Losing the plot

It is absolutely right that there was a policy response to the 8216;Janadesh8217; rally 8212; 25,000 people marched to Delhi asking for land rights. But the response itself is absolutely wrong. There are rallies and morchas and not all can be or should be met with Central announcements of intent. But this rally was different because it highlighted a reality that the rally8217;s metropolitan sympathisers may have missed, but is clear to any objective observer: land rights are becoming an emotive and agitationally exploitative issue because regular jobs aren8217;t filtering down as quickly as they can. Given that, setting up a National Land Reform Council is, bluntly put, beside the point. Some history and some current facts need to be understood to appreciate this apparently 8216;non-progressive8217; argument.

The history is that India missed the bus on land reforms in the immediate post-Independence period. Indeed, Congress claims on being forever for the aam aadmi is most glaringly exposed when one looks back at Congress state governments8217; record at that time of colluding with anti-modern rural landed classes. Marxists in Bengal attempted land reform, with some positive results. But, as problemsof unregistered share-croppers showed during Singur agitations, more complications were created. The large point is that there may be a case for redistribution in some local cases but giving land rights nationally as a way to increase economic security is a non-option. This is because economic, social and agricultural dynamics are different now. Farming desperately needs efficient exploitation of very large holdings. Average land-holding size is very small and inefficient. And agriculture as it is now cannot support the number of Indians not in secondary and tertiary sectors. So whatever seems to be the apparent moral basis for 8216;universalisation8217; of pattas in rural India, as a policy it will not help intended beneficiaries.

As has been argued in these columns, India needs to radically expand the scope of low-cost manufacturing that requires semi-skilled or low-skilled labour. Given the appalling state of our primary education, factory work that can provide on-job basic training is the best guarantee of creating jobs outside cities and towns. Among the many policy quirks that prevent an expansion is the rule on industrial employment that makes labour flexibility extremely costly for employers. That8217;s why there was a proposal that SEZs be spared usual labour laws and of course there were howls of protest. As our columnist argues today it is not that reforms are not creating jobs. But a massive shift to industrial employment has not happened because policymakers can8217;t or won8217;t admit the fundamental economic history lesson: general economic security is always born on factory floors. If you can8217;t give them jobs, promising them land is almost cruel.