Debate on poll sops & freebies gets sharper

Lakshmana Venkat Kuchi *

A heated debate has erupted in the country after the Supreme Court waded into the issue of freebies, taking up a petition seeking directions on poll sops made by political parties. The SC observations and suggestion for forming apanel on freebies drew sharp questions on its own proprietary in advising on how elected state governments can spend their money.

This is considered the exclusive domain of an elected government, whether at the centre or at the state, on spending government money. The Supreme Court was conducting a hearing on a petition from an advocate and BJP leader seeking directions to stop political parties from making promises of freebies ahead of elections when it suggested the formation of a panel to discuss the issue.

Incidentally, the issue has been raised independently by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who likened freebies as revaris (sweetmeats) distributed by political parties to secure votes from people that he said threatened the finances and economy of different states. The Prime Minister held that the freebies were harmful for the economy and development of the country as such entities would not be able to build new infrastructure and urged people to shun this culture.

The BJP leaders too, on cue, came down heavily on subsidies of various kinds and argued that only those that led to capacity formation should be encouraged and the rest be discarded in the overall interests of the nation. On the face of it, the argument seems pretty sound, except those questions are being raised on the very premise that freebies adversely affected economic performance, and the strong Dravidian regional party from Tamil Nadu even moved the Apex court for its inclusion in the petition.

The DMK challenged the premise on freebies and in fact its senior leader and state finance minister launched a stinging criticism of the premise, and the suggestions on welfare schemes (that someone else describes as freebies) and questioned the constitutional right of the central government in making the suggestions on issues that were totally out of its realm of affairs.

Asserting that Tamil Nadu was performing way better than the national average on a host of economic parameters, the state finance minister questioned both constitutional proprietary as well a moral authority of the central government to lecture on management of the finances of the state government, and especially questioned as to why the state government should listen to an entity whose management of economy was not up to the mark, and whose track record in economic management was not too great.

Now this stinging retort from Tamil Nadu has sparked off predictable attack from the regional party's political opponents — who are questioning the claims of superior economic performance of the state by its finance minister. But the sharp counter to the Prime Minister's views on freebie culture has found an echo among the other opposition leaders, notably Telangana Chief Minister, another key South Indian state that incidentally goes to polls next year.

The Telangana Chief minister sought to defend welfare schemes aimed at poor and decried efforts to insult them as freebies, which is nothing but running down welfare schemes and an attempt to dilute the federal spirit. Public welfare is the responsibility of the governments, which he said was being fulfilled by his government admirably well and no one had the right to demean them.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi had, in an address in Uttar Pradesh the other day, expressed concern over the ballooning expenditure incurred for freebies promised by political parties ahead of elections, and said it was time that this culture be curbed in the overall interests of the nation.

On this, every political party has been not without guilt. Now the debate has become sharper and wider, with a section of the political dispensation questioning the wisdom in effecting corporate .x cut and writing off debts by banks that run into thousands of crores of Rupees. A huge noise is made over subsidies for the poor that cost significantly less in comparison to the huge amounts running into thousands of crores of Rupees given away in silence to benefit the rich.

Now the debate is getting sharper with each passing day, even as the Supreme Court wants the political class to deliberate on this issue and come to an acceptable solution that effectively cuts down on freebies in the overall economic interests of the country. Promises of freebies to voters are made by almost every political party during elections, something that the Apex court wondered if it was good economics.

Admitting that the issue was more complex, it said that a distinction should be made between welfare schemes and freebies, something exactly what a section of the political class insisted. But the trouble is, who will decide what was a welfare measure and what was a freebie. Given the different needs of different states, what could be construed as a welfare measure in a state could be seen as a freebie.

Now questions have also been raised on the proposal of the Apex court to constitute a committee to examine the issue of freebies, on the grounds that it would defeat the objectives of the Directive Principles of state policy. Citing this, the DMK opposed the formation of a committee to examine the issue of freebies. The DMK challenges the premise that promises of freebies during elections can cause financial stress and ruin a state's economy.

Incidentally, Tamil Nadu has witnessed competitive freebies, with the two Dravidian parties — the DMK and AIADMK — matching and bettering the other in giving free mixies, grinders, television sets and scooties — prompting many to dub them as "purchasing votes" and morally wrong. But the debate has just begun, and in the right earnest.

Chief Justice of India Venkat Ramana, during proceedings, observed that just because a political party makes a promise before the elections does not mean the party would win the elections, solely based on these promises. At its previous hearing, the SC said a legislation barring political parties from offering voters freebies was not advisable and was not in favour of de-registering them for making such promises as it would be anti-democratic.