By Atul K. Thakur
Bifurcation of Bihar in 2000 gave away the industrial landscape to a newly created state, Jharkhand. What remained in the old state was a terrain devoid of the industrial infrastructure, hope and political accountability—to reorient the new economy of the old populous state and retain the workforces in nearby productive activities. After horrendous financial efficiency in the course of 1990-2005, Bihar had witnessed a comparative benefit with the new commitment to governance, infrastructural overhaul and reforms in the power sector. However, Nitish Kumar did tiny to score greater on his personal satisfactory show in his initially complete-term (2005-10) as the Chief Minister of Bihar.
As his longing for the Chief Minister’s position remained unswerving, he failed the state and its people today by limiting the equitable development prospects with prioritising petty political ambitions more than the financial grand vision. Considering the financial development in comparative rather absolute terms, a false sense of euphoria was produced. After a couple of rounds of customary conviviality, Nitish Kumar and then his Finance Minister Sushil Modi did tiny to generate an enduring interface with the sector. Indifference to the possibilities of generating Bihar adequately enough with conducive industrial activities and thereby checking the exodus of young workforces from the state—reflects on Bihar’s present political leadership.
With a mandate that was not favourable adequate for a seasoned politician to think about helming once again as the Chief Minister of Bihar, Nitish Kumar did a grave injustice to himself and the state. He worked for lengthy as a pretty sensible politician with sound judgemental capacity, certainly except him no a single knows the explanation for his bizarre option in public life for an workplace that is never ever as well far for him even if he explores an ideologically comforting selection. The top choice-makers’ in the state government are either pressed via their personal construct and displaying off sufficiently in terms of curing the ills or locating themselves marginalised by the political leadership’s disdain for knowledge and more than-reliance on third parties. The state government’s web-sites such as the sector division reflect pretty poorly on plans, information and vision—for a fair assessment of industrial outcomes. As far as information management is concerned, a couple of chosen NGOs have colonised the state’s intellectual arena. With no locally empowered media, the predicament even gets undesirable to worse in flagging the problems of governance and improvement.
While the actual information is questionable even beyond Bihar’ borders in India, the state’s personal preparedness on this matter is particularly precarious. As a single goes on to appear at Invest India’s web page, there is certainly a sturdy explanation to be dismayed by seeing two distinctive versions of identified sectors and devoid of facts for crucial sectors—Food Processing & Dairy Textile & Leather Renewable Energy Tourism. No mention of Agriculture, Services such as IT & ITeS, Education & Skilling, Healthcare and Infrastructure that can be labour-intensive and capable of fulfilling the glaring requirements of high quality employment possibilities in a workforce-exporting state like Bihar.
In an unprecedented manner, the disruptive approach of collective financial loss was began with a series of monumental blunders from the centre with hurried demonetisation, unprepared GST implementation and dramatic lockdown. More to these, the international pandemic Covid-19 caught the whole universe unaware, specifically the government of Bihar. An imposed lockdown devoid of a correct notice produced a humanitarian crisis and impacted millions of Bihari migrants working in the semi-organised and unorganised sectors—and they left with no option but to be homebound on their feet devoid of hope or help. More than any other problems, the influencing variables of livelihood losses had been discussed most—and the political camps came forward as well with generating employment creations in each government and private sectors as their agenda in lately fought Bihar elections. However, the finish outcome is shabby—and migrants’ are significantly more precarious now as they are progressively returning back to their areas of work for mere survival.
Nitish is coping with an more than-confident senior alliance companion BJP for saving his party’s MLAs and defending the residue of his secular credentials by resisting the law on Love Jihad and quite a few more such advances. His 6 MLAs have been poached by BJP in Arunachal Pradesh—and to steer clear of the collateral harm and deal with a BJP devoid of Sushil Modi in the state government, RCP Singh was created JD (U) Chief. With unprecedented intra-coalition contradictions and tussles, Nitish Kumar is operating a government devoid of an agenda and inspiration.
Mass aspirations cornered and no arsenal left except for political upheavals, the new government promises not significantly for restructuring the state’s industrial capacities. For nearly the final 3 decades, Bihar has been suffering via its lamentable political-financial divide. With just enhanced standard infrastructure and status of a remittance-driven economy, Bihar can not go pretty far in securing the decent livelihoods for majority of people today who are destined to migrate hopelessly. In absence of a pragmatic political discourse that could have instilled a sense of financial duty as effectively, the state has desperately witnessed the possibilities foregone.
The centre’s lengthy and painful apathy to the hindrances on coal linkage and freight equalisation policy (1952) had eroded the competitive edge of Bihar and other eastern states. Bihar suffered most amongst them and private investment and production facilities remained elusive for lengthy in spite of the state’s edge with mineral sources and fertile land. The freight equalisation policy subsidised the transportation of minerals to a factory set up anyplace in the nation. It is effectively in public reckoning how the policy hurt the financial prospects of mineral-wealthy states like undivided Bihar (such as present-day Jharkhand), West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh (such as present-day Chhattisgarh) and Odisha. In the present situation, NDA government in Bihar’s inability to safe the repeatedly created promises for “Special Status” for state from the NDA government at centre is baffling—reminding bitterly about the unfortunate continuance of a regressive policy trend.
No matter how Nitish Kumar goes ahead with his political preference, his alternatives have to be significantly more balanced on policy fronts. With removing the anomalies and outlining the implementing tactics, he have to come out with a improved drafted Bihar’s Industry Investment Policy. Overplayed politics and underplayed financial action has not served in favour of Bihar, an overly complacent group of people today can not be useful in choice-generating, Nitish Kumar ought to try for a course correction by providing the knowledge, its effectively-deserved due. In maintaining at bay the cheerleaders disguised as policymakers—and applying their personal thoughts and conscience, he will be improved placed to consider about the state. Ignoring urgency in bridging the gap among politics and economics ought to not be wishful for him.
(Atul K. Thakur is a policy qualified and columnist, Views expressed are the author’s personal.)