Not just politicians but the bureaucracy too is thoroughly corrupt in Uttarakhand. Matters have been made worse by imprecise laws which have harmed environment
Not surprisingly, development has been a major issue in the lok Sabha election campaign in Uttarakhand. As in many other States, a main complaint is the inadequacy of it. While few repudiate the charge outright, many cite extenuating circumstances. The State has a long history of severe natural disasters ranging from devastating earthquakes like the one that wrought havoc in Chamoli district in 1999 killing 103, wounding several hundreds and destroying over 50,000 houses. Roads and bridges were extensively damaged and power and water supply disrupted over large areas. There have also been severe floods including the one of tidal dimensions in June last year, which devastated large areas and left, according to a State Government estimate, over 5,700 people presumed dead, including 934 locals. Regarded as the worst disaster hitting India since the Tsunami in 2004, it destroyed power lines, water mains, roads and bridges over huge tracts.
Each disaster inflicts huge reconstruction costs, diverts the State Government's attention from development to relief and rehabilitation work and, in more recent times, preparations for disaster management. It inhibits investment. The June 2013 catastrophe has reportedly hit hard the new industrial estate being developed by the State Infrastructure and Industrial Development Corporation of Uttarakhand limited at Sitaraganj in Kumaon. It has also scared away tourists given the high casualties and incredible hardships pilgrims and visitors suffered last year.
All this, however, could not have hamstrung development so severely as to have reduced it to its present sorry state. Nor can one attribute the latter to the region's neglect prior to November 9, 2000, when it ceased to be a part of Uttar Pradesh and became Uttarakhand. Neglect has continued since then, though not in the same measure as earlier. Tardiness in announcing policy measures has contributed. It was only on January 7, 2003, a little over two years after its formation, that the Union Cabinet Committee for Economic Affairs announced the first policy package incentives to promote industrial growth in the State as well as in Himachal Pradesh. It was to run for 10 years.
The CCEA announced a second package, covering the period from January 7, 2014, to March 31, 2017, for the two States on January 15 this year. Prima facie, both, like most Government-generated documents in India, are marked by a flow of unexceptionable platitudes promising the earth. As in most such cases, however implementation has been inadequate and progress on the ground has trailed expectations.
The main reason is gargantuan corruption, an area in which Uttarakhand is among the States leading from the front. Potential investors complain that files gather dust on ministerial tables as haggling continues for the quantum of bribes. It has been the same with every Government that has run the State since its formation-— the most eloquent commentary on the state of affairs being the fact that Major-General BC Khanduri, a person of integrity who wanted to eliminate corruption, was himself ousted from office of Chief Minister! In fact, the hill industrial policy of 2008, which he was instrumental introducing, has suffered on account not only of fear of the elements but corruption and partisan politics.
It is not just politicians but the bureaucracy too that is thoroughly corrupt at every level, and matters are not helped by imprecision in laws meant to protect the environment and the rights of tribals, which are used at every level to extort bribes for clearance. The impact of this can be easily imagined considering that 70 per cent of Uttarakhand is under forests. Understandably, people do not believe that things will change overnight. But they do believe that elections are a time when corrupt and indifferent politicians should be taught a lesson.