Bibek Debroy: With an eye on the rear-view mirror

Since the twenty-point programme was about a command economy and government intervention, invoking it today is making a strong statement about where the government stands on reforms.

A stray remark by Arun Jaitley put this thought about the Twenty Point Programme (TPP) into my head, that is, the TPP in it original Mark-I version, circa July 1975. There was a Mark-II in 1982 and a Mark-III in 1986 and evidently, the ministry of statistics and programme implementation is working on a Mark-IV, to incorporate initiatives like Bharat Nirman, e-governance, highway projects, inter-linking of rivers, social security for the unorganised sector, the digital divide, AIDS control and decentralisation.

In a broad philosophical sense, if the objective of TPP is to "improve the quality of life of the poor and the under-privileged population of the country", as the ministry tells us, we don't need a TPP, and a TPP Division in the Ministry for that. That is the objective of all development, government intervention and planning. True, no TPP can be carved in stone and needs to change with altered circumstances. However, using a TPP peg suggests there is something special about the number twenty and the original TPP-1975. And no doubt, the mindset of TPP-1975 also continues. It is surprisingly difficult to get hold of TPP-1975 now, that is, a listing of those original twenty points. The name TPP may be invoked, but rarely will you find those items mentioned. Here they are:

(1) Continuance of steps to bring down prices of essential commodities; streamlined production, procurement and distribution of essential commodities; strict economy in government expenditure.

(2) Implementation of agricultural land ceilings and speedier distribution of surplus land and compilation of land records.

(3) Stepping up of provision of house-sites for the landless and weaker sections.

(4) Bonded labour, wherever it exists, will be declared illegal.

(5) A plan for liquidation of rural indebtedness. Legislation for moratorium on recovery of debts from landless labourers, small farmers and rural artisans.

(6) Review of laws on minimum agricultural wages.

(7) Five million more hectares to be brought under irrigation. A national programme for use of underground water.

(8) An accelerated power programme. Establishment of super thermal stations under Central control.

(9) New plan for development of the handloom sector.

(10) Improvement in quality and supply of people's cloth.

(11) Socialisation of urban and urbanisable land. Ceiling on ownership and possession of vacant land and on the plinth area of new dwelling units.

(12) Special squads for valuation of conspicuous construction and prevention of tax evasion. Summary trials and deterrent punishment to economic offenders.

(13) Special legislation for confiscation of smugglers' properties.

(14) Liberalisation of investment procedures. Action against misuse of import licences.

(15) New schemes for workers' association in industry.

(16) National Permit Schemes for road transport.

(17) Income-tax relief to the middle class-exemption-limit raised to Rs 8,000 per annum.

(18) Supply of essential commodities at controlled prices to students in hostels.

(19) Supply of books and stationery at controlled prices.

(20) New apprentice schemes to enlarge employment and training, specially of the weaker sections.

There was a mindset of the mid-1970s, more accurately, the period from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, and most of these 20 points reflect that mindset. There are some that can be thought of as perennial, such as (2), (3), (7) and (8). There are others that have been over-taken by events, legislative or otherwise. Instances are (4), (6), (9), (16) and (17). However, the ones that are really symptomatic of that mindset are (1), (5), (10), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (18), (19) and (20). This is the core of TPP-75. If you believe in reforms, you can't believe in these. And vice-versa. At least, you can't believe in these in their entirety.

Consider (1) for instance. Economy in government expenditure is fine and is a pious statement and no more. But you can't believe in government intervention in production, procurement and distribution of essential commodities, whatever the definition of essential. Similarly, on (5), a plan for rural indebtedness may be fine, but you can't believe in a moratorium. Or on (14), liberalisation of investment procedures may be acceptable, but one can't have action against misuse of import licences. Finally on (20), the implicit suggestion is that these apprenticeship schemes will be run by the government and one can't believe in that either.

This brings me back to the Jaitley remark. If you continue to invoke TPP-75, it is axiomatic that you don't believe in liberalisation. Instead, you believe in a command economy and pervasive state intervention. Conversely, any government that believes in reforms should have the guts to say it is time to discard and give up the legacy of TPP-75. That was another time and another age. India needs to move forward.

However, giving up the baggage of the past isn't easy and that represents the dilemma. A Mark-IV version of TPP will therefore go to the Cabinet. The TPP Division in ministry of statistics and programme implementation will continue to remain. And every once in a while, we will look back and remember TPP to justify state controls. Driving with an eye on the rear-view mirror slows you down. But then, we don't really want to move on to the expressway, do we?