From India's largest newsroom, I'm Arun George and this is the
Times of India podcast. The Women's Reservation Bill may
have been passed by parliament, but as multiple opposition
parties have pointed out, it's on hold for a while.
First, there needs to be a census that hasn't been
conducted since 2011. Then there needs to be the
process of delimitation. Doctor Jay Prakash Narayan is a
retired IAS official and set up the Foundation for Democratic
Reforms, which aims to improve governance in the country.
He also set up the Loksatta movement and the Loksatta Party
to motivate people to join politics and to educate people
about governance. He says that the process to give
women reservation in parliament and state assemblies could have
been much easier. We are not still at thousands in
knots by having a very complicated model which
necessitated waiting for a delimitation again.
Which itself was stalled because of the constitutional amendments
ever since 1976. So we complicate lives.
A simpler model, though, made it much, much better.
We could have straight to be implemented.
But, you know, let's rejoice, at least after 2530 years of a lot
of talk and very little action long last.
No near unanimity is there in Parliament, it appears, in the
parliamentary debates. Both the government and
opposition, they hinted that they're willing to look at
better models. As long as, no, this is
ironclad, you cannot go back on this.
So let us see if they're willing to look at something better.
But it could have been done. It could have been done
immediately and in a much more need fashion.
But we're not talking to Dr. Jay Prakash Narayan about the
Women's Reservation Bill. We're talking with him about the
process of delimitation or the redrawing of parliamentary and
state assembly constituencies in India.
The delimitation exercise would be carried out on the basis of
the census. The process of delimitation is
seeing a lot of political debate, despite the fact that
it's not going to be done before 2026.
A lot of the southern states in India are worried that the
process of delimitation would reduce the number of Mp's the
states sent to Parliament. It's also feared it will reduce
the funds received by states in the South from the central
government. In today's episode, Doctor Jay
Prakash Narayan is in conversation with my colleague
Alka Dupkar and me about the process of delimitation and they
need to conduct it. He also explains why it hasn't
been conducted since 1976 and how it can be done without
increasing the political temperature.
Now coming to the main subject of delimitation, what is the
delimitation exercise and why it is needed?
Every democratic country has the constituencies for the election
to legislature based on population.
After all, the basic principle is one person, one vote.
So equitable vote. Whether and richer core one
human being must have roughly the same political power in
terms of voice and voting as another human being.
And our Constitution also clearly provided for
redistribution or delimitation, as we call it, of constituencies
based on population. Every 10 years, the Constitution
said A. The number of Lok Sabha seats
allocated to a state shall be as closely as possible in
proportion to. The population of the state
based on the latest census and after every census you must
conduct this exercise so that the number of seats are
allocated to a state first as far as practicable.
The second thing the Constitution said is that once
the number is allocated, the seat service redistributed every
10 years. Because not only do you require
redistribution because the allocation changes from state to
state for the Lok Sabha every 10 years, but within a state.
The population changes within the ten years.
We know large pockets of the country.
Increasingly now the rural population is declining, at
least where the birth rates are coming down.
Urban population is increasing, therefore delimitation within
the state also. And that happened after 1951
census. It happened after 61 census.
After 71 census 3 delimitation commissions worked on this and
everything went off very well. Then came the constitutional
amendment in 1976. It was in 1976 that it was
decided to freeze the Lok Sabha constituencies as they stood at
the time. In 2001, the Atal Bihari
Vajpayee government also decided to keep the constituencies as
they were. Doctor Jayaprakash Narayan
explains the role he played in that and why the government
decided to keep the decision on hold for another 20-5 years.
He admits it's difficult to judge whether the decision to
put it on hold in 1976 was a good one or a bad one.
But he says as far as he knows, there was number Malified
intent. The then Prime Minister Mrs.
Indira Gandhi, seem to have genuinely believed that you must
not create perverse incentives for population increase to
punish states which have been able to contain the population.
Growth will be reopened only in 2001, they said they thought 25
is a long time. Then 2001 came Vajpayee.
Government was in office, then some of us particularly late.
She has faces of Ramakrishnan. The former Secretary, Government
of India in Urban Development and I, we took the initiative
because we sensed it that this is coming and unless we handle
it well, there will be political challenges.
So we appeal to the government to allow status quo to continue.
Whether it is a good judgment or not I cannot say.
But at that point of time we felt the country was politically
somewhat unstable. If you remember the watch by
government did not have very great majority a multi party
coalition. And economy was just then.
They're trying to recover from the difficulties faced poker and
explosion led to sanctions etc. Therefore, economy, we're just
not then trying to get back on our feet.
And if we reopen this Pandora's box, the fear was that it will
consume all our energy. It will hurt the economy and the
country and the political stability and that argument they
bought it and therefore. They said the numbers will be
frozen for another 25 years. We kick the can down the road.
Honestly, I thought 25 years is a long time.
We will see what will happen then, little knowing that 25
years passes by very fast. And now we are saddled with that
again in 2026. The normal process is that each
person in a democracy will have roughly equal weightage in terms
of the vote or in terms of representation.
Therefore, you cannot really have any strong argument
against. Going back to the redistribution
based on the census data, so in. Nutshell, are you suggesting
that north-south divide, which will happen based on population,
is unavoidable? One day or other, we have to
face it when demographic differences are there and they
also accompany economic disparities.
May take Bihar. Bihar has actually 1/4 of the
per capita income of the. Better off states like
Maharashtra or Tamil Nadu or Karnataka.
Just to clarify, the per capita income is the income earned by
each person in the state. This is calculated by dividing
the state's income by the number of people living in it.
And Bihar is not a tiny state with a million population, it's
a state with, I don't know the current population but probably
about ten floor. And normally what happens in
countries where migration is very common within the country,
like United States. Many more people tend to migrate
within the country than other countries.
There's far greater migration than India.
So migration addresses the challenges.
And also after a certain level of development, population
actually is an asset. Therefore, more people migrating
into the area actually stimulates economic growth.
We're not there yet. And migration does take place in
India. But migration still is
relatively not very large in India from state to state, while
it is taking place more than hour before.
Therefore, that does not automatically address the
demographic problem. And without addressing the
demographic problem and the political representation, I
don't think we can go far. Southern states like Tamil Nadu
haven't quite welcomed the delimitation exercise.
They have called it the political conspiracy to lower
the political representation of South India, the fear that they
have controlled the population and that's why they will be
punished, how the fear should be handled.
Every state the birth rates are coming down.
Some states are ahead of other states, even Bihar, which has
the highest birth rate in India. There is an expression called
fertility rate that means the number of children a woman based
during her reproductive life. Bihar used to be 4 some 1520
years ago. Now I think Bihar is close to
three every state. The birth rates are declining
and fertility rates are declining.
First, I want us to all understand this panic that my
God population is growing out of control.
What will happen is not true. It's just that some states
because of historical, political and economic reasons.
They have been a little ahead of the cow, but every state is
following so and every segment of population.
The rich and the poor, the urban and the rural, the Hindu and the
Muslim and the Christian and upper caste and the poorer
caste. Every segment of the population,
the birth rates and fertility rates are declining.
The second is it's unfair to say that representation in
proportion to population is political conspiracy every
country. Worth mentioning of the
democracy as the same principle. We adopted the same principles
part of the Constitution. I don't think that Ambedkar and
the Constitution makers indulged in a deliberate conspiracy to
hurt all of us. Freedom fighters were very
learned people. They were fully aware and yet
they had the delimitation based on census every 10 years.
We cannot call it a conspiracy. Unity of India is paramount in
Matthew. Unity is critical for order and
peace and harmony in society. We don't have a record of
peacefully coexisting as separate political entities,
even a state division, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.
There was so much of A strife only now people are trying to
forget the what happened even though some people feel very
strongly. So we are very volatile.
Therefore, unity to me is the most paramount consideration,
because without unity and order in society.
There cannot be economic growth and they cannot be freedom.
And I think all of us must pause a little bit and stop using the
rhetoric. That is a conspiracy.
It's not a conspiracy. Yes, a negotiation is necessary.
Yes, some kind of adjustment is necessary.
In the 1960s, when there were attempts to impose Hindi and the
whole country, Tamil Nadu heroically resistant.
And I think India's unity was safeguarded because of the
wisdom of the political leadership of the country.
By ensuring that while Hindi with the national language,
English will continue to the link language of India and the
national language as long as people of India want, that is
forever. So we require that kind of a
negotiation and compromise, keeping in mind the unity of
India, rather than use a very explosive rhetoric.
So in your opinion, what are the ways or what are the
negotiations? That should take place to avoid
the north-south divide. Population control and
population representation in today's political culture has
become the center stage of the controversy.
Some states, if you take the current number of Lok Sabha and
if you redistribute that in proportion to the population
currently, some states will lose a significant number of
representatives. Tamil Nadu and Kerala.
Most of all, my ballpark number is Kerala out of 20, may lose
about 6:00 or so. Coming out of 39 we lose eight
or nine other states. There will be relatively minor
adjustments. States like Maharashtra where
they are prosperous and they contain population because of in
migration that may not make much of a difference and states like
UP and Bihar they will get a few more representatives then they
have currently. So one easy ways can we maintain
the minimum number whatever the current number and therefore to
the doesn't increase the size of Lok Sabha.
So first, there is no sense of actual loss of constituencies
and representation. I think that's an easy one.
I have a feeling that's already being considered.
That's why the new Parliament premises actually provide for
larger capacity, keeping in mind or growing population and
therefore the increasing numbers of the Lok Sabha.
The second thing is finances. Everybody is worried about
finances. Now we have to again practical.
Bihar, as I said already, is has 1/4 of the per capita income of
the. Better off states.
Now you cannot have one part of the country, a large part of the
country, suffering from extreme poverty and have prosperity and
peace in the rest of the country.
Unless we create conditions through federal transfer
resources to improve the infrastructure and provide basic
communities and services to every part of the country, all
of us will suffer. So can we look at the Finance
Commission redistribution in a manner that the genuine concerns
of? The poor states are addressed
without the better off states feeling that you are rewarding
incompetence or profligacy. That means can we have a better
management of resources in every state in terms of the
transferred money from Union government which actually goes
only for the capital investment, educational, healthcare,
infrastructure and service delivery improvement.
The third is migration. India still is not seeing enough
migration for a country of employment for billion people.
I am talking of internal migration.
And migrants, even when they exist, we must now give them
rights. Of there is some talk about you
having ration card everywhere, but I believe if you migrate for
work or anything, you are a citizen of India anywhere.
Therefore you must have the rights of citizenship, including
voting rights including public distribution, including all
welfare programs of the government.
If that is done, as more and more migration happens because
of economic compulsions, the demographic problems will not
appear to be big and Southern states already are realizing.
Without this migrant laborers from some of the more popular
states, many things in Bengaluru or Mumbai cannot get done today.
So instead of getting worked up about the Interstate
differences, we recognize we actually need the migrant
workers. Typically migrant workers, once
they are dislocated and approved, they work harder, they
have dignity of Labor, they don't suffer from prejudices
which are very typical in the local community and they are a
tremendous asset in the economy. So I think encouraging economic
migration within the country to the all down development of the
whole country and finally we can probably have some kind of an
adjustment in the upper house if lower house is strictly
according to population, can we have some kind of a satisfactory
formula. It's not going to be easy
because we extremely tiny states like Sikkim and the Mizoram and
we have very large states like UPUP is bigger than every
country in the world save 3. So we have to think very
innovatively and figure out some way.
Of doing something, maybe in the upper house or at the very least
finally, we can give an ironclad guarantee, if necessary by a
constitutional amendment so that no states rights or state
subjects or anything will be affected on account of this
division. Therefore, if right now 2/3 is
what is required to amend the Constitution in respect to those
subjects, we can say we will go for 4/5 or even more.
That should not be a difficult thing.
So there are I think, ways there is good will all around we can
address these challenges. But the most important question
of getting the power, and you have not touched it, but today
who is in power is also important and the whole fight is
about that. Also if the MP is in northern
part of India are going to increase, that will change the
balance. Alka the truth is in India.
Northern India always dominated the power structure in terms of
numbers. You take the prime ministers.
There are a few prime ministers in the South, like for instance
Mr. PV Narasimha Rao and Mr. Deva Gowda.
But both were prime ministers by accident, not by political
strength. In terms of real politic, the
northern India will always have dominance.
In terms of the power structure of the Union, there is nothing
new. Let's first accept it, if
anything. The government successively and
all parties have been extraordinarily wise.
I know we blame them for many things that are wrong in giving
reasonable representation to the whole country in terms of the
cabinet formation, etcetera. And 3rd.
The real government for the people is the state.
If you look at the elections, for instance of the political
behavior of the electorate, most people vote according to their
perception of the state government.
That means power already has shifted to the states.
That ordinary people understand the center of gravity is now in
states. The national government is
largely notional. It's important, it's critical.
But in terms of political discourse, if you really don't
have the English speaking in national media talking all the
time about the power struggle in Delhi, people actually are not
bothered. The Assembly constituency is the
unit of politics in India and the state government is the
government that people judge most of the time.
And therefore, strengthening federalism and further
localizing government decentralization of government
to the third tier, effectively with accountability, will take
away the obsession of national power.
Will actually make us focus on what matters to our lives in
terms of service, delivery, education, healthcare, the park
in front of your house, the road or the traffic jams and so on.
OK, fair enough. I don't completely agree with
you. Should we bifurcate States and
could it help? To keep away the north-south
divide. There is no way you can have
states the size of 20 crores and 15 crores.
Call them provinces. They're too big.
I remember making a presentation to the Prime Minister, Rajiv
Gandhi as a district magistrate, I told him then.
Mr. Prime Minister, district in India is larger than half the
nations of the world. At that time there were about
100 and 61170 countries. About 80 countries were smaller
than an average district of India.
I don't think the UP chief minister or chief secretary can
even suddenly name all the districts or name all the
members of parliament in their state or name all the district
magistrates in the in the state. So I think there is a case to to
have a moderate size, you know, I think you must have a rule
that five to seven crores. But we must also make it very
clear to our people, the state. The identity must not be so
incredibly polarizing that no many people feel it's a matter
of life or death, particularly because of linguistic
reorganization. And given that, we must come to
some agreement by which there will be 0 difference in terms of
our lives and there will be fairly distributed resources.
As we have seen in entrepreneurship, big city now
goes to one part of the country, one new state.
The other states will feel off and therefore we have to figure
out a way. In which those city revenues for
a final period, it can be actually shared by all or you
can even have a completely different pattern of governance
for the big cities in the country.
So a lot of political negotiations required.
But I think the short answer is yes, we have many of our states
are too big, and therefore smaller states by common
consent, without upsetting the constitutional balance in terms
of English, city organizations, etcetera, is both necessary and
welcome. And it will help the
delimitation exercise also in some way.
If the problem is beyond language you don't feel
culturally otherwise subjugated, then it's easier to have a more
rational public discourse and more peaceful resolution of
issues. What would you say in this
current scenario where you have, as you said, little room for
conciliation between the political parties and there is
also a very clear political divide in terms of.
Which parties in power and which isn't at the center?
So how does that even go forward then?
Should maybe it again be kicked down the road for 25 years from
purely from don't upset the apple cart point of view down
the right to man. Actually by that time I will not
be there. I'm sure 25 years later I will
not be answering these questions, So it's a very
tempting option. But two things.
One, whether you like it or not, when there is a majority stable
government at the national level whose political interest
probably will be better served by getting political weightage
in proportion to the population, because the regions where they
seem to have a certain political strength, they are the ones
which probably will gain the political clout in terms of
numbers in the parliament. It is somewhat unrealistic to
expect that a party in power lat against so self-interest.
It is one thing I learnt in life.
It is that a reformer must never argue with a political leader to
hurt his own interest. We must craft the agenda in such
a manner that their own sense of their political interest and our
sense of the national interest they both coincide.
That is when real results happen.
The second thing is wonder. Rather, we have to grapple with
this and luckily, particularly in the last 25 years, in the 30
years in India in particular, but from broadly all over the
world, we've learned that while population is a huge challenge,
human society, we are coming to terms with that.
In such a changing world, I think we must address this
intelligently and calmly unhurried deliberation rather
than both sides between apocalyptic you know, one side
we talk about democratic rights and defy the another side we
talk about subjugation in term because of the minority and
punishment because of population control.
You can argue either way, but that's not the issue.
We have to find an answer we can live with.
That's the way I would like to project.
Given the timeline between now and the proposed delimitation.
Period is a very. Short one what?
Do you expect to see happen? See, a lot depends on the wisdom
of the political leaders. It is not the people.
People of India are extremely sensible.
In my judgment, people of India are extremely conciliatory,
accommodation, adjustment, coexistent, survival,
compromise. It's part of our blood.
It is politics that polarizes us for their own gains, tribalizes
us and that creates, you know, yes or no, black or white
situation. So a lot depends on the wisdom
of the political leaders, particularly those in
governments at the state or national level.
If they recognize the interests of their respective states is
perfectly legitimate or nationally, they have some point
of perfectly legitimate. But if they do it in a calm
manner, based on evidence and logic, and with an intention to
resolve the issue rather than to polarize the people, I think we
can find a solution. But if they deliberately provoke
animosities and make it a very loud and contentious issue, then
all bets are off. Doctor Jay Prakash Narayan says
there is a validity to the regional parties fears that they
will not be consulted during the delimitation process, especially
the Modi government returns to power after the 2024 polls.
However, he does have some advice for a BJP government if
it does come to power again in 2024.
My advice to the government would be, if anybody cares to
listen, look, it's not in your interest to polarize the country
in this manner, particularly in issues like this.
Any issue of polarization is not in your interest.
But issues like this ultimately will be difficult to your own
political future. If BJP has stakes in Karnataka,
if BJP wants to grow in Telangana, if BJP is now making
some efforts, let's say in Tamil Nadu, these are not states where
you can write off, right? So it's not in your interest to
permanently marginalize yourself and to you believe, and I
believe you believe in the unity of India, your sense of
nationalism. While we may disagree on some
specifics, but we all want one thing and if BJP is genuinely
patriotic, then BJP must want unity of India.
So my advice to them would be in their interest not to make it a
polarizing issue and to meet the the concerns of the people who
are worried about what might happen halfway and reduce the
temperature. Today's episode was produced by
Jayaraj Singh and Anuja Singh. For a daily spotlight on people,
ideas and stories that matter, subscribe to us.
We are available on TOI, Spotify, Apple, Google Podcasts
and all other platforms of your choice.
For any news tips, e-mail us at TOI Podcast at Timesinternet in.