The one–time loan waiver of a whopping Rs. 60,000 crores to help an estimated 40 million farmers is definetly a good development for Indian farming sector. The purpose of writing this article is that, while reading the news papers, I came across many people talking insignificant things and only a small section of the people really addressing the ‘true’ pros and cons. Here I would like to express my take on pros and cons of this so-called ‘mother of all waivers’. Even though this loan-waiver would definitely provide some relief to the estimated 40 million small and marginal farmers, a better package would have been the increase of Minimum Support Price for all the crops and providing subsidies for inputs so that farming in general becomes profitable.

Pros -

First of all, farmers in India are in distress and considering their loss in farming over the years, any kind of help to these farmers would be useful to them. The claim by some people that even the ‘private lender’ loans  should also be cleared is not possible for the simple reason that there is no reasonable and fair way to identify and account for such private loans.  Also, the other opinion raised was that it would be better if the governments pay some money to the farmers on monthly basis for 2-3 months to provide a kind of financial cushion. It would be practically impossible to raise such huge sums of money without increasing the taxes on the other sections. Another important thing is that in the current loan-waiver scheme fair records are available for farmer’s loans and since it only waives the loans of small and marginal farmers, it has higher probability of reaching the poor directly than any other scheme, which involves money flow through government’s bureaucracy. Waiving the loans issued by the banks is an easy option, as the banks will not insist on immediate repayment, and most likely all that the governments have to do is write bonds for the loan-waiver amount and repay them later. As far as the impact of this waiver on the banks is concerned, I don’t imagine these small and marginal farmers repaying their loans in the near future with the current agricultural practice. In case the government has not decided to pay back these loans, banks would have paid from their own pockets. However, the major advantage is that the small and marginal farmers can get new loans again now.

Cons -

 “Give me the fish and I eat for a day. Teach me to fish and I eat for a lifetime”

This quotation is very apt in this particular instance where government is not looking for a permanent solution to farmer’s crisis. A better solution would have been spending a portion of this amount on developing their infrastructure –providing them with better education, providing quality inputs (water, seeds and fertilizers), setting up food storage facilities and increasing the minimum support price would make farming more economical and help farmers to stand on their own feet. I do support the increase of Minimum Support Price for wheat and rice, but still it is very unfortunate that the government which came to power on ‘AAM ADMI’ plank has done very little on these aspects over their four year term. Subsidies do give temporary relief but they must be properly supported with proper infrastructure facilities to permanently stop farmer’s misery.

Of late, the demand for a separate telengana state has intensified, with some political parties switching the gears on the agitation.  Also, I have been reading about the other demands for separate states. In many cases, the demand for a separate state is mainly based on the reason that a particular region is not economically well developed when compared with other regions. Over the last decade, three separate states were created, and we are hearing some more demands, and there will be many more coming up in the future. Rather than looking at creating a separate state as the only solution, governments should work on making sure that the development is properly distributed to all the regions. Moreover, creation of states is not a possible option for all the regions at all the times. The current telengana movement (from AP), has been there for a long time, and no visible progress has been made so far, except that political parties keep talking about it and media has something to cover all the time. In the telengana case, there are definitely some serious complications like who would get Hyderabad (AP state capital).

However, the point that I want to make is, whether the governments give separate states or not, it is important for all of us, to address these disparities in regional developments within the states, and should make sure every region gets its deserved share in developmental schemes. In a democratic country, I think, a section of the people have the right to demand a separate state, if they are not happy in the current state. I don’t think we can make any general argument on whether a region would benefit if it is made a separate state or not. It depends on the leadership vision on how they want to develop the new state. General advantages would be better governance, better developmental representation, and more government jobs. However, more government  jobs doesn’t just improve economy, because the productivity doesn’t change much after a separate state is made, and the revenues need to be developed to pay for all these new jobs.  Not all the small states formed are flourishing. 

When only some regions of the state prospers and gets importance in funding, industrial and irrigational developments, the other regions would obviously be unhappy. If this continues for some time, the backward region people feel cheated in their own state and d start agitations. So, the real solution lies on the shoulders of the people and the government representatives (MLA’s and MP’s )to make sure that their regions received due importance and on the governments to immediately address any disparity issues.  If this is not addressed properly, sooner or later, there would be many more demands for separate states, and the basic issue of regional development disparities would be forgotten, and the concentration would be on just getting a separate state.

Water is a scarce natural resource in most regions of India.  Many city water supply administrations are spending huge amounts on transporting water from faraway places to the households. A new report (September, 2007) by the Planning Commissions http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2007/09/19/stories/2007091952411000.htm) drawn attention to alarming depletion of groundwater at some places in India. Not to add the ongoing droughts.  

Over the last decade, various government organizations encouraged rain water harvesting, and there has been some progress in this area. For example, in Hyderabad and Chennai, it is compulsory to include rain water harvesting structure in house plans for approval. Also, there have been some projects on the revival of lakes and temple tanks to replenish ground water.

However, I think, it is time for us to accelerate our progress in the rain water harvesting and have concrete plans for future water demands. Most of the current rainwater harvesting programs concentrate on recharging ground water. I think there is enormous scope for harvesting roof water in underground tanks, and then use this water for residential applications AFTER PURIFICATION.

In my earlier studies on roof water harvesting possibilities of Center for Water Resources building (in Anna University campus, Chennai), it’s been noted that, if roof water is harvested (underground storage tank is available) it would supply sufficient water for domestic use to at least two more similar buildings.

Collecting roof water seems to be a simple process, no huge costs involved, however, purifying and pressuring for supply involves reasonable costs. Good amount of information and designs are available online (google it!) for roof water.  However, much information is not available on the quality of this harvested water and how to purify this water.

Water samples need to be collected from harvested water before domestic applications and need to be tested for physical, chemical and biological impurities. Table 1, presents The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS 10500-1991) for drinking water in India.

Generally, the treatment process would include, but not limited to, screening, settling, filtering and disinfecting. The screening stage filters debris and large particles, the settling process then further cleans the rainwater by allowing the tiny particles that got through the screening process to settle at the bottom of the rainwater tank. Filtering is then supposed to remove sediment and contaminants and trap other smaller particles. The final process of disinfecting the rainwater can be done using chlorine, ozone or even ultraviolet light to kill harmful micro-organisms.

Table 1. INDIAN STANDARDS FOR DRINKING WATER  -  SPECIFICATION                   ( BIS  10500 : 1991 )

         Bacteriological standards

         Coliform count             0 in 100 ml of sample

         E.Coli count                  0 in 100 ml of sample

Being a fan of Ganguly, personally I felt sad when I read about Ganguly’s exclusion from the WSC one day series.  However, after some thinking, I thought it looked like a good decision. No doubt replacements were essential; hence, someone had to make way for these replacements.  As I had already mentioned in my earlier post (Cricket views on 01/12/2008), I still think that ‘rotation’ would be the best policy and I am not sure whether the selector are thinking on the same line.

It’s still too early to comment as the selectors have not made their thinking clear. However, I appreciate their attempt to bring more young players into the team and hope they would not expect too much from the younger players as it would be generally difficult to defeat the world champions on their own home ground.

As of Ganguly, I would be happy, if he doesn’t give up and still competes with the younger players and makes more and more comebacks.

 I would update this post, as and when I come across more information.