Gujarat persecuting people through greedy governance


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Gujarat persecuting people through greedy governance

  1. 1. Gujarat: Persecuting People (through) Greedy Governance (P2-G2) Gujarat has industrialized, but not developed. It has done this by crushingIntroductory the under-privileged, the marginalized and the aam admi. Modi prioritizes Argument the greed of mega-corporations over the needs of the aam aadmi.• Rationale for Government and development: A nation develops to empower its people by establishing institutions, both public and private, that support them to realize their dreams. A Government provides full opportunities of growth through easy access to these institutions. Ultimately, each and every individual and community is the raison d‘etre of development (Rio Declaration, United Nations, 1992), and a Government has to be of, by and for this community of people.• Development in Gujarat is anti-people: Gujarat is the one state where goals like social quality, sustainable livelihoods, access to education and health, justice and peace have been bypassed by an authoritarian despot, who has been hand in glove with big businesses. The so called ‘development’ in Gujarat has been anti-poor, anti-dalit, anti-women and against all minorities and people on the margins, as also the aam admi. The state’s outcomes on employment, poverty, education, health, inequality and consumption, the things that matter the most to the people, are dismal.• Why this anti-development matters to India: Modi’s governance style is similar to a fascist dictatorship, where one leader rules by personal dictat. He brooks no opposition, not allowing any room for legislative accountability (the Gujarat Assembly was allowed to meet for only 30 days a year on average for the past ten years, much less than the preceding years). The impacts and consequences of ‘development’ in Gujarat could well be a precursor for the rest of India, and we need to be aware and wary of the choices imposed by Modi. Gujarat has industrialized rapidly, but the Modi Government has turned a Key blind eye on how these mega-corporations industrialize, and has actually Argument I aided them blatantly. • Modi blatantly aiding mega-corporations, not people: The ‘development’ of Gujarat is completely dependent on the private sector, and Modi has been bending over backwards to ensure that mega corporations earn a massive profit. Under Modi, the Gujarat Government has imposed: i. Agricultural land converted to non-agricultural: Legislative changes in the land use norms have made it easy for large corporations to grab land, dislocating farmers (these have also reinforced speculation in land). ii. Modi Government turns a blind eye on standards and practices of businesses: The Modi government has enforced a policy that ensures that any unit (up to Rs. 40 lakhs) can be set up and operate without any government inspections. This gives even small businesses complete freedom to do whatever they want in their firms. A study conducted by the Peoples Training and Research Centre (PTRC) found that a large number of children were employed in the agate industry, and despite repeated petitions, the Modi Government ignored it. Further, the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights found that a large number of children were forcibly employed in Banaskanta, Sambarkanta and Patan districts in the BT cotton industry.   iii. Development of only that kind of infrastructure that aids big businesses (these include road and rail access to SEZs, SIRs and big factories). iv. Mega-corporations, with Modi’s support, discriminate against their staff: The Economic Survey, 2011 listed Gujarat as the ‘worst’ state for labour unrest. Gujarat witnessed the highest number of strikes and other forms of labour unrest because mega-corporations in Gujarat gave poor wages, allowances and bonuses, and stamped out indiscipline by using State sanctioned violence against personnel. Mukta (1990, 2002) has argued that it is not unusual for capital to defend their economic power by what they like to term as “rule of law”. This means a “political culture of
  2. 2. authoritarianism”, which uses “brute force” to subdue any request for equality or fair treatment by workers. • Low FDI because of Modi Government’s poor record in curbing human rights violations and support of discrimination against workers: Although Gujarat contributes to approximately 16 percent of the total industrial production, most of this driven by domestic investment. Gujarat accounts for merely five percent of FDI since 2000. The reason for this is that multi-national corporations cannot afford to have their images tarnished by being associated with a State that encourages discrimination against employees and human rights violations. After Maharashtra, Delhi is the preferred destination for foreign direct investment (20.72 percent), followed by Karnataka (six percent) and Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry (5.27 percent). Gujarat’s development is comparable to other States, but is heavily Key concentrated in select areas and sectors, which limits the benefits to theArgument II people. • Summary of Gujarat’s “success story”: Gujarat accounts for seven percent of India’s GDP, 14 percent of India’s manufacturing gross value added, nine percent of employment 17.25 percent of fixed capital and ten percent of total number of factories in India. • Growth rate in Gujarat, comparable to other states: Gujarat has grown at 10.5 percent per annum GDP growth in the last decade, comparable to Maharashtra’s 10 percent, Haryana’s 9.2 percent and Tamil Nadu’s 8.5 percent. • Investment concentrated in only a few districts; investment pattern politically motivated: On the face of it, Gujarat’s growth story has been evenly distributed (industrial sector: 40.7 percent), (services: 47.2 percent) and (agriculture: 15.0 percent). However, 80 percent of the total investment is heavily concentrated in only five districts (Hirway, 1995; Awasthi, 2000), and there has only been investment in those districts/ constituencies where the BJP is dominant (BJP controls 48 out of the 57 seats in the said districts): Total Investment District BJP Seats Percentage Ahmedabad 21 17 9.28 Bharuch 5 4 13.52 Jamnagar 7 5 13.94 Kachchh 6 5 32.26 Surat 18 17 10.74 57 48 79.74 In comparison, North Gujarat which has primarily INC legislators (Sabarkantha and Banaskantha districts) has suffered because Modi has deliberately misused public funds for political gains. • Manufacturing concentrated in just three districts: A key part of Gujarat’s industrialization is manufacturing. However, only three districts, namely Jamnagar, Vadodara and Surat account for 60 percent of gross value added, and 64 percent of fixed capital in 2005- ’06 (again all three are dominated by BJP legislators, which further points to the political misuse of development funds). • Investment concentrated in only a few highly technical sectors; consequently employment generation is very limited: Most of the total investment is heavily concentrated in a few industry groups like chemicals & petro-chemicals (42.19 percent), textiles (10.28 percent), engineering equipment (8.1 percent) and metallurgical industry (8.07 percent). Because of the highly technical nature of the industries that drive Gujarat’s growth, refined petro- chemicals provided negligible employment, while the chemical sector provides for only 23 percent of total employment. The benefits of Gujarat’s rapid industrialization have not “trickled down” to Key the employees of the mega-corporations, let alone the aam admi. Argument III This capital intensive form of industrialization has adversely affected the aam admi.
  3. 3. • Sectoral growth rates has not translated into high employment rates: Despite high growth rates in key sectors like agriculture and manufacturing, these same sectors saw negative employment growth rates in employment, as compared to other comparable states, and the all India level. This further bolsters the argument that the so called ‘development’ in Gujarat helps mega-corporations, and not the aam admi. Comparison of sectoral contribution to GDP versus Employment Growth Rate Gujarat Haryana Tamil Nadu All India GDP Employment GDP Employment GDP Employment GDP EmploymentAgriculture 3.19 -1.59 3.72 -3.1 3.33 0.14 3.21 -2.2 Industry 10.14 -0.79 7.87 4.88 6.53 2.08 8.87 3.05 Services 9.60 -2.23 7.48 3.72 7.33 -1.8 9.62 -1.64 Source: NSSO, 50th, 61st and 66th Rounds, Employment-Unemployment Situation in India.• Rise in wages not commensurate with industrialization: With such rapid industrialization, it would be fair to expect that there would be a commensurate increase in wages. However, in fact, in Gujarat, the growth rate of wages in the organized manufacturing sector grew slowly by 1.5 percent in the decade of 2000 (all India wages grew by 3.78 percent). As evidenced, Maharashtra and India as a whole have had a higher increase in the growth rates of wages per employee. Growth Rate of Wages per Employee 1990s 2000s Gujarat 3.70 1.48 Maharashtra 1.52 2.20 All India 1.54 3.78 Source: Annual Survey of Industry (various States), 1980- ’81 to 2007- ’08.• Consequently, low rise in wages has adversely affected per capita expenditure of the aam admi: This slow growth in wages has had severe consequences for the average monthly per capita expenditure in Gujarat, which grew at much lower rates as compared to the national average and growth in other comparable States. In 2009- ’10, the average monthly per capita expenditure in Gujarat was Rs. 1, 388, as compared to Haryana’s Rs. 1598 and Maharashtra’s Rs. 1549. In the urban areas, the growth in average monthly consumption expenditure in the state of Gujarat was marginally less than the national average (2.13 per cent per annum compared to average of 2.4 percent) and the advantage that the state had between 1993-05 was lost during 2005-10. In urban Gujarat, 60 percent of the population spends less than the state average of Rs.1909 per month per head which is lower than the national average of Rs.1984 per month per head. In rural Gujarat too, 60 percent of the population spends less than the state average of Rs.1110 per capita which is slightly higher than the national average of Rs.1054 (NSSO 2009-‘10 – the survey on consumer expenditure by households).• Employment record dismal; marginal groups lose out on benefits from ‘development’: It has been pointed out that while Gujarat has experienced rapid economic growth, it has not experienced any structural transformation in employment (Bagchi, Das and Chattopadhyay, 2005; Hirway and Shah, 2011a). Between 2004- ’05 and 2009- ’09, the manufacturing sector saw negative growth in employment (-2.6 percent), and there has been a huge rise in the number of casual workers in Gujarat (casual workers have no security of tenure or social security benefits), with over 37 percent of all workers being causal. i. Unemployment rate across social groups: It is extremely worrying that the aggregate employment growth has been negative for all social groups (except the General category) and stagnant for the Scheduled tribes. Unemployment rate by current daily status (urban), 2007- ’08. Scheduled Scheduled Other Backward All Social Others Castes Tribes Classes groups Gujarat 6.9 6.2 3.1 3.4 3.9 Delhi 4.9 NA 0.4 2.4 2.6 Source: NSSO, 61st and 64th Rounds (in Human Development Report, 2011). ii. Unemployment rate across religious communities: Consistent with the stereotype of the Gujarat Government deliberately ignoring religious communities, the unemployment rate shows that religious communities do poorly in terms of employment.
  4. 4. Unemployment rate by current daily status (urban), 2007- ’08. Hindus Muslims Christians Gujarat 3.7 5.0 5.4 Delhi 2.8 2.4 00 Source: NSSO, 61st and 64th Rounds (in Human Development Report, 2011). • Female workers treated poorly in Gujarat; reflective of patriarchal RSS attitude of Modi government: Firstly, the proportion of women workers in Gujarat is very low (around five percent of total), as opposed to India’s 20 percent. In Maharashtra it’s around 14.4 percent and in Tamil Nadu it’s 41 percent (2000-’10). Moreover, it has been pointed out (Ghosh, 2009) that women workers in the organized sector earn only 38 percent of what men earn which severely limits their financial independence. • Poverty in Gujarat: Gujarat has 23.22 per cent of its population living below the poverty line as per NSSO 2009-‘10. This is much higher than Haryana (19.88), Tamil Nadu (17.42), etc. Key Agriculture in Gujarat has grown faster than the national average (7.64Argument percent as compared to 2.96 percent), but this has been achieved at the cost IV of the corporatization of agriculture. • Agriculture corporatized; benefiting only huge agri-businesses: The Modi government changed the policy on land use (implemented by a Congress Government) by abrogating the rule that a famer has to stay within eight kilometres of the farm (this was to prevent absentee landlordism as well as land grab by huge businesses). Loss of Common Property Resources (CPRs); windfall gains for mega-corporations: Further, on the 17th of May, 2005, the Modi government issued a resolution (Gr. No. JMN/3903/453/A) allowing mega- corporations to start corporate farming. Up to 2000 acres of CPRs can be appropriated by these mega- corporations for 20 years for a mere Rs. 500 security deposit, and no interest for the first five years (following which, they have to pay only Rs. 40 per acre till the eleventh year, and Rs. 100 henceforth). These mega-corporations are further allowed to mortgage these lands to any banks (who can then do whatever they wish if such eventualities arise). This has led to non-local, non-farming corporate agro-industries to capture rural land markets, and severely deprive the local communities. There has been a dramatic increase in land holdings over 20 hectares (increased by over one percent) in the last decade, and this trend implies a complete re- structuring in the rural landscape of Gujarat. • Declining share of agriculture in GDP possibly linked to corporatization of agriculture: In 2009- ’10, the agricultural allied sector employed 53 percent of the workforce, but contributed to only 12 percent to Gujarat’s income. Jodha (1990) has pointed out that CPRs (forests, pastures and common grazing lands) are extremely important for the rural poor, who depend on these to complement their already meagre incomes. By disallowing the use of CPRs and corporatizing agriculture, Modi has severely deprived not just the vulnerable groups dependent on agriculture and allied activities, but also the 53 percent employed in agricultural activities. The number of SCs employed in agriculture in Gujarat fell by 6.86 percent, OBCs by 2.81 percent, and overall by 1.67 percent (all figures from 2004- ’05 to 2009- ’10, NSSO, 50th, 61st and 66th Rounds, Employment-Unemployment Situation in India). The Modi Government has only been aiding mega-corporations increase their profits, and has dramatically reduced social expenditure.Argument V The so called ‘development’ in Gujarat has been anti-poor, anti-dalit, anti- women and against all minorities and people on the margins. The state’s outcomes on poverty, education, health, and inequality, the things that matter most to the people, are dismal. • Modi is industry’s CM, not peoples’ leader: “The service of India means the service of the millions who suffer. It means the ending of poverty and ignorance and disease and inequality of opportunity (Trust with Destiny, J. Nehru, 14th- 15th August, 1947)”. A Government that is for, by and of the people is mandated to ensure that the people “may have full opportunities for growth...if any government
  5. 5. deprives a people of these rights and oppresses them, the people have a further right to alter it or abolish it” (Declaration of Independence, Indian National Congress, 26th January, 1930).• Modi focused on filling corporate pockets rather than supporting people: Ensuring “full opportunities for growth” means supporting the people to realize their full capabilities through a good education and proper health care facilities. However, the Modi government has deliberately ignored these two aspects, and this has led to widespread inequalities and poverty. 1. Declining state expenditure in education: Data shows that the total expenditure on education (as a ratio to aggregate expenditure) falls far below other comparable states. The situation is of serious concern because of the prevailing outcomes related to education, amongst social groups in Gujarat. Expenditure on Education* – As Ratio to Aggregate Expenditure States 2010-‘11 2011-’12 (RE) 2012-’13 (BE) Gujarat 15.9 16.1 13.4 Haryana 17.3   16.6   18.3   Maharashtra 20.8 19.9 19.8 Rajasthan 19.1 18.0 18.5 Assam 22.0 18.7 21.1 Kerela 17.0 17.6 17.0 *  Includes expenditure on Sports, Art and Culture under revenue expenditure and capital outlay (RBI, PRS). i. Direct consequences of poor expenditure on education: a. Access to schools: Because of this poor expenditure in the education sector, the peoples’ access to schools is very poor. Ideally speaking, a school should be within two kilometres of where the student lives, to facilitate easy access and to reduce the financial burden of travelling to school. Percentage of households that have schools within two kms (rural). States Upper Primary Secondary Gujarat 76.30 42.12 Haryana 96.30 77.30 Maharashtra 79.56 61.85 Tamil Nadu 78.47 44.34 India 78.86 47.40 Source: NSSO 64th Round, Participation and Expenditure in Education Survey. b. Percentage of people by different education groups: Despite what Modi may say in SRCC, the most damning evidence about the Gujarat growth story not being in favour of the people of Gujarat, is the percentage of people attending educational institutions. This is clear evidence that the Modi government is more interested in creating cheap surplus labour, toiling away to fatten the purses of mega-corporations, than actually ensuring their empowerment through good quality education. Education level Gujarat Maharashtra Tamil Nadu All India No formal education 32.6 27.0 25.8 36.3 Sec./High.Sec./Diploma 13.5 19.6 17.4 13.1 Graduate/ PG 3.9 6.2 5.3 4.2 Professional/ Technical 14.3 20.7 31.8 14.2 Source: NSSO 64th Round, Participation and Expenditure in Education Survey. ii. Indirect consequences of poor expenditure on education: There are wide disparities in the educational outcomes within Gujarat, and this is directly linked to the deliberate policy decisions taken by Modi: a. Literacy rate (6+ years age) by gender: As evidenced, the percentage in literacy rates gender wise, is massive, and this is directly linked to why women constitute for only five percent of Gujarat’s workforce. This lack of priority is reflective of the patriarchal attitude that Modi has inculcated as an RSS man.
  6. 6. States Female Male Gujarat 64.80 84.75 Maharashtra 73.61 88.24 Tamil Nadu 72.74 88.17 Source: NSSO 64th Round, Participation and Expenditure in Education Survey. b. Literacy rate (6+ years age) by caste: In comparison to other comparable states, Gujarat fares poorly in the empowerment of SCs/OBCs/General or even the combined literacy rates. This further oppresses the already vulnerable sections of society: States SC OBC General Total Gujarat 74.57 70.27 87.98 75.24 Maharashtra 78.08 81.1 85.78 81.12 Tamil Nadu 72.87 81.96 92.8 80.33 Source: NSSO 64th Round, Participation and Expenditure in Education Survey. c. Persons currently attending schools by caste (11-14 years): The reasons for the low literacy rates are directly caused by a low emphasis on enrolment. This is again a deliberate casteist ploy by the Modi government to keep the vulnerable sections oppressed so they can provide cheap labour for the profits of the mega-corporations Modi is in bed with: States ST SC OBC General Total Gujarat 76.0 81.8 75.1 87.5 79.3 Haryana NA 86.4 85.1 93.9 89.2 Maharashtra 73.8 88.6 92.2 91.0 89.4 Tamil Nadu 83.6 94.0 95.8 100 95.4 All India 77.2 80.1 84.3 88.2 83.9 Source: NSSO 64th Round, Participation and Expenditure in Education Survey. Even Muslims fare poorly: As compared to 81.51 percent in Maharashtra and 87.84 percent in Tamil Nadu, in Gujarat, only 74.45 percent are enrolled in schools (in the 6+years of age category). This is also another vulnerable group that languishes in poverty and inequality because of the deliberate strategies employed by the Modi Government.2. Low public expenditure on health: Data shows that the total expenditure on health falls far below other comparable states. The Modi government subsidizes mega-corporations so they can profit over the health of the people of Gujarat. If he comes in the Union Government, the consequences of reduced social expenditure could be catastrophic for the health of the people of this country. Public Expenditure on Health (as share of GSDP), 2004-‘05 Public Exp. As States Share of GSDP Gujarat 0.57 Assam 0.86 Delhi 0.94 Kerala 0.88 Rajasthan 0.98 Arunachal 3.46 Pradesh Himachal 1.74 Pradesh Jammu & 2.26 Kashmir Mizoram 3.28 Nagaland 2.49 Sikkim 3.82 Source: National Health Profile, 2009, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare i. Direct consequences of poor expenditure on health: The situation is of serious concern because of the prevailing outcomes related to health amongst social groups in Gujarat. This is directly because of the Modi Government’s neglect of health care facilities.
  7. 7. a. Poor physical infrastructure of healthcare facilities: Compared to other states, the healthcare facilities available in Gujarat are dismal. The figures given below show just how committed the Modi government is in ensuring the health of the people. In fact, just comparing the situation in rural Kerela and Gujarat, we see Kerela boasts of 281 hospitals and 13, 75, 666 beds. Gujarat, with 282 hospitals has only 9, 619 beds. Total number of Government Hospitals and Beds, 2009 Total Hospitals States Number Beds Gujarat 373 28,958 Andhra Pradesh 359 3,43,333 Delhi 130 23,858 Kerala 386 31,285 Maharastra 765 49,579 Rajasthan 475 32,067 Tamil Nadu 581 47,198 Source: National Health Profile, 2009, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare b. Access to health care facilities: Apart from a fewer number of hospitals and beds, even the number of public medical facilities available to the people of Gujarat are very limited. This forces people to spend more on private healthcare facilities, and adds an unnecessary financial burden on the aam admi.Percentage Distribution of Households by Public and Non-public Healthcare Provision, 2005- ‘06   Urban Rural All Public Private Public Private Public Private States Medical Medical Medical Medical Medical Medical Sector Sector Sector Sector Sector Sector Gujarat 16.8 81.1 35.2 61.6 27.5 69.8 Assam - - - - 65.2 34.5 Kerala 45.8 53.5 52.1 46.8 50 49.1 Orissa 62.2 37.3 79 19.9 76.2 22.9 Rajasthan 59.2 40.3 74.7 25.2 70.2 29.6 Tamil - - - - 53 46.6 Nadu Source: National Health Profile, 2009, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare ii. Indirect consequences of poor expenditure on healthcare: The indirect consequences of this poor expenditure and the resultant consequences on physical infrastructure in the healthcare facilities is that the aam admi in Gujarat has suffered. If Modi were to come to the Union Government, the effects would be replicated because of his mega-corporation priorities, and this could have severe negative effects on the people of India. a. Lack of access to food causes massive malnutrition and anaemia amongst children in Gujarat: As per 2005 statistics, in Gujarat, more than 40 percent of children under five are underweight. Further, 42.4% of urban children (6-35 months) are stunted. This is higher than the corresponding rate at national level, which is 37.4 percent (National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3) INDIA 2005-‘06 “Nutrition in India”).   Percentage of Children with Anaemia, by Major Religious Communities, and by Social Groups 2005-’06 Major Religious Communities Social Groups States Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs SCs STs OBCs Others Gujarat 70.2 67.1 50 83.4 69.6 83.3 71.7 63.3 Delhi 57.3 56 41.2 63.6 63.6 83.4 56 54.1
  8. 8. Kerala 41.2 50.9 39.8 – 50 43.8 44.1 43.8 Maharashtra 64 58.9 40.8 50 64.8 67.4 62.1 62.3 Source: National Health Profile, 2009, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare b. Compendium of health outcomes because of poor expenditure on health: c. d. e. f. g. c. Infant Mortality Rate by Social Groups, 2005-‘06: States SCs STs OBCs Others Gujarat 65.4 86 66.5 47.3 Haryana - - 52.1 36.1 Kerala - 11.5 19.9 Maharashtra 45.2 51.4 - - Himachal - - 36.9 28.2 Pradesh Jammu & 62.6 34.3 45.3 44.7 Kashmir All India 66.4 62.1 56.6 - Source: National Health Profile, 2009, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare d. Vaccinations being used to discriminate against vulnerable groups: The Modi Government has deliberately been discriminating against vulnerable groups, and not providing them with vaccinations. Percentage of Children who have NOT received all vaccinations, by Social Groups (2005-’06) States SCs STs OBCs   Gujarat 48.8 60.5 57.8   Kerala 25 20.1 16.5 Tamil Nadu 27.7 33.3 15.4 Source: National Health Profile, 2009, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.
  9. 9. Because of this, there is a massive discriminatory effect felt by women, as well as vulnerable groups like SCs/ STs/ OBCs (for whom the effects are multiplied). This is evidenced by the sex ratio at birth in Gujarat, which is the worst amongst all other comparable states. Sex-Ratio at Birth by Social Groups, 2001 Non States SCs Hindus Muslims Christians Sikhs SC/STs Gujarat 854 834 830 871 898 784 Andhra 964 948 951 950 951 986 Pradesh Assam 931 949 952 943 946 672 Kerala 903 889 973 960 972 938 Tamil 972 950 932 961 966 787 Nadu Modi argues that the “government has no business to do business”, but that’s exactly what he’s doing. He is hand in glove with mega- corporations, and they are plundering from the people and looting the natural resources from Gujarat. He says that it’s time for “development politics”, and we agree. But we Concluding disagree vehemently on what development is for. The Modi led Argument ‘development’ of Gujarat includes poor social expenditure, cheap handouts to mega-industries. And so we ask of him: ‘Development’ for whom? For, by and of mega- corporations? Seems his P2-G2 mantra stands more for “Persecute People (through) Greedy Governance”.• What’s wrong with Modi and the system he rules: “Power is grossly centralized in our country... (and it) only empowers people at the top of a system”. Modi does not “believe in empowering people all the way to bottom”, and seeks only to empower rich mega-corporations. He has no respect for the aam admi, of the millions of communities that India consists of...The “aam unique. He has immense capabilities, intelligence and strength. He builds this country every day...and yet our system crushes him at every step”. This system is best exemplified in the Modi Government of Gujarat, for whom the aam admi is simply fodder for the profit of mega-corporations.• The Congress Party recognizes and accepts that “the time has come to question the centralized, unresponsive and unaccountable systems of decision-making in governance, administration and politics. The answer is not in running these systems better. The answer is to completely transforming these systems”.