On land acquisition law, back to square one
The Union Government's decision to let the land acquisition Ordinance lapse on Monday is to do with the ground reality of the day. The Ordinance had been promulgated three times in the recent past, and each time it was done in the hope that the Centre would be able to win the support of the opposition parties to endorse a connected Bill in Parliament. But when it became clear that the Opposition was simply not willing to extend support, and had in fact launched a vicious campaign to project the Narendra Modi regime as anti-farmer and pro-rich because of the Bill, the Government had to take a final call. This is not a move that the Centre must have liked.
After all, the amended land acquisition Bill was one of the two major showpieces of its reform programme (the other being the Goods and Services Tax Bill). If it had seen the light of the day, the legislation would have made acquisitions for public purpose, including infrastructure and housing, speedier, and beneficial to small landholders. It could have helped the vast number of landless people living on the margins in rural India, through the creation of new job opportunities. The Government did have the option to re-promulgate the Ordinance, but that would have served no real purpose. After all, Ordinances are brought in when the Government is reasonably certain that Bills related to them will be adopted by Parliament earlier than later.
Else, the exercise can end up as becoming part of an unwanted ‘Ordinance raj'. The Government had done its bit, talking to various leaders of rival parties to bring them on board. But it was of no use, because opposition leaders had decided to exploit the issue to flog the Modi dispensation. Incidentally, the amendments that had been incorporated in the new Bill reflected the larger opinion of members of various parliamentary panels from different political parties, including the Congress. And yet, ironically, the Congress's was the loudest voice to oppose those changes. Clearly, politics took precedence over the larger national interest. Indeed, the Congress and its supporters have already begun to gloat over Prime Minister Modi's remark in his Mann ki Baat on Sunday that it is a return to status quo before the Ordinance. There is no doubt that the likes of lalu Prasad and Mr Nitish Kumar will use the issue in the coming Bihar Assembly election.
Given that the land legislation which the Congress-led UPA regime had brought in (which comes into force), has not led to any significant acquisition, nor has it propelled growth and development, especially in rural parts of the country, it can be assumed that the grim situation will continue to prevail. In other words, the development agenda of this Government will remain hostage, in some measure, to the drawbacks of the previous regime's legislation. How appropriate would it be then, in this situation, to blame the Modi Government if rural infrastructure suffers as a resultIJ let's hope that the Prime Minister's idea of including the 13 points which sought to provide direct financial benefits to farmers, as part of the rules of the existing Bill, will somewhat mitigate the negative impact that goes beyond land acquisition. Will this ‘victory' make the Opposition dig in its heels on the GST logjam or will it make it more amenable to reasonIJ