Editorial 1 : Benefits and bribes
Introduction: Election is an important part of a vibrant democracy. But the doles and freebies announced during elections and their impact on the country's long-term financial health are problematic.
Recent examples of announcements during elections
- In Rajasthan, for instance, the ruling Congress party has promised to make a law to implement minimum support prices (MSPs) in line with the Swaminathan formula.
- The BJP maintains that they have already implemented the Swaminathan formula when, at the Centre, they made the MSP to be at least equal to Cost A2+FL plus a 50 per cent margin on that.
- Congress may be interested in rising the MSP on Cost C2, which will raise crop price by 25 to 33 per cent over the existing levels.
- Similarly in Chhattisgarh, the Congress is promising to raise the MSP for paddy to Rs 3,000/quintal.
- The BJP has gone a step further and promised to raise the MSP to Rs 3,100/quintal — the current MSP is Rs 2,183/quintal.
- This means that whichever party comes to power in the state, it will have to summon the resources to pay the highest MSP for paddy in the country.
- There is very likely to be pressure on this count from other states during the parliamentary elections.
- Raising the MSP for paddy to such a level, an increase of 42 per cent, will have severe repercussions on the economy.
- While campaigning for the Madhya Pradesh elections, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that free ration (5kg/person/month) will continue for the next five years under the PM Garib Kalyan Yojana.
- Already, the food subsidy bill is more than Rs 2 lakh crore per annum. As MSPs will be raised for paddy and wheat in the next five years, this bill is surely going to inflate.
- And if the MSP for paddy is raised to Rs 3,100/quintal, the food subsidy bill will touch the sky.
The inconsistency of Indian policy makers.
- On one hand parties are promising rise in MSPs and on other hand current government is unloading excess paddy in the market, and banning the export of non-basmati rice to cool off the rising inflation.
- This shows the inconsistency of the policymakers in India.
The only benefit of doles and freebies
- Doles have been promised without much thought to their consequences on the economy.
- The only silver lining is that it will lead to a temporary increase in the incomes of those who have been left behind in this process of economic liberalisation.
- This may raise expenditures, especially in rural areas, and create a business opportunity for some to serve the rural demand better.
- But the flip side is that it will lead to major distortions in agri-markets, and create a big pressure on the fiscal position of states or the Centre.
- This will have multiplier effects on the economy, which may not be very palatable to the party in power.
Way forward
- There is a need to exercise caution in promising the moon to the electorate in the heat of elections.
- It can cause long-term damage to India’s development.
- If the hearts of political parties bleed for the poor, let them give income or investment support within budgetary constraints.
- Such support is much better than higher MSPs for some crops because it is crop neutral — something along the lines of PM-KISAN at the Centre or Rythu Bandhu in Telangana or KALIA in Odisha.
- Investments are always better than income support, but investments take time to fructify while political parties need quick quid pro quo for the doles in terms of votes.
Conclusion: Can the Election Commission or Supreme Court form taxpayers’ committees in poll-bound states to evaluate how many of the promises made by major political parties are rational welfare measures, and how many are simply “bribes for votes” to educate the electorate? Ultimately, it is taxpayers’ money, and they are being relegated to the background in this race to distribute revdis.
Editorial 2 : No COP-PING out
Introduction: The fortnight-long COP 28 that will begin in Dubai on November 30 will test the resolve of countries much more than any of the UNFCCC’s recent meets.
The situation on ground
- Global temperatures have broken all records this year, and 2023 looks set to be the hottest.
- The IPCC reckons that emissions need to fall 43 per cent this decade to stay under the 1.5-degree C limit agreed on by countries in the Paris Pact.
- But there is very little evidence of the warnings being heeded.
- The UNEP’s latest Emissions Gap Report shows that global emissions were a billion tonnes more than in 2019.
- The International Energy Agency’s estimates show that fossil fuel use is not likely to come down before 2030.
Recent changes in the terms of bringing down emissions
- For decades, climate negotiations avoided mentioning the elimination of fossil fuels, until the COP 26, two years ago at Glasgow, agreed to “phase down” coal power.
- Though countries have taken steps to speed up the deployment of clean fuel, energy markets, roiled by the conflict in Ukraine, have played truant.
- The future of coal, gas and oil will be among the flashpoints when the Dubai COP works on the main item on its agenda — stocktaking of the progress on attaining the Paris Pact’s goals.
The UNFCCC stocktaking report’s findings
- In September, a UNFCCC stocktaking report pointed to deficiencies in every aspect of climate action — mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology and capacity building.
- The report also affirmed that the current national commitments — the Nationally Determined Contributions or NDCs — towards the Paris Pact will not be sufficient to keep the temperature rise below the 1.5-degree C target.
- The treaty was based on the hope that NDCs would become more ambitious with time.
- The pact also has a “ratchet mechanism” through which countries are supposed to update their climate pledges every five years.
What is global stocktake (GST) process under UNFCCC?
- The global stocktake (GST) is a comprehensive process under the Paris Agreement that assesses and evaluates the collective global progress towards achieving the long-term goals of the Agreement.
- It is a key mechanism for ensuring that the Paris Agreement is effectively implemented and that countries are collectively on track to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels.
- The GST is a multilateral, inclusive, and transparent process that involves the participation of all Parties to the Paris Agreement, as well as non-Party stakeholders, such as civil society, indigenous peoples, local communities, and the private sector.
- The GST is conducted every five years, beginning in 2023, and provides an opportunity for Parties to:
- Review and assess the collective progress towards achieving the long-term goals of the Paris Agreement.
- Identify areas where further action is needed.
- Enhance international cooperation on climate action.
- The first GST is currently underway and will conclude at the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the UNFCCC in 2024.
- The GST is expected to have a significant impact on climate action in the coming years, as it will inform the next round of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) that Parties are due to submit in 2025.
Some of the key features of the GST:
- Party-driven: The GST is led by Parties to the Paris Agreement, with the support of the UNFCCC secretariat.
- Inclusive: The GST involves the participation of all Parties, as well as non-Party stakeholders.
- Transparent: The GST is conducted in a transparent manner, with all information and documents made publicly available.
- Evidence-based: The GST is based on the best available science and evidence.
- Action-oriented: The GST is designed to inform and guide future climate action.
- The GST is a critical tool for ensuring that the Paris Agreement is effectively implemented and that the world is on track to limit global warming.
- It is an important opportunity for all Parties to come together and take stock of progress, identify areas where further action is needed, and enhance international cooperation on climate action.
Drawback of the stocktaking process
- The stocktaking process assesses the cumulative effects of the NDCs.
- It does not pin responsibility on individual countries. This approach is rightly based on the principle that mitigation is a collective responsibility.
- It makes the already contentious task of scaling up ambitions more fraught.
- UNFCCC meetings have almost always come to uneasy stalemates over the issue of who should take up more responsibility and how.
- That said, the stocktaking process does speak of “integrated, yet inclusive policymaking”.
- It also underlines that “scaled-up mobilisation of support for climate action in developing countries entails strategically deploying international public finance”.
Conclusion: The ball is now in the court of the negotiators in Dubai. Rigid approaches of the past will have to be discarded for COP 28 to make a meaningful difference.