The Odisha Government’s “welfare approach” has been criticised by the Opposition. The opposition parties argue that by doling out “excess” dose of welfare schemes, the State Government is perpetuating poverty instead of eradicating it.
They blame the State ruling BJD for engaging itself in welfare- governance for furthering its vote bank politics. Is the Opposition’s allegation against cradle-to-grave welfare approach rationalIJ Is there scope for making Odisha a “zero-welfare-scheme” StateIJ
Today is the age of “sustainable development” which calls for the abolition of “charity approach” in the world to mitigate poverty. But the old dilemma between the two “choices” of giving “a fish” and “a fishing rod” to poor stills haunts the benefactors. When we examine the citizens’ approach, we find charity continues during the religious months in all parts of the world. Rich people donate in churches, temples and mosques for the poor. The NGOs raise public donations by provoking the charity-conscience of the rich. The UN is now raising money in the holy X-mas month, showing the pitiable pictures of the refugees. The national Governments of the world extend welfare schemes for their citizens in various forms. Both the approaches co-exist paradoxically.
let us start the story from the fisher folk as it is the story of ‘fish and fishing rod”. In Odisha, the indigenous fisher folks were born with fishing rods in their hands. The gradual fall in the flow of rivers made them occupationally displaced. In the Chilika lake area, the fisher folks migrate due to gradual fall in access rights and fish resources. Marine fishing was dominated by immigrants. The injection of prawn farming, mechanized fishery and pond pisiculture into fishing sector in Odisha, witnessed privatization of the means of production of fishery and emergence of a new class from the non-fishing rich community. Thus the fishery communities became jobless and are waiting for help.
Similar situation is found in agriculture. Farmers were born with “ploughs and bullocks” in their hands in Odisha. Frequent occurrence of natural disasters, low MSP, fragmentation of land holdings, increased population pressure, enhancement of wages, educated class of children emerged as deterrence to the farmers. In coastal areas, the big farmers left agriculture due to its low return and risk character. Agriculture was left to small and marginal farmers who took leadership in cultivation as sharecroppers. A contradiction was set between capital and labour. How a poor sharecropper can lead an economic system while rich landlords washed their hands offIJ The outcome was evident. It resulted in harm to sharecroppers as well as the farming system.
In the forest areas, tribals had no cultivable rights. It took more than half a century for the Government of India to give cultivable land rights to the tribal farmers through the Forest Right Act. It will take a few more years to implement the entitlements and help the tribals develop their land amidst forests and hills. The tribal agriculture is geographically destined to be subsistence not profit-oriented. In the west Odisha and coastal Odisha, land reforms eluded the farmers. The Union Government continued mindlessly with the American-model of fertilizer-seed support based agricultural assistance to farmers. It was not needed for the tribal hill farmers and small farmers of Odisha who were using manure and local seeds for a variety of crops. The Government of India did not listen to the fact that tribals, small and marginal farmers had no requirement of chemical fertilizer and seed and something else should be given to them.
Industrialisation of agriculture in Odisha brought tractors which displaced the drought-animals and ploughs. It shifted cultivation- capital from the farm labourers to the tractor companies and the tractor owners. Cows, bullocks, ploughs and cart were thrown away. The hapless farmers are asking for “rice” not “ploughs or bullocks”.
Workers in mining areas only got wages while mine owners and transporters looted minerals as caught by Shah Commission. Some high caste families got sarkari-jobs after Independence but the gradual shrink in Government jobs due to New Economic Order left their children jobless. Due to national programmes, some part-time and half-salaried jobs floated in Odisha where a few got employed as Sikhyakarmis or AWC cooks. There was gradual abolition of employment exchange system at districts. In absence of the registration system, the unemployed youths did not know where to look for a job. He trusted his fellow villager or the exploitative local labour-contractor to become a dadan-shramik!
This is the story of the people Of Odisha who are needing “fish” , after giving up their ”fishing rod”. Therefore, a huge competition is seen when a welfare-scheme reaches the village. The have-nots want welfare schemes urgently and the haves also want it as they have fear of becoming have-nots tomorrow. It is not only the story of the 28th ranked Raghuram Rajan panel State, but of other similar States. All that they want is “fish” not a “fishing-rod” as they lost their fishing rods due to the New Economic System.
In a capitalist system, the private players use national resources to produce goods and services with a profit motive. The distribution is made through markets. As the resources are scare, there shall be competition to avail the resources and many are eliminated from the system of entrepreneurship. Due to profit motive and mechanization, many citizens are excluded from job-system. The larger is the population size of a nation, the bigger shall be the economic exclusion of the masses. Who are the excluded groupsIJ The first category of the helpless group is the production- incapable, economically dependent population like the aged, the children, the disabled and even the women in the Indian context. These groups need the support of the society and Governments. There is objection in adopting a “fish-giving” approach for these groups from the State exchequer. But what shall be the approach for helping the groups like the educated/uneducated unemployed 18-60 age groupIJ All these people will not get distribution justice from the market due to zero-purchasing power. In Indian context, there exist further lower strata within this group, like the SCs, the STs, and the women. The Union Government has various welfare schemes/Acts for the poor including job reservation. Why no one criticizes the Union Government but the State GovernmentsIJ
In Odisha, the SCs and STs make up to 40 per cent of the population. If we add OBC and SEBC groups to them, imagine their percentage! What is the responsibility of the State Government for these groups, apart from the Central schemesIJ In States like Odisha, the State Government have to give a high dose of appropriate “welfare schemes” to help the marginal sections to meet their survival needs. Simultaneously, it has to provide quality education to enable the next-generation to escape the State boundary for quality jobs. Agriculture, industry and mining have probably reached saturation here. Only hope is the expansion of service/manufacturing sector.
The welfare State is a Government in which the State plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the social and economic well-being of its citizens. Sociologist TH Marshall described the modern welfare State as a distinctive combination of democracy, welfare, and capitalism. The activities of present-day welfare States extend to the provision of both cash welfare benefits such as old-age pensions or unemployment benefits and in-kind welfare services such as health or childcare services Nations like France, Finland, Denmark and Belgium spent more than 30 per cent of GDP in 2014 for social expenditure. How much does India spendIJ The Union and State Governments in India must increase their budgetary allocation to the social welfare programmes as India is a welfare State.