Trinamool's Policy on Land Acquisition

While Trinamool endorses state-centered development models (or does it? nobody knows when the policy gets changed by the whims of one person!), it is resolutely market-oriented when it comes to land acquisition. Why?

The stated reason is to remove irregularities that come from government intervention in the land acquisition process. So what about the irregularities that come from direct market intervention? The Trinamool economist, Abhirup Sarkar from ISI, said on a TV show yesterday that both are comparable. Pity how a whiff of power corrupts basic economic logic!

I do not need to have a doctorate degree to understand the simple fact that the government, no matter how tyrrannical it might be, will be held accountable and it cannot, one fine morning, "go out of business". Trinamool's big promise of remedying the Left's ills rests on the fact that Left might go but the government of West Bengal stays and will be held accountable by people, courts, and the next incumbent. Can we say the same about private realtors and agents? If a strongman employed by a business house gets land deeds transferred to a party who sells it to somebody who resells it (all can be done in a matter of months), will the current owner be accountable for the irregularities? The key culprit, the strongman, would be untraceable and people will be left with nobody to fight with.

Think about how RBI is monitoring the flow of money in the speculative bond and equity markets. The government reserves its rights to intervene if there are anomalies or signs of overheating in the market. Going by Trinamool's logic, government will have to stand mute even if land sharks push up the land price by speculative trading.

Market definitely has a role, a rather prominent role. But government cannot be out of the loop completely. Let's not take extremist positions and deny either's role. Let government and market work together (the much vaunted yet unrealized PPP model of the Rail Minister) to ensure efficiency and sustainability in land acquisition.

Is Rajarhaat Another Singur?

I do not think Rajarhaat will be another Singur for Mamata. With Singur, the objective was really limited. And, no, it was not getting the land back for she knows full well how diffcult that can be. In Singur she wanted to make an impact, and so she did, by allowing her partymen to manhandle the Tata employees. It was about making one organization, the Tatas, uncomfortable.

In Rajarhaat she won't dare to launch anything big simply because more people are involved. If she manages to intimidate residents of one apartment complex, she'd plant cold fear in the hearts of lakhs of middle-class homeowners who have invested in Rajarhaat. Also, there is a big chance that Gautam Deb might call her bluff with his shrill and relentless communication campaign in various media. Trinamool shouldn't dare to go in there unless their chief is severely misguided.

What do you think about it?