Clamouring for Special Category Status to AP

A ballad, fundamentally, is a song that tells a story. In the beginning a ballad was a musical accompaniment to a dance. There are certain basic characters common to it always.

The beginning is often abrupt; the language is simple; the story is told through dialogue and action; the theme is often tragic. Though there are comic ballads, too, there is often a refrain.

---

Special Status is an emotive issue, especially for the people of AP. Moreover, with the passage of the GST Bill, the relevance of the Special Category Status dips further. As and when this one supercedes all, there is little or no scope for the status. Those clamouring today for the SCS to AP are fully equipped with this knowledge

---

If you want to further add then you could say it usually deals with a single episode and the events leading to the crisis are related swiftly. There is a minimal detail of surroundings. Then there is a strong dramatic element.

There is considerable intensity and immediacy in the narration. The narrator too is impersonal using stock and well-tried epithets in singing it.

There is frequently incremental repetition and the single line of action and the speed of the story preclude much attempt at delineation of character. The imagery is sparse and simple though.

If one has a whole slew of complaints to get off one's chest, it is called litany. Among ballad tunes, the litany stands in the front rank anyway. It is name was taken from the original refrain "which nobody can deny'.A political component to these two – ballad and litany – is not new.

The latest theme of these balladeers from the land of Telugus is the Special Category Status. Right or wrong, possibility or not, it has to be attained, they cry. Now let me hand-hold you through the maze of this latest ballad – going by its qualifications to be called one – sothat you don't get confused.

This one, too, is dealt with as a single episode and the events leading to it from February 20, 2014 to the "Bill becoming the Act" (of AP Reorganisation) are related swiftly.

The surroundings are minimal. You all know the dramatic element involved in it or how strong it is. Intensity is not just considerable but almost stupendous and no need to emphasise on its other quality – immediacy in the narration.

The balladeers are all impersonal having only the "AP's interests or five crore Telugus' interest" uppermost in mind. The others characteristics like incremental repetition and the single line of action are quite visible.

So where does AP stand? Is it entitled to the Special Category Status? Let us just check with another story, that of Bihar, to understand this.

Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar has been demanding Special Category Status (SCS) for his State for at least four years now. The pitch had reached a crescendo ahead of the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.

Just before the Assembly elections last, Nitish once again clamoured for the SCS. He later realised that with the recommendations of the Fourteenth Finance Commission having been accepted, the SCS has been reduced, at best, to a political rallying point — not just for Bihar, but also for Odisha and Jharkhand.

Budget 2015-16 has not provided for any such sop. The NITI Aayog, which has replaced the Planning Commission, has no power to allocate funds — therefore, the discretion that the ruling party at the Centre had to dole out special favours to States through the Plan panel, no longer exists.

The National Development Council (NDC) first accorded SCS in 1969 to Jammu and Kashmir, Assam and Nagaland. Over the years, eight more States were added to the list — Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Sikkim, Tripura and, finally, in 2010, Uttarakhand. Until 2014-15, SCS meant these 11 States received a variety of benefits and sops.

How was SCS accorded? In the past, the NDC considered factors such as hilly and difficult terrain, low population density and/or a sizeable share of tribal population, strategic location along borders, economic and infrastructural backwardness, and non-viable nature of state finances.

What benefits did SCS receive? Despite the mess governments often made of transfers through the Planning Commission, special category states received funds on very favourable terms under several mechanisms.

For instance, in 2014-15, 44 per cent of Plan funds, or Rs 2.53 lakh crore, went to the States through centrally sponsored schemes (CSS). Special category States had to pay just 10 per cent of the spend on a particular CSS.

These 11 States also received a bigger chunk of block grants to States, which accounted for Rs 86,250 crore, or another 15 per cent of Plan funds — much of it as grants.

Nitish was right to claim that the share of central taxes and duties to his State had dropped (to 9.69 per cent) under the Fourteenth Finance Commission from 10.88 per cent in the Thirteenth Finance Commission. But in absolute terms, it had jumped 136 per cent to Rs 4,08,555 crore for the period 2015-16 to 2019-20.

Also, the grants-in-aid for local bodies had jumped to 8.24 per cent or Rs 23,695 crore compared with the 6.49 per cent devolution — or Rs 5,682 crore — under the 13th Finance Commission. In Budget 2015-16, States received a significantly higher share of central taxes — 42 per cent, or 10 percentage points more than before.

While this does mean more untied funds to states, the Finance Ministry also slashed the outlay under the CSS — which has led to an outcry from several States, which have been complaining that in effect, they have been receiving less money from the Centre than before.

The Finance Ministry’s reasoning for withdrawing sops was that the higher 42 per cent devolution took into account all needs of States. What had upset Nitish was that the Budget had not allocated funds under the Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF) programme and the Integrated Action Plan for Left Wing Extremism (LWE) affected districts.

The BRGF covered all 38 districts of the State. Between 2006-07 and 2014-15, these districts were cumulatively allocated around Rs 6,165 crore. In addition, the Centre had approved Rs 12,000 crore during the Twelfth Plan (2012-13 to 2016-17).

The State had received only Rs 3,700 crore, and had demanded that the balance be released. But all this found no mention in the Budget later, which also did not provide for any assistance to districts affected by LWE.

It is not that the Centre’s outlook towards Bihar had changed. An inter-ministerial group set up in July 2011, that submitted its report in 2012, specifically said Bihar did not satisfy any of the criteria set out by the NDC, and hence did not qualify for special category status.

Again, a committee under former Chief Economic Advisor Raghuram Rajan (now RBI Governor) did say that Bihar was a backward state, but ranked it above Odisha — so, purely in terms of backwardness, Odisha deserved SCS more than Bihar. But with the Fourteenth Finance Commission’s award in place, there is no raison d’etre for the Special Category Status.

Did the Congress seek the Status for Bihar all these days? It is a fit case, after all. Surprisingly, No. Special Status is an emotive issue, especially for the people of AP. Moreover, with the passage of the GST Bill, the relevance of the Special Category Status dips further. As and when this one supercedes all, there is little or no scope for the status. Those clamouring today for the SCS for AP are fully equipped with this knowledge.

A politician must be, like a satirist, a self-appointed guardian of standards, ideals and truth as well as aesthetic values. A politician should take it upon himself to correct, censure and ridicule the follies and vices of society or government.

All the players straining their vocal folds in this SCS game seem to be just playful. Let's enjoy the show.