Price Rise, Rail Budget, Maoist Offer

As expected, the Budget session of Parliament has begun with both the Houses being adjourned on the second day or the first working day (the first day witnessed President Pratibha Patil addressing the joint session of the two Houses in the Central Hall as is the customary practice) with the entire Opposition unrelenting in its demand for a discussion on the serious issue of price rise under a substantive motion entailing voting, and the government inflexibly stonewalling the demand so that no meeting ground could be found. The idea of an adjournment motion was rejected by the ruling Congress on the ground that price rise was a recurring issue for the past six years and hence did not warrant adjournment. This was a clear bid to minimise the enormity of the problem on the aam aadmi whose interests the ruling dispensation claims to uphold, defend and safeguard.

Subsequently on the second working day, that is, February 24, the Lok Sabha Speaker too rejected the demand for an adjournment motion on the subject. While acknowledging that the issue had put the common man in distress and therefore it should necessarily be discussed, she nevertheless said she did not find it such an urgent matter as to merit the tabling of an adjournment motion thereby provoking the entire Opposition to vociferously protest. Finally the matter is learnt to have been sorted out and the discussion is to take place the following day.

So eventually the Railway Minister was able to present her second Rail Budget in a row. Here too Mamata Banerjee’s Budget was on expected lines: there was no hike in passenger fares and freight tariffs (rather some relief to the passengers, reeling under the impact of the phenomenal price rise, was also announced); it is definitely striking that for the seven years the UPA has been in power there has been no hike in passenger fares and freight tariffs. She was also emphatic in dismissing the idea of privatisation of the Railways, but she pointed out that industrial houses should come forward to cooperate with the Railways to evolve a business model for generation of resources, and applications for private investment will be processed within 100 days. She further announced the launching of 54 new long-distance and 28 new short-distance trains, besides 10 new Duranto trains. Moreover, she claimed that 1000 km of new lines would be laid within a year and all (that is, about 17,000) unmanned rail crossings would be turned into manned ones within the next five years.

Of course, she did announce several facilities for West Bengal from the side of the Railways obviously with an eye on the State Assembly elections there barely a year away. But those were not the highlights of her Rail Budget. What was welcomed across-the-board was her proposal to start 101 new suburban trains in Mumbai which is definitely in need of such trains since the demand for them is continually on the rise. Likewise the idea of health of insurance for the coolies was greeted across party lines as it is directly related to the interests of the aam aadmi. These steps were not just playing to the gallery, and should not be derided as ‘populist’. There is, however, an element of skepticism in this regard: during Laloo Prasad Yadav’s tenure as the Railway Minister in UPA I, he had announced that coolies in rail stations would henceforth be elevated to the status of gangmen; but this announcement has largely remained paper and not translated into reality till date. Is the same fate awaiting the health insurance scheme for the coolies (since they occupy the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder and are thus treated as dispensable commodities)?

Meanwhile the Maoists have offered a 72-day truce provided the government suspends its ‘Operation Green Hunt’ (or whatever name the governments at the Centre and the concerned States have given to the paramilitary operations underway in Tribal India). This is being interpreted by keen observers of the recent developments in our tribal heartland as a prelude to talks between the two sides. Reacting to this offer the Union Home Minister has declared: “I would like no ifs, no buts, no conditions… I would like a short, simple statement saying: ‘We will adjure violence and we are prepared for talks.’†Fine. But can the Maoists give such an undertaking when the government continues with the paramilitary operations against them? One is also tempted to ask if such a statement brings out the seriousness of P. Chidambaram to enter into dialogue with the Maoists. On the other hand, sections of the media have cast doubts on the veracity of the Maoist offer. However, at this stage nothing should be done to queer the pitch for talks between the Union Government and CPI (Maoist) since dialogue is the only means to protect the tribal populace whose very survival is at stake following the official decision to embark on paramilitary operations in the tribal belt. At the same time for such a dialogue to fructify it is necessary to make back-channel efforts for which a mechanism must be evolved. As of now nothing has been done in that direction. So one wonders whether the relevant announcements from the respective sides are just exercises in public relations or if they conceal something really substantive.

Simultaneously the war over Bt brinjal has intensified within the Union Government after Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh took the significant step to keep the decision of introducing Bt brinjal in abeyance, at least for the present. Clearly under pressure from the international seed corporations moves are afoot overturn the Environ-ment Minister’s decision in this regard, and some members of the Council of Ministers are reported to have even gone to the length of proposing police action against critics of the GM crops—an outrageous and unheard-of proposal in any functional democracy. Where are we heading?

February 24 S.C.