The Hindu Business Line : `Economic policies are a cause for worry'

In the first two years, the UPA Government passed some good legislation. Of late, what is worrisome are the UPA's economic policies, especially seen from a poor man's point of view. MR A. B. BARDHAN, GENERAL SECRETARY, COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA

Communism in India has, in one sense, both aging and ageless warriors. Among them, Mr A. B. Bardhan, General Secretary, Communist Party of India, has been an energetic activist and articulate spokesman for his ideology. When asked about his age, he asks one to guess. When I venture, "about seventy?," he grins and replies, "I'll turn 82 later this year." He says he took to Marxism/Leninism at the age of 15. "Ideas cannot be killed. They sustain you. They keep you young," he says.

Using a mixture of sarcasm, passion, anger and cool confidence, Mr Bardhan gave his views on a number of recent developments, while speaking to Business Line recently in Chennai.

Excerpts from the interview:

You were quoted recently as saying that you would be reviewing your support for the Centre? What is making you unhappy?

For the last three years we have extended support from outside, because of the compulsions of the poll arithmetic. We wanted a secular government but we insisted on a Common Minimum Programme (CMP) as the basis of our support. Not a Left or a socialist programme, but one that was capable of being implemented in the given order of things.

In the first two years, the United Progressive Alliance Government has functioned according to the CMP, more or less. Some good pieces of legislation, such as the Right to Information Act (RTI) and the National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREG) Act, were passed. But what is worrisome, of late, are the economic policies, especially seen from a poor man's point of view. The Finance Minister continuously lectures on the monetary measures of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the fiscal measures of the Government, without paying attention to the Consumer Price Index and the rising prices of all essential commodities.

What do you want him to do?

We from the Left have been suggesting that the Centre stop forward trading of foodgrains, pulses, and edible oil.

This is enabling big corporate houses purchase before the harvest, and corner stocks. This is mischief.

Why not restore the Public Distribution System (PDS) and ensure people get food? If you want good procurement, how is it possible if you do not give good price to farmers?

And now there is talk of importing — giving higher prices to others than what our farmers are getting.

Someone pointed out that blaming futures trading for price rise is akin to blaming the thermometer for showing a higher temperature. Doesn't it actually help the farmer discover the correct price?

What is the correct price... the price that is dictated by industrialists? They can dictate prices. Farmers never can. Initially, these monopolies will offer a good price. Afterwards, the farmer will have nowhere to go. The monopoly purchaser is a big giant. This has been tried out in the West. But the corner-store and neighbourhood shops have disappeared. I don't think that is the goal that India should follow when there is so much unemployment.

Aren't these new retail stores providing employment to many?

The employment given will be for 400-500 people, who will be wage-slaves, attached to big corporates. But that will wipe out the employment of 4,000-5,000 people. The independent poor trader will be deprived. Look at it from the micro angle.

The Finance Minister and Commerce Minister don't listen to anything. They are freely serving capitalist policies and big business. They don't care at all about poor people.

Do you want them changed?

I want them to be removed. It is up to the Prime Minister. I am not spelling out in so many words, because they are implementing government policy. But the time is not far off when people will demand that you let these two Ministers go. The Commerce Minister only talks of Special Economic Zones (SEZs).

What is your objection to that?

SEZs have been equated to industrialisation. Industrialisation is a must. But all the industrialisation that has happened in this country came before SEZs.

Didn't the original idea of SEZ come from China?

That is the whole point. First, China has only six. You are talking of 600. SEZs in China are on the coast. I have been to four of them. They are SEZs all right — but I am not sure that labour laws don't apply to them. But our SEZs will almost be deemed to be foreign territory — where no laws of the land will apply. Is that fair? Is that level-playing field?

Does not China give incentives?

I am not against incentives. Every government gives some incentives — some land, some infrastructure, some tax relief. But, here, SEZs are becoming excuses for grabbing land. Which is the industry that requires 5,000 hectares? Reliance, for instance, has been given some 15,000 acres for a power station. I have seen many mega stations — but never something like this. Why should they be offered this? A new class of zamindars and landlords is coming up.

More companies are entering the insurance sector. Everyone is waiting for the Left's veto to be lifted (on increasing foreign stake from 26 per cent to 49 per cent). Can we expect some thawing on that?

At the moment, no.

More Stories on : Interview | Economy | Politics

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Forex at the core

The importance of succession planning

In search of a first-rate economics talent pool

Holding West Bengal to ransom

Enterprise Management — Building intelligence into information systems

`Economic policies are a cause for worry'

Hoarding knowledge diminishes power

Rising rupee

Housing for poor