Economics and the politics behind ban

The controversy over the ban on the sale of beef by certain States raises many larger questions

The dictionary meaning of beef is: Meat of cow, ox and bull. The cow, from time immemorial, is considered sacrosanct for Hindus and in the Hindu way of life. There is usually a suffix of ‘mata’ or ‘mother’ whenever we address a cow. It is considered auspicious to worship the cow at the start of an important ceremony.

The killing of a cow is considered like murdering a human being  belonging to one’s own  community. A majority of the Hindus would not touch cow’s meat. Therefore, cow’s meat  is normally forbidden in Indian cuisine, and no one has complained about it for ages. If at all beef is served in some restaurants as a special case,  it would be other than that of cow meat.

However, a comprehensive ban on beef recently imposed by the Governments of Maharashtra and Haryana, probably means that henceforth, there would be a ban  on the slaughtering of ox and bulls too. The contention here is: Why should there be such a ban in these two States only,  and why not in all of IndiaIJ In case the ban has a religious  angle to it, then it should concern all Hindus. If there is no religious motive, what is the rationale of banning in some States and not in othersIJ

Moreover, such a ban opens up a Pandora’s box comprising many questions  and resulting to serious ramifications. Some of the issues  arising could be:

• Beef (meat other than that of cow) is the cheapest and the rich source of good protein. With the beef ban, fish and chicken, already expensive, would become even more dear, in fact almost unaffordable, to the lower and the middle classes. This will adversely affect a large population of the country. As a result, the  already prevalent malnourishment in that segment, will get an unwelcome boost.
• There is a very huge unsustainable population of  live stock under the category of beef. With shrinking availability of fodder and  space, a large section of cattle population might die of starvation and disease.
• India is the world’s second largest beef exporter, next to Brazil. The declining exports that are already a concern with the Government, would face another blow on this front. Besides, many slaughter houses would  go out of business and thousands of workers would be rendered  jobless. The leather industry too would take a hit. This business sector employs mainly the minority  Muslim population, which is already economically marginalised. The ban will send a wrong signal to this community, and may even attract large scale protests on the economic front.
• In many remote villages, cattle-rearing, as a small-scale side business, along with the main occupation of farming, is common. When farming gets affected by nature’s fury, the farmers manage their finances through the sale of cattle, which is a valuable asset to them. The cattle are not just used for agricultural purposes but for the market value of their meat too, as far the buyers of such cattle are concerned.
• Banning beef in a restricted area would encourage inter-State  clandestine movement of the commodity, and create mafias to control the business. already, illegal cattle movement across States, is a big problem. The limited ban can also lead to an artificial, overall increase in meat prices, and pushing inflation up to rather uncomfortable levels.
• Even with a ban on beef in place, restaurants  would get the licence to serve beef to foreigners/tourists, and the select elite class in any way will manage their quota of beef, in whatever form.

The controversy on recently imposed beef ban by some State regimes is not going to die down soon. The Government needs to seriously ponder over the issue  before it gets out of hand. Moreover, there should be one unambiguous and uniform policy for the entire nation, which must be strictly adhered to by all States and all people, regardless of their caste or religion.

It is not as if the matter is too complicated to be resolved. The complications have arisen because of vested political interests that have been fishing in troubled waters. Politics have to be de-linked from the issue. If there has to be a ban of the Haryana and Maharashtra kind, it must be effectively implemented and the violators punished.