West Bengal on the wrong track?
Singur will create a benchmark for future industrial projects in West Bengal, including special economic zones (SEZs). Singur represents a new development paradigm.
Its easy to understand why Singur is controversial. 997 acres of land, and 12,000 livelihoods are at stake. Given that it is 45 km from Kolkata, people know that its land is valuable, especially the 30 percent (according to one estimate, two-thirds) of the total that is multi-cropped.
Some want higher compensation than the governments offer (Rs 6 to 8.9 lakhs an acre). The political right and the far left have focused on their discontent.
The Communist Party (Marxist), the Left Front's leading component, claims that the landowners have consented to sell 954 of the 997 acres. Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee dismisses all protesters as "opponents of Bengal's growth."
However, the government's own Singur status report (The Times of India, Dec 16) says that prior consent for land purchase was obtained only for 586 acres -- on the day the government started fencing off land.
It had no consent for acquiring the rest (411 acres). It imposed the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (LAA) -- a colonial law that the left rightly opposes!
The LAA permits forcible acquisition for public purpose, but the Tata factory fulfils no public purpose. The government shouldn't have agreed to procure land for the Tatas, rather it should have asked them to buy it themselves.
In other states, the left opposes such government mediation and acquisition of multi-cropped land for SEZs.
The front government claims it is paying Singur's landowners more than the market rate. Usually, less than half the market price is legally registered. Recent purchases suggest Singur land could be worth Rs 30 lakhs/acre.
The bulk of Singur's land belongs to absentee landowners, and is cultivated by share-croppers (Bargadars). These will get just 25 percent of land value even if they're registered under the "Operation Barga" land reform.
If they aren't registered, as happens with large-scale programmes, they'll get no compensation. Their number is estimated at 250.
Even if they're brought into the net, they'll still get meagre compensation. As for the 1,000 or so landless agricultural workers and blacksmiths, mechanics and barbers, the prospect is worse: getting wiped out without compensation.
Singur's land transaction model will have a profoundly negative effect in West Bengal. "Operation Barga" reduced the landlord's share in the harvest to one-quarter or one-third. Singur will reverse that ratio -- a counter-reform.
The Left Front will have turned its back on the biggest land reform agenda in Bengal in three decades!
To make matters worse, the front government has bypassed the village panchayat -- violating Article 74 of the Constitution. One must criticise Mamata Banerjee for her right-wing politics and opportunism. But that doesn't exonerate the front.
The left should know that land is at the cutting edge of today's class struggles; it shouldn't be on the wrong side of the divide. The left had the responsibility -- and opportunity -- to create a model of consensual, humane land acquisition and rehabilitation at Singur. This would have redeemed its indifferent rehabilitation record.
A recent study finds that West Bengal has rehabilitated only 9 percent of those displaced by the Damodar Valley and other development projects since the 1950s. This is far lower than Andhra's 28 percent, Orissa's 33 and Goa's 34.
The Singur paradigm will be applied to 40,000 acres to be acquired nearby for other projects, including SEZs and industrial parks -- of the kind the left opposes elsewhere. The government has requests for a total of 125,000 acres.
One favoured applicant is Indonesia's Selim group, known to be a front for the super-corrupt Suharto family.
Singur's significance doesn't end there. Singur is a concentrated expression of the pattern of development the Left Front has embraced in Bengal. This model is dominated by private capital, and is weak on social development.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. The front seems desperate to attract private investment, including foreign investment, at any cost, irrespective of whether it generates employment, or contributes to public welfare.
This means that the front is essentially adopting the neo-liberal model in which the corporate investor calls the shots and sets the market rules, leaving elected governments helpless in directing investment into desirable areas to maximise public welfare.
The left front vocally -- and rightly -- criticises neo-liberalism and corporate-led globalisation. At the national level, it alone has a coherent critique of economic policies, which are creating havoc through their vicious dualism, widening disparities, and callousness towards the poor.
If the left takes the opposite approach in the states where it rules it will damage its own credibility, and weaken its ability to push the UPA in a progressive direction. This pressure-group role is the central reason why the left supports the UPA from the outside.
India's left parties today enjoy their highest-ever representation in Parliament, and rule in three states. They command credibility and respect far in excess of their membership. They are well-placed to develop an alternative model of development and industrialisation which doesn't squeeze the peasantry and isn't predatory on the livelihoods of the poorest people.
The Singur model will inflict yet another loss on the left. Over the past decade a healthy coalition has emerged between the left, and civil society groups, grassroots movements, and the radical intelligentsia
The Singur issue has created a rift within this coalition. Unless this is healed, it will weaken all of them and reduce their effectiveness.
The Left Front must not sit on prestige on Singur, as Chief Minister Bhattacharjee has been doing. It must radically revise the Singur land acquisition plan; even if that means the Tatas have to relocate the project. Far too much is at stake for the owners of a car factory to be allowed to dictate terms.
Comments