Newsclick travelled about 1,800 km in Saurashtra and Kutch region and spoke to farmers, fishermen and women to understand issues that affect them and who they willvote for in this Lok Sabha election.
Courtesy: News Click
Along with the photograph of her polling slip, Deeksha posted a lengthy note, in which she claimed, “I went to the polling booth and the guys in charge asked me to vote for the BJP and even put the lotus picture on the polling slip,” She added, “In the previous phase, a number of videos of booth capture was being shared by students in the North East.”
Campaigning in the 48 hours ahead of polling is strictly prohibited by the Election Model Code of Conduct. For the staff of a voting booth to ask someone to vote for a particular party, and going so far as including a picture of the its symbol on the voting slip, is a brazen violation of the rules. However, it seems in character for the ruling party, which for five years has operated as though the laws of the land, including the Constitution, do not apply to it.
Image Courtesy: socialism.in
The much touted ‘Gujarat model’ is facing a backlash from the poor and vulnerable farmers in the state of Gujarat. A study called ‘Gujarat’s Agricultural ‘Miracle’: At What Cost?’ by Persis Ginwalla and Sagar Rabari provides evidences on the lacklustre performance of the Gujarat government in augmenting its irrigation potential. The study shows that, despite the numerous apparent efforts by the Government of Gujarat (GoG), even today more than 50% of the agriculture in Gujarat is rain-dependent. Further, the much-talked about irrigation projects have been a failure with almost 64% of it being dependent on the groundwater sources like wells and tubewells. This poses a big question on the sustainability of such an agricultural model and exposes the grave threats on the environment in the long-term. Not only this, the out-of-pocket expenditures of the farmers have increased manifold for carrying out drilling work and using electric motors for extracting water from the ground. Predictably, the GoG has left no stone unturned to conceal its failed model by obfuscating the reports and misleading the citizens.
Growth of Irrigation:
According to the Agriculture Census 1995-96, 63.94% of the total operational holdings were wholly unirrigated which rose to 67.84% in 2000-01. Since then, there has been a steady decline. Similarly, the percentage of holdings receiving irrigation (wholly and partly) rose to 23.93% in 2000-01 from 20.39% in 1995-96 and has been on a rise since then.
In the previous decade, there has been a minor increase in the overall land holdings and the area under irrigation while a net decrease in the unirrigated holdings. Thus, there has been a significant improvement in Gujarat’s irrigation coverage which is a major reason for its substantial agricultural growth. The following table gives a summary of the same:
Despite of the impressive gains, half of the Gujarat’s agriculture continues to be rain-dependent or groundwater dependent.
Source of Irrigation:
Irrigation can happen through the surficial sources such as canals and tanks or through groundwater sources such as wells and tubewells. Surficial irrigation is preferable over groundwater irrigation as the former is more sustainable.
According to the above table, Gujarat’s irrigation model is majorly dependent on the groundwater sources that account for 62.41% of the total irrigation while only 21.34% comes from the surficial sources. Strikingly, over the past two decades, there has been a steady increase in the tubewell irrigation with a simultaneous decline in well irrigation. This is a cause of concern as the farmers have to now spend more on drilling and electricity operations which reduces their already low profits. Further, this indicates a steady depletion of the groundwater table.
Thus, the GoG’s successful efforts have come at the cost of over dependence on the groundwater sources putting a big question on the sustainability of such an agricultural model. Further, the farmers continue to dig deeper and use electric motors which shifts their status from ‘marginal, small or medium’ farmers to ‘large’ farmers. This reduces their electricity subsidies and increases their out-of-pocket expenditures.
The GoG’s initiative to revive the groundwater through its Sujalam Sufalam Yojana has contrararily increased the areas under the dark zones as the rate of extraction is higher than the recharge rate and the amount of water pumped into the canals is insufficient.
The groundwater depletion in Gujarat has reached an alarming level with one Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) study putting Gujarat among the top 15 states with depletion in water tables in wells between 2007 and 2016. The study states, “According to the information provided by the Union ministry in the Lok Sabha, the analysis of 799 wells in Gujarat conducted by the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) suggested that 473 wells (59%) across the state had registered a depletion in water levels from 2007 to 2016… Of the 25 blocks defined by the CWGB, 23 are overexploited in the state. The worst affected areas are the districts in North Gujarat where depletion is more than 100% — meaning that more water is extracted from the ground than is replenished. Against the national average of 62% of groundwater resources used, Gujarat uses 72%. About 80% of this is used for irrigation. In Gujarat, the exploitation ranges from 30% to 150%.”
State of Surface Water Irrigation:
As mentioned earlier, it is essential to develop surficial sources to have a sustainable and an environment-friendly irrigation system. For this to happen, the surface water should be harnessed in the dams and transmitted to the canals which has been tried by the GoG; one of its biggest project being the Sardar Sarovar Dam. According to the data of Narmada Water Resources and Water Supply (NWRWS) department, the maximum irrigation potential realised in Gujarat has not exceeded 76% which was achieved in 1996-97. The CAG report of 2016 reiterates this wherein it examines 22 irrigation schemes which have achieved an average irrigation of only 24%. It indicts the GoG saying, “There was no long term action plan for water conservation activities. Instead, the Department took up water conservation works, mainly, canal lining and desilting of dam reservoirs in a piecemeal manner. The average CCA achieved was only 24 per cent as against the CCA created for the irrigation under 53 Irrigation Projects during 2011-12 to 2015-16. This indicated sub-optimal performance in the water conservation activities.”
Even in the case of the Sardar Sarovar Dam, only 640,000 ha. of irrigation potential has been created as of 2017-18 as compared to the planned potential of 18,45,655 ha. It means that the GoG has been able to achieve only 34.67% of the total potential. Even after 17 years, the canal network remains unfinished and the most important component of the canal network, the sub-minor canals, are at a mere 53.5% as per the NCA Annual Report of 2016-17.
Almost, 22% (57 of the 252) of the blocks have been declared as ‘dark zones’.
Misleading Reports and Obfuscation Strategies:
The GoG, through its ‘success’ reports, has tried to deliberately mislead the farmers and boast about its success. Few of the instances are:
“The ultimate irrigation potential through the surface water is assessed at 48.11 lakh hectares which includes 17.92 lakh hectares through Sardar Sarovar (Narmada) Project. Similarly, with respect to groundwater resources, it is estimated that about 20.04 lakh hectares can be irrigated. Thus the total ultimate irrigation potential through surface & groundwater is estimated to be 68.15 lakh hectares. The total irrigation potential of surface water created up to June-2017 works out to 90.62% of ultimate irrigation potential whereas maximum utilisation works out to 68.25% of the irrigation potential created.” (Socio-Economic Review, Gujarat State, 2017-18)
It is reporting on “irrigation potential created” and how much area “can be irrigated” as opposed to how much is actually realised on the ground, on which it is suspiciously silent.
Another example of its misleading reporting is the NCA Annual Report of 2016-17 which says:
“Overall 100% Main Canal, 99.90% Branch Canal and Sub-Branch Canal other than KBC, 80% of Kachchh Branch Canal, 40% Sub Branch Canal of KBC, 90% of Distributaries, 78% Minors, 100% Sub-Minors under conventional system and 41% Sub-Minor under UGPL are completed for creating irrigation potential of 79% up to Minor level and 53.50% upto Sub-Minor level up to March, 2017.”
Here, they admit to having created an irrigation potential of upto 53.5% (987,425 ha.) but only 34.67% (640,000 ha.) has been actually provided with irrigation water. What about the rest of the 3,47,425 hectares? Where is the water going?
Conclusion
Thus, it is amply clear that the augmentation of the irrigation potential has been achieved through the extraction of groundwater sources, posing adverse impacts on the long-term sustainability of agriculture and at the expense of the poor farmers. The GoG is merely trying to gain vote banks through its much touted ‘Gujarat model.’
With growing unrest, joblessness and rural distress, the much touted ‘Gujarat Model’ is increasingly looking like a PR exercise and little else. This study has clearly highlighted the problems that face the farming communities of Gujarat and agriculture in general, bringing into focus yet another major area where the ‘Gujarat Model’ is coming across as a colossal failure. Even as the state and central governments claim a higher agricultural growth rate compared to the other states, it continues to face backlash from vulnerable farmers. Gujarat stands on a distant ninth position amongst all states in farmer’s income with their average monthly income being a meagre Rs. 3,573. Farmer’s unrest is prevalent, especially in the rural regions, tremors from which were felt by the ruling BJP in assembly elections of 2017. Regrettably, in elections 2019, farmers distress is not even an election issue for the opposition parties.
CPM leader VP Sivankutty filed a writ petition with the court, asking that the Election Commission be directed to take action against Pillai. Murali Purushothaman, counsel for the Election Commission, filed a submission, that the court considered; Sivankutty’s petition was disposed of, The New Indian Express said. Sivankutty also sought that a criminal case be filed against Pillai, for which the High Court sought the opinion of the Kerala police chief.
Kerala CEO Teeka Ram Meena had submitted a report to the Election Commission calling for action against Pillai, stating that Pillai’s speech was a prima facie violation of the Representation of the People Act, the Times of India reported. Meena noted that the speech breached Section 123A of the Act, which states that “the promotion of, or attempt to promote, feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of the citizens of India on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language, by a candidate or his agent or any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate” is considered as corrupt practice, the Times of India said, adding that both the Congress and the CPM had approached the Election Commission over the incident.
Pillai made the remark in question on Sunday, April 14, while speaking at a campaign event for Sobha Surendran, the BJP’s candidate for the Attingal Lok Sabha constituency. Per Meena’s report, he said, “Our Rahul Gandhi, Yechury, Pinarayi and all are saying that, after getting there… the dead bodies… which caste, which religion… if they are Islam then there will be a few signs… if only you remove the dresses only then it can be found out… so after doing all that, we should come back is what they say,” PTI reported.
At a press conference on Sunday, Sivankutty said, ‘‘Mr. Pillai has made reprehensible remarks against the Muslim community with the hope that it would garner votes for the BJP. It is the kind of speech no political leader has ever made in Kerala. The speech is not just a violation of the model code of conduct, but also a criminal act under IPC Section 153A for promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion,’’ The Hindu reported.
A video of Pillai’s remark can be seen here.
This constituency in Assam’s Barak Valley has a large population of Bengali Hindus and it is possible that their vote that will determine the electoral fortunes of key players in the region. The BJP had hard sold its stand on the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016 (CAB) in Assam, promising all Hindus in the subcontinent safe haven and citizenship in India.
Silchar has a large population of Hindus, many of whom are Bengali and are alleged to have migrated from Bangladesh. It is interesting because many of these Bengali Hindus were left out of the draft of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) that was released in July 2018. The conflict surrounding the CAB stems from the possibility of granting citizenship to these people whose citizenship is under question now due to the NRC.
So basically an “insider vs outsider” debate between Assamese people and people of alleged Bangladeshi descent, has been given a communal Hindu vs Muslim twist. Silchar has seen several protests, rallies and demonstrations due to this. In the past Silchar has also experienced bouts of communal violence in 2017 and 2018.
The incumbent Susmita Dev of the Congress is also the president of the All India Mahila Congress. She is also the daughter of veteran Congress leader and five time MP from the region Santosh Mohan Dev. Both Rahul and Priyanka Gandhi have campaigned for her. Meanwhile the BJP has fielded Rajdeep Roy. Also, earlier Assam Minister Hemant Biswa Sarma made a remark comparing Susmita Dev to Pakistan, a gaffe whose electoral impact remains to be seen.
Meanwhile the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) that has a sizable following among Muslim voters has opted out of fielding any candidates, a move that is being viewed as something that might bolster the Congress’s chances.
Silchar parliamentary constituency includes the assembly segments of Silchar, Sonai, Dholai, Lakhipur, Udharband, Borkhola and Katigorah, all of which are ruled by the BJP except Lakhipur which was won by the Congress.
New Delhi: A shoe was hurled at the BJP MP and national spokesperson GVL Narsimha Rao during a press conference at the BJP headquarters in New Delhi this afternoon. The conference was about the Malegaon blast key accused Sadhvi Pragya Thakur joining the BJP and contesting from the Bhopal seat against Congress candidate Digvijaya Singh. BJP general secretary Bhupendra Yadav was also present when the incident took place.
While Rao was condemning Congress’s opposition on Pragya’s nomination and accusing it for defaming the Hindus, a shoe was thrown at him which Rao escaped by a few inches. The shoe pelter has been identified as Shakti Bhargava, a surgeon at a private hospital, who has been a vocal critic of the Modi government in his facebook posts. The workers nabbed the shoe-pelter and escorted him out of the venue. Rao has condemned this attack and has termed it as ‘congress-inspired.’ He said, “This is yet another attempt by a Congress inspired person who comes in here to show the same kind of mentality. We won’t get deterred by these criminal elements in society. We condemn this action.”
Mr Bhargava has been taken to the IP Estate Police Station. The intention behind his actions is yet unclear.
After being slapped with a 72 hour ban from campaigning, UP CM Adityanath decided to make a “personal visit” to Ayodhya. But the visit was far cry from being quiet or personal.
On Monday April 15, the Election Commission barred Yogi Adityanath from campaigning for 72 hours starting 6 am on Tuesday. This was in wake of his highly communal remark about Ali and Bajrangbali during a campaign rally in Meerut. The remark was seen as a clear violation of the provisions of the Election Model Code of Conduct (EMCoC) that prohibits asking for votes in the name of religion.
The provision states: “No party or candidate shall include in any activity which may aggravate existing differences or create mutual hatred or cause tension between different castes and communities, religious or linguistic.”
After being barred from campaigning though Adityanath decided to go temple hopping and engaged in multiple photo-ops and activities such as dining with a Dalit, meeting a Muslim woman survivor of triple talaq and also meeting visually challenged young women. Most importantly he visited Ayodhya, specifically the disputed site where the saffron combine hopes to build a grand Ram temple someday. Adityanath’s activities are therefore being seen as a veiled campaign by many.
In fact, according to the EMCoC, “Mosques, Churches, Temples or other places of worship shall not be used as forum for election propaganda.” Adityanath’s actions have therefore attracted questions and criticism.
Here’s a blow by blow account of Adityanath’s itinerary since the ban:
Tuesday, April 16: Adityanath offered prayers at Lucknow’s famous Hanuman Setu temple. He reportedly recited the Hanuman Chalisa here.
Wednesday, April 17: Adityanath travelled to Gonda where he met a Muslim woman who said she was a victim of instant triple talaq. He then took a detour and went to visit differently abled children at Lucknow’s Mohan Road. He met visually impaired girls here before leaving for Ayodhya. He went to the disputed site where he met seers including Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas Samiti chairman Nritya Gopal Das. He also held discussions with seers at the Digambar Akhada. He then stopped to have a meal with a Dalit family before proceeding to offer prayers at the Hanuman Garhi temple. He spent the night a Devi Patan Shaktipeeth temple.
Thursday, April 18: As the second phase of the general elections commenced, Adityanath maintained a low profile, not addressing the media and bidding his time till the ban was lifted.
Try as hard as he might, Adityanath is fooling nobody and it remains to be seen if he will once again be hauled up by the EC.
BJP leader Gajendra Singh Shekhawat, who is contesting the Lok Sabha polls from the Jodhpur seat in Rajasthan, found himself in hot water after he was filmed purportedly issuing a threat. Shekhawat is the current Minister of State for Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare.
Shekhawat allegedly said, “Today, I am warning the ‘prashasan’ (administration) standing on the podium. This election is not the last election. Government changes in five years. I have kept the ‘janampatri’ (horoscope) of each and everyone. My name will not be Gajendra Singh, if I don’t hang them upside down (Ulta na latka du toh mera naam Gajendra Singh nahi hai),” the Times of India reported. “The police and the officials are dancing to the tune of Ashok Gehlot government, which is not right. They are removing party flags only from our houses and catching our vehicles,” Shekhawat added, speaking at an election event in Pokharan, Rajasthan.
Per The Wire, Shekhawat “was apparently angered by the videography of vehicles during his election meeting in Pokaran”. The Wire noted that the vehicles were filmed after the sub-divisional magistrate issued a notice stating that expenses incurred on the vehicles that Shekhawat used at the event would be added to his overall campaign expenditure.
Sunil Chaudhary of the National Students Union of India (NSUI) filed a complaint with the District Election Officer (DEO). “Desperation of the BJP candidate was evident by his threat. It showed that the BJP doesn’t believe in democracy,” Chaudhary told The Wire.
Jaisalmer DEO Namit Mehta told the Times of India, “A notice has been issued to him (Shekhawat) for violation of model code of conduct (MCC) and violation of 189 IPC (threat of injury to public servant). He has been asked to reply by April 18.”
A video of Shekhawat’s remarks may be seen here.
Join our mailing list to get the latest human rights news that matters, straight to your mailbox.
Join our mailing list to get the latest human rights news that matters, straight to your mailbox.
