The officially stated reason is that smaller states grow and prosper faster. When they are ensconced within large states, some areas typically tend to be ignored. If they were carved out into separate states, there would be more focused attempts to achieve growth. In addition to this official line (the growth mantra), there is of course another and more relevant political line (the political mantra) that drives Mayawati towards dividing her state up.
Let’s first look at the growth mantra. I have taken the examples of the three new states that were carved up in 2000 by the NDA government – Chhatisgarh (from MP), Uttarakhand (from UP) and Jharkhand (from BJP).
Source of data: For the purpose of this piece, I have used Net State Domestic Product at factor cost at constant prices in Rupees as the measure of economic growth. The data taken is from the RBI’s “Handbook of Statistics of Indian Economy” readily available on the internet. By using “at factor cost”, we eliminate the effect of taxes. By using “at constant prices”, we eliminate the effect of inflation. And by using “in Rupees”, we eliminate the impact of the $: Re exchange rate. Since the Rupee has been depreciating over the years, the growth rate in $ terms will be lower than the growth rate in Rupee terms. Further, to calculate the average growth rate during a period under consideration, I have used a “simple average” of the growth rates of each year during that period (rather than a compounded average). Whatever method I have used, I have used it evenly.
The data reveals that all the three new states have achieved faster growth rates post their formation. Jharkhand’s growth rate in the 7 years before it was carved out was 9.3% per annum while in the 9 years since its formation, the growth rate has increased to 12.7% per annum (Don’t worry about the high absolute growth numbers – that’s to do with the definition of the data). In the case of Chhatisgarh, the comparative figures are 7.5% (before formation) and 16.2% (post formation) and for Uttarakhand the figures are 11.5% (before formation) and 16.6% (post formation). Clearly, the new states have done better post their formation.
What about the growth rates of the states from which these new states were carved up? Well….here’s the good news. The growth rates of these states have held up and in fact grown slightly – obviously because there is now more focus available to a smaller area. MP’s growth rate increased from 10.5% (before Chhatisgarh was formed) to 12.7% (after),Bihar ’s growth rate increased from 11.8% (before Jharkhand was formed) to 12.6% (after) and UP’s growth rate increased marginally from 11.3% (before Uttarakhand was formed) to 11.6% (after).
So the growth mantra is indisputable. But if growth was the only reason for dividing up states, our politicians wouldn’t take so much interest! That brings me to the other part. The political mantra.
These new states were formed by the NDA government at the Center. Did the BJP benefit from dividing up these states?
Take Chhatisgarh – the BJP has ruled for 8 out of the last 11 years – the same as in MP. So there has been no additional gain, but there hasn’t been a loss either. But in Jharkhand, the BJP has managed to rule on its own for 8 years out of the last 11 years – while inBihar , it has only managed to be a junior partner of the JD(U) which has ruled for the last 6 years or so. In Uttarakhand, the BJP has ruled for 6 out of the last 11 years, but in UP from which Uttarakhand was carved out, the BJP has managed to rule for only 1 year out of the last 11. Clearly, the BJP was rewarded in the new states that it helped get formed! This has to be a factor that is playing on Mayawati’s mind as she sets out dividing UP. On her own, she may not be able to retain UP. But if she could effectively claim credit for making four new states, then she could expect to be rewarded by the people of the new states for many years to come.
There is of course one other compulsion that motivates all politicians. More states means more party people can be accommodated as MLAs and ministers and in state corporations and the like. For example, undivided UP had 426 MLAs, but after formation of Uttarakhand, the total number of MLAs in the two states is 404 (UP) and 70 (Uttarakhand) = total 474. That’s an extra 48 people who can be accommodated as MLAs! Politicians simply love power and position and the lure of being able to accommodate more party folks as MLAs is simply too much to resist! A similar increase however was not seen in the case of MP andBihar .
But most importantly of course is the fact that the issue of dividing up UP will distract attention from the other issues that confront Mayawati right now. Mayawati knows that the process of making states is a long one – the Central government has to give the final go ahead. That’s not going to be possible without many committees being set up and many debates taking place. It could take years – even decades before the states are set-up. In the meantime, the party to get bad mouthed the most by the BSP will be the Congress. Clearly again, the BSP sees the Congress as the biggest threat in UP and this move of hers is aimed as much at spiting Rahul Gandhi as it is at distracting attention from the ineptitude of her governance. Additionally of course, she manages to steal a march over arch rivals Samajwadi Party and the now-less-important BJP.
The real truth is that UP elections are always great fun to observe! The most dynamic political strategy is always pursued in UP. This latest move is going to change equations dramatically. Suddenly, the political foes of Mayawati are all running around to the agenda set by Mayawati. Suddenly, no one is interested in the anti-incumbancy factor. Suddenly, no one is talking of corruption. Suddenly, the entire state and its electorate are talking about the new states being formed. How the parties react will be good fun to watch!
(We often don’t realize – but if this plan goes through, there will be no UP left! Somehow that’s a bit of a shocker)….
Let’s first look at the growth mantra. I have taken the examples of the three new states that were carved up in 2000 by the NDA government – Chhatisgarh (from MP), Uttarakhand (from UP) and Jharkhand (from BJP).
Source of data: For the purpose of this piece, I have used Net State Domestic Product at factor cost at constant prices in Rupees as the measure of economic growth. The data taken is from the RBI’s “Handbook of Statistics of Indian Economy” readily available on the internet. By using “at factor cost”, we eliminate the effect of taxes. By using “at constant prices”, we eliminate the effect of inflation. And by using “in Rupees”, we eliminate the impact of the $: Re exchange rate. Since the Rupee has been depreciating over the years, the growth rate in $ terms will be lower than the growth rate in Rupee terms. Further, to calculate the average growth rate during a period under consideration, I have used a “simple average” of the growth rates of each year during that period (rather than a compounded average). Whatever method I have used, I have used it evenly.
The data reveals that all the three new states have achieved faster growth rates post their formation. Jharkhand’s growth rate in the 7 years before it was carved out was 9.3% per annum while in the 9 years since its formation, the growth rate has increased to 12.7% per annum (Don’t worry about the high absolute growth numbers – that’s to do with the definition of the data). In the case of Chhatisgarh, the comparative figures are 7.5% (before formation) and 16.2% (post formation) and for Uttarakhand the figures are 11.5% (before formation) and 16.6% (post formation). Clearly, the new states have done better post their formation.
What about the growth rates of the states from which these new states were carved up? Well….here’s the good news. The growth rates of these states have held up and in fact grown slightly – obviously because there is now more focus available to a smaller area. MP’s growth rate increased from 10.5% (before Chhatisgarh was formed) to 12.7% (after),
So the growth mantra is indisputable. But if growth was the only reason for dividing up states, our politicians wouldn’t take so much interest! That brings me to the other part. The political mantra.
These new states were formed by the NDA government at the Center. Did the BJP benefit from dividing up these states?
Take Chhatisgarh – the BJP has ruled for 8 out of the last 11 years – the same as in MP. So there has been no additional gain, but there hasn’t been a loss either. But in Jharkhand, the BJP has managed to rule on its own for 8 years out of the last 11 years – while in
There is of course one other compulsion that motivates all politicians. More states means more party people can be accommodated as MLAs and ministers and in state corporations and the like. For example, undivided UP had 426 MLAs, but after formation of Uttarakhand, the total number of MLAs in the two states is 404 (UP) and 70 (Uttarakhand) = total 474. That’s an extra 48 people who can be accommodated as MLAs! Politicians simply love power and position and the lure of being able to accommodate more party folks as MLAs is simply too much to resist! A similar increase however was not seen in the case of MP and
But most importantly of course is the fact that the issue of dividing up UP will distract attention from the other issues that confront Mayawati right now. Mayawati knows that the process of making states is a long one – the Central government has to give the final go ahead. That’s not going to be possible without many committees being set up and many debates taking place. It could take years – even decades before the states are set-up. In the meantime, the party to get bad mouthed the most by the BSP will be the Congress. Clearly again, the BSP sees the Congress as the biggest threat in UP and this move of hers is aimed as much at spiting Rahul Gandhi as it is at distracting attention from the ineptitude of her governance. Additionally of course, she manages to steal a march over arch rivals Samajwadi Party and the now-less-important BJP.
The real truth is that UP elections are always great fun to observe! The most dynamic political strategy is always pursued in UP. This latest move is going to change equations dramatically. Suddenly, the political foes of Mayawati are all running around to the agenda set by Mayawati. Suddenly, no one is interested in the anti-incumbancy factor. Suddenly, no one is talking of corruption. Suddenly, the entire state and its electorate are talking about the new states being formed. How the parties react will be good fun to watch!
(We often don’t realize – but if this plan goes through, there will be no UP left! Somehow that’s a bit of a shocker)….
No comments:
Post a Comment