





|
Thought
for Food Linking Indian agriculture
with global trade makes economic--and political--sense
Charlie Chaplin's enduring portrayal of
hunger in The Gold Rush -- chewing on a boiled shoe as though it were a succulent chicken
-- may regain topicality in India '98. The 8.4 per cent annual rise in inflation does not
capture either the intensity or the specificity of price rise because the real culprit,
food articles, are given a relatively small share in the overall weights. It is the food
price that burns the largest hole in the pocket of the average citizen. In the past year,
the wholesale price of food articles has shot up by 20 per cent -- the sharpest annual
rise in a decade. The deleterious impact of this climb in bulk prices on the retail market
is evident from the ballistic movement of prices of such everyday eatables like the onion,
potato, cauliflower, pulses, even salt and green chillies. The price rise is playing havoc
with the cost of living indices. For industrial workers, this has risen 15 per cent over
one year and for urban non-manual employees by 12.7 per cent.
For the failure of the vegetable crop, the Government has an
obvious whipping boy in the weather -- the unexpectedly hot summer and the untimely rains
of September-October. If the weather gods continue to be unfavourable, even the rabi crop
output will be reduced. However, there is little in evidence yet that the eight-month-old
Government of A.B. Vajpayee has factored the cyclical nature of food into its projections
of supply and prices. It has begun importing onions now, which should have been done in
June. The BJP is anything but a helpless inheritor to the dirigiste philosophy of its
predecessors which held that food should be religiously left out of the reach of global
trade. Instead of importing food items as a firefighting measure, the agricultural policy
should be adjusted to the cost advantage for export or import of each crop. Food remains
the largest globally traded item -- more than oil -- and India will pay a high price if it
sticks the swadeshi label on its barn doors.
Medium of Discord
Is there no more to good schooling than the 'regional
language vs English' debate?
If the purpose of language is to enhance
mutual understanding and simplify life, India has obviously missed the point. Four decades
ago, the country upturned every tenet of good governance by carving out new states on the
basis of language rather than administrative convenience. In more recent years, the medium
of instruction in schools has instead become the medium of discord. A couple of weeks ago,
the human resource development minister sought to make Sanskrit a compulsory subject. Now
the Tamil Nadu Government has decreed that all schools owned or recognised by the state
must teach their students Tamil as well as teach them in Tamil. The second clause,
however, is limited to a few subjects. This will lead to the ridiculous anomaly of a child
learning mathematics in Tamil but physics in English. Schools which go the whole hog and
use only Tamil have been promised financial benefits.
Tamil Nadu's predicament is not unique. Schools in Mumbai,
which prides itself as India's most cosmopolitan city, have been known to be cussed when
it comes to Marathi. When a migrant from Gujarat sued the state secondary education board
the Mumbai High Court upheld his case, terming the "insistence on Marathi arbitrary
and unreasonable". Admittedly, there is a difference between forcing students to
learn a language and making it the medium of instruction. Even so, these are both
manifestations of the same pigheadedness: one which denies English its due place. By all
means promote regional tongues, even revive classical languages like Sanskrit -- but not
by enforcement. To deprive schoolchildren of adequate English-language skills is to
handicap tomorrow's Indians. West Bengal, which banned English from primary schools 20
years ago, now wants to make amends. Does the rest of India too want to learn the hard
way? |