This refers to Arvind Panagariya's article "Win-win on land" (March 10). The reasons for opposing the changes are emotional and political rather than logical. According to the survey cited in the article, 72 per cent farmers want to hold on to their land despite the fact that only 10 per cent among them get a "good income" from it. This speaks of an emotional bond with the possession that politicians and NGOs exploit to their advantage.
Besides, 60 per cent of the farmers have become used to this 'traditional occupation' and 62 per cent of all farmers would exchange the land for 'a good job in the city'. This is the crux of the problem. Farmers could be weaned away by the offer of jobs rather than the compensation. If jobs cannot be offered, they should be given the right to the acquired land as a long-term lease, instead of an outright sale.
Is the requirement of land for industrial purposes well calculated or do they err on getting more than what they actually use? It is claimed that Japan uses only five per cent of available land (1.9 million hectare) for residential and industrial purposes and generates three times more industrial output than India. Where do we stand? Also, is land acquisition a bottleneck on the critical path? The lack of electricity is a big deterrent too. If other hurdles that come in the way of the ease of doing business are not resolved, land acquired will be land wasted.
Lastly, the obstinate infatuation of the Congress with its 2013 Act may prove to be counterproductive. It lost the Lok Sabha elections despite its enactment. While its Opposition may give it the satisfaction of paying the Bharatiya Janata Party in its own coin, it may not win more votes.
Y G Chouksey Pune
Letters can be mailed, faxed or e-mailed to:
The Editor, Business Standard
Nehru House, 4 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg
New Delhi 110 002
Fax: (011) 23720201
E-mail: letters@bsmail.in
All letters must have a postal address and telephone number
