Protecting the weaker sections ???

People of Bengal have recently undergone a phenomenon that politicians of different hues have termed as "Protecting the Interests of the weaker sections". What the common middle class have felt is being held hostage by a motley crowd of political leaders of varying credentials on the pre-text of protection of human rights. What they have felt to understand is whether this violation of human rights was an actual threat or a perception being force fed by these issue hungry politicians. There have been largely five parties to this circus (if I may be excused for my choice of word) - The suddenly investor friendly Government, opposition (which has sometimes come from within the ruling coalition) from some parties struggling to maintain a credible existence, the local people directly affected, the investor (who maintains a safe distance and prefers to wait and watch), and the rest of Bengal (fed by a not so credible media). Results have varied and so has the public perception. In Nandigram, the ruling party won the battle, lost the war and some face. Result was an withdrawal from Nandigram and shifting the proposed project to Nayachar. In the end public sympathy sided with the opposition, espcially due to the crude methods used by th ruling party. However, opposition had not bargained for one thing i.e. the early timing of the end to the crisis. By the time of the polls next year, Nandigram would hardly reamin fresh in the proverbial shortlived memory of the electorate, atleast the ones who had juxt remotely kept an eye on proceding thru TV and print. Hence, the ghost of Singur was exhorted to rise once more. In Singur, opposition leader Mamata Banerjee managed to put her credentials on the altar in a desperate bid to hold the state ransom. She succeeded in her guerilla tactics, managing to both drive out the Tata project and to lose whatever sympathy she had garnered, post Nadigram, from the neutral electorate. Now, she would pray that the same electorate memory would live upto its reputation of being short lived before the imminent polls.

A more amusing string of incidents unfolded in connection to the renewal of licence of Metro Cash & Carry. The Forward Bloc, which wields the baton in AgriMarketing in Bengal, by virtue of its ministry, suddenly (on a technical ground- flimsy or not) refused to renew the licence of the German company for carrying on business in Kolkata. There was suddenly a voice of conscience from within the party and others that asked the German wholesalers to be driven out to protect the interests of the "weaker sections". Only question was which was the 'weaker section' they were worrying about? As per party claims it was the small farmers, whose bargaining capacity would be severely hampered by the wholeselling behemoth. Common sense raised the question that do these farmers really have a bargaining power in today's middlemen driven supply chain? Whatever one could gather about Metro's business pattern, it seemed to atleast favour the smaller traders (grocers and vendors) in the unequal battle of scale with retail giants. If anyone's intersts were really under threat, it was the LARGE retail chains setting up shop and the midlemen community. What role does this latter play in today's supply chain - value addition to either the product or the reach, is dis-proportionately low compared to the increase in prices which is mainly driven up due to profiteering & trading. It is often this layer whihc has been found guilty of hoarding, giving rise to artificial shortages. Protecting their interests could hardly be protection of any weaker section. Fortunately, with a show of authority from the CM, the issue was resolved in favourof Metro, and Forward Bloc inspite of its bravado, managed to stay on in the ruling coalition as an active partner - with just a loss of face maybe.

What really needs to be addressed is this politicisation of issues to and attempts to win over sympathy by infusing the "Weaker Section" in every so called movement. Hopefully the electorate will be intelligent enough to understand this play act that cuts across all party lines. That is the only way we can put a stop to this.