence” to get the job done.

Are we willing to accept the norms of civil society in our day to day life? Are we willing to admit that any action that is harmful to other person in any manner is a kind of corruption? Will the youngsters stop playing loud music after 10 pm, or stop participating in any function or activity that blocks traffic?

So what exactly were the middle class and youngsters protesting against when they turned out to support Hazare? Were they not protesting against their own corruption, and that of their relatives?

There is no harm in participating in an agitation to muster support for a cause, particularly a worthwhile one.

But what if the people who went to Jantar Mantar, gathered at public squares, lit candles, sent out sms’, and endorsed such causes on Facebook and Twitter had instead just decided not to accept any bribe for the work they do? What if they severed ties with all relatives and friends who indulge in corruption?

Now that would have been a real revolution.