India's free riding political class

PURE PUBLIC goods like internal and external security, roads, bridges, environmental cleanliness, etc., are characterised by their non-exclusion and non-rival consumption character. In India some of these pure public goods, particularly internal security and use of roads, seem to have been robbed of their pure public goods character by the VIP brand of politicians. An unconscionably disproportionate share of the total security services in a city like Delhi is diverted to the security of the democratic anachronism called the VIPs - mostly politicians (including some facing criminal charges) with some sprinkling of serving and former bureaucrats. This disproportion leads to virtual exclusion of an overwhelmingly large proportion of citizens from the safety net of any effective security against criminal elements. Such an exclusion is most pronounced and glaring in regard to estimation by means of intelligence agencies of the threat faced by the common citizen, including those like old couples, single young women and people engaged in moving large quantities of cash.

An undisclosed but apparently colossal amount of intelligence services are entrusted with the task of making periodic estimates of threat perception for a small number of VIPs. But despite growing incidence of murder, robbery, heist, molestation, rape, abduction, extortion faced by the senior citizen, single women, children, etc., in different parts of the metropolitan cities and in the rural areas as well, there is little evidence of the intelligence agencies engaging themselves in the task of making such estimates for various socio-economic groups in various locations. The rural India hardly has a publicly provided security cover worth the name.

Exclusionary, rival allocation for intelligence concerning the threats facing the political class seems to become the basis for further disproportionate extension of very costly, obtrusive and, from the point of view of the citizens, irksome, if not loathsome, security cover for the so-called VIPs. One wonders if this is a case when the security of the state is considered equivalent to the security of a few chosen political- administrative personalities who gobble up unjustifiably large and very costly internal security services. As a result, both the quantity and quality of security is reduced for the ordinary citizens, for whom even in the normal course grossly inadequate security, especially preventive, arrangements are made. It is a clear case in which two well-established, universal characteristics of pure public goods, non-exclusion and non-rival consumption, are substantially compromised.

Disproportionate allocation

And this disproportionate allocation, this deviation from the pure public goods character of security services, and to some extent even of public-roads, blocked at will and without notice, is ostensibly and formally an outcome of a deliberate political administrative decision. To the extent there is a special legislation for this purpose going to the extent of creating a special force for the purpose, less security to the citizens on account of tremendously heavy security bandobust for the chosen VIPs stands formally sanctified.

The theory of pure public goods, a component of public economics, is fully and completely a market-friendly and market-compatible theory. In fact, it is a theory based on market economics. Private provision of pure public goods invites market failure, giving rise to the problem of free-riders if private supply of such public goods and services for market sale is visualised. But in the anomalous Indian case of the political upper crust hogging by their own narrow, sectionally-focused, political, non-market decisions a heavily disproportionate amount of quality security services, a real, genuine case of free-riders has been created. This cheats the common citizens of quality security services which are callously reduced to a grossly inadequate level. In fact now, mostly the security services make their appearance only after a crime has been committed on the helpless citizens. Even this ex-post appearance is not necessarily prompt, efficient and just: it all depends, inter alia, on the `clout,' `media noise,' `rent' of authority, etc. The general environment of insecurity thus engendered further recoils in the form of political violence, making the politicians even more paranoid.

The anomaly of `free-rider' public security in India compromising the time-tested public goods character of security services is all the more glaring in the present context when the market fundamentalism is running riot. The `free-rider' politicians totally enamoured of the virtues of the market mechanism clearly violate the basic rules of the game of their own professed policy regime when it comes to their own security. Or is it more a case of obtaining one-upmanship based on the pursuit of a vain sense of status? The review of such security cover at the administrative level has shown (if the hitherto undenied media reports are to be believed) that much of such security bandobust has degenerated to the level of a freely acquired status symbol or a free supply of labour for personal purpose.

Another angle

Let us take the discussion to another level. It may be argued that the politicians being public functionaries invite or attract such security threats not on account of their personal pursuits but owing to their role of discharging public responsibilities. To an extent it is correct and in some cases, particularly those connected with defence, external relations and internal insurgencies, the point seems to be substantially valid. It is the national/public interest which would suffer if the personnel discharging state responsibilities are not prevented from falling prey to the assassins' bullets. Even this valid case would not plead a case for an unlimited, sky-is-the limit level of security, totally unmindful of costs and the needs and rights of the other stakeholders. And certainly such VIP security can have greater priority over the security of the common citizen who too attracts such terrorist threats, especially in public places for absolutely no fault of his/her. And, it is quite possible that at times the citizens are exposed to such threats because the public policies pursued by the politicians create such social tensions, sense of unjust deprivation and desperation that drive individuals and groups to senseless violence against their fellow citizens. It may sound cynical but the more impregnable the fortresses built by the security forces around the people in power who alienate and/or antagonise the people inclined to bypass law and civility, the greater are the chances and ferocity of violence getting directed against the defenceless, innocent citizens, who are the easy targets.

There is another angle from which the propriety of free-rider variety of personalisation of public security services at the cost of excluding the general run of public from the preventive security cover must be analysed. Every profession and activity involves some hazards and risks, which differ under different circumstances. Given the prevalent levels of terrorist violence, widespread, endemic insurgency, criminalisation of politics, hyper growth of crimes, etc., it may easily be inferred that politics in India today is no safe haven and carries high corporal risks. But it also has offsetting compensations as well, even in crass materialist terms. The rewards, perks and privileges available to our legislators, ministers and other public functionaries are of real lordly dimensions even if we do not take note of their many times larger under the table collections. We are certainly not going short on pomp, show, grandeur granted by the holders of public offices to themselves. Whether these rewards and their obscenely luxurious levels are in keeping with the democratic values and principles, resource base and overall socio-economic position of the ordinary citizens is a question which is rarely raised.

Risks and rewards

Worse, these levels are granted by the political functionaries to themselves and are periodically jacked up often without even the formality of a debate. Thus anybody opting for work in the political arena ought to be making a conscious choice weighing costs and benefits, risks and rewards. With such heavy rewards in real and financial terms and lifetime financial security which the politicians have granted to themselves before even contemplating the same for the most hapless poor citizens, how can one justify a level of security to the political big brass which tends to exclude, obstruct, humiliate and even insult ordinary citizens as though each one of them is a real security threat to these self-certified and proclaimed, axiomatically assumed precious national lives. The VIP security not only reduces the security available to every other citizen but treats them all in an offensive, undifferentiated manner as potential assassins. This approach and practice effectively amounts to compromising the citizen's fundamental right to life.

Those who swear by the market mechanism as their guide for public policies have to realise that so long as they enter the political arena of their own free volition, grant to themselves what they consider appropriate compensation and rewards for the rendering of public services, they are consciously exposing themselves to the risks to their life, property and progeny. Their own preferred principles of market economy and user charges would dictate that they jolly well pay for what they get or consume, more so if they continue to need such services even after demitting office. One cannot become a public servant, self- sacrificing social worker and patriot and cost the country and compatriots so much, putting to shame the Maharajas of yore. What we have argued about security services is applicable to many other public goods like roads where the citizen's fundamental right of freedom of movement is trampled ostensibly for the sake of VIP security. A large number of scarce public services, facilities, etc., like invitations to exclusive national and cultural events, rail and air reservations, access to scarce public facilities and services and the privilege of out of turn allocation of scarce goods and services are made available to the serving and former political functionaries disproportionately, dysfunctionally, at concessional rates or free of cost and out of turn. One hears of cases when such access and availability is sold or transferred for a consideration by the politicians.

The very concept and practice of VIP treatment is anti-democratic and is anathema to our democratic conscience treating the political class more equal than the rest. Private, personal cornering of pure public goods and quasi-public goods is an aberration and perversion of democratic practices which reflects the colonial feudal mindset of the market-oriented political class, irrespective of the slogans they mouth.

The force of the above arguments increases manifold if one were to take note of the illegal amassing of the rent of authority (the bribes, commission, kickbacks and cuts) in the hands of our political class, the manner in which they have become power brokers and, by and large, have failed the nation. The blatant private unrequited cornering of public goods and services is a serious national malaise and moral disorder which has gripped our polity. It is time such topsyturvydom was brought to an end, more so because it conflicts so blatantly even with the prevalent practice of market fundamentalism so loudly proclaimed and practised by the political class.

KAMAL NAYAN KABRA

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : Swadesh, not swadeshi
Next     : Cry of a carrion-eater