Quo
Vadis? Whither goest though? Anna asks this ancient question
as a concerned Indian, who sees the country approaching
a precipice. Speaking on the Finance (No.2) Bill of 1962,
he examines the economic progress achieved by the Government
after 15 years of ‘fleecing the people’ in the name of
the plan. He questions the rationale of a tax stricture
which leans so heavily on indirect taxation, especially
in a nation where 95% of the people live on the brink
of starvation. He speaks feelingly of the utter lack of
coordination between the Centre and the States. He speaks
of disparities between the various regions of the country
in the matter of development and the neglect of the Southern
States by the Centre. He deplores the delay in developing
Tuticorin in Tamilnadu as a major port.
Anna
as Chief Minister of Tamilnadu succeeded in persuading
the government of India to take effective steps to develop
Tuticorin as a major port. Though the Government of India
ultimately accepted his other suggestion of giving tax
concession and subsidies for the development of backward
areas in the country, this was not done during Anna’s
lifetime. Fortunately, today, the country’s attention
is fully focused more on regional disparities in development
and the paramount need to reduce disparities in development
and the paramount need to reduce disparities in the minimum
possible time. This was a cause dear to Anna’s heart.
Madam,
Deputy Chairman, the Finance Bill has been discussed in
the other House and is being discussed in this House.
I have been hearing many good suggestions offered by Members
on this side of the House, as well as on the other side.
I come to understand on hearing the discussion, that nobody
is satisfied with the way in which the people are being
taxed. Whatever may be the arguments advanced for the
necessity for fresh taxation, no section of this House
or no section of the public outside is prepared to bear
any more burdens. Moreover, the fresh burden of taxation
from the Centre has been preceded by the Railway Ministry
and is soon to be pursued by the State Ministries. Therefore,
the first impression that one gets on going through the
Finance Bill is that the present Government, puzzled over
their own failings, is asking the people to bear an unnecessary
burden. The present Government is not able to offer an
explanation for its failures, for its acts of commission
and omission except to say that since it has got a plan
to be fulfilled, every burden ought to be borne by the
people. When the critics ask them what the criterion of
their planning is, whether their planning is going to
be socialistic or otherwise, they say; “We are very good
people; we take bits from here and bits from there, mix
them together and call it a mixed economy.” Madam, you
know that adulteration is a crime. And the finance Minister
was very vehement in attacking adulteration. In the other
House he said that those people who were found to be guilty
of adulteration should not only be whipped….
Morarji
R. Desai : I did not say that. There was a suggestion
that they should be flogged.
So, the Finance Minister is not willing even to punish
them. But anyhow, adulteration is a crime and adulteration
of economic principles is a crime for which the present
and future generations have to pay. Therefore, I would
like the present Government to formulate a policy which
would conform to the norms of economics. But they want
a new interpretation for any economic theory. Whenever
it suits them, they say, “We are not doctrinaire, we are
a very practical people.” The whole trouble arises because
this Government lacks a philosophy behind it. They want
to steal the thunder from every political party functioning
in this country. They want to steal the thunder from the
Communist Party, they want to steal the thunder from the
Swatantra Party, they want to steal the thunder from every
other party and say, “There need be no other political
party here, because we are socialists and we are capitalisits,
and we have got a mixed economy.” Therefore, if there
is a clear-cut exposition of the economic philosophy behind
the implications of the present Government policy, the
other parties can formulate their own philosophies. And
the Hon. Mr. Bhupesh Gupta was pointing out that there
were groups inside the Congress, one group pulling towards
the Right and another group pulling towards the Left,
and he has stated very categorically that the Communist
Party would help the Leftist group to out the Rightist
group. I was sorry to hear Mr Bhupesh Gupta clubbing the
present Finance Minister with the Rightist group which
he wanted to shove off.
But
may I point out that whatever the philosophy behind the
fiscal policies, the bare fact remains that these changes
in direct and indirect taxation taken together, will bring
in a revenue of Rs.71.7 cores in a whole year, of which
Rs.44.5 crores will be from indirect a stoic pleasure
when the Finance Minister says that these proposals will
bring in revenue. But he does not understand the feelings
of the people when they are asked or forced to pay taxes
which they cannot bear. And he points out philosophically
enough that undoubetedly the richer section must carry
an increasingly larger share of the taxation and that
the poorer sections must benefit progressively more through
development, and that that is part of their concept of
a socialistic state. I would very much like the Finance
Minister to substantiate both these statements. Is it
that he has worked out his fiscal policy in such a way
that the richer sections are carrying an increasingly
larger share of the taxation and the poorer sections are
getting the benefit out of it? I would like to quote the
opinion I may even call it a stricture of a member of
the ruling Party itself.
He
has stated that the whole fiscal policy followed by the
Government of India has lessened the value of the rupee
which is going down, that 95 per cent of the people are
on a marginal or sub-marginal level of subsistence and
that more money is getting concentrated in the hands of
a few. If Members on this side were to say that the value
of the rupee is going down, they will be accused of not
knowing the full facts, but I have quoted the opinion
expressed by the Hon. Mr. T.T. Krishnamachari Minister
without Portfolio, who had to get out of Delhi because
man-caters were on the prowl. I hope that the man-eaters
have now been chased or perhaps he may have come with
a muzzle-gun. The fact remains that a responsible Member
who has got a responsible post, Mr. Krishnamachari I say
‘responsible’ because he has not got any portfolio and,
therefore, he has got all the portfolios has stated that
the value of the rupee going down. Who is to be accused
for the value of the rupee going down? The ruling party
members do not have even the courtesy to consult us when
schemes are being formulated. But it is Mr. Krishnamachari
who is saying that the value of the rupee is going down
and that 95 per cent of the people are on a marginal or
sub-marginal level, in spite of the fact that we have
had a national Government for the past fifteen years conducted
and directed by a political party which can command the
funds of the capitalists and also the votes of the poor.
And yet after having had two Five Year Plans and being
in the middle of the Third Five Year Plan, this is the
stricture that is being passed by an Hon. Member of this
Cabinet.
May
I ask the Finance Minister to point out whether this is
the time to tax the people, especially to levy indirect
taxes, when 95 per cent of the people are stated to be
on a marginal or sub-marginal level of subsistence? Here
again are the figures taken from the national sample survey
(Agricultural Labour Enquiry) sponsored by the Government.
It is stated that 27 million people have work for one
hour a day, 20 million people have work for two hours
a day, and forty five million for four hours a day, and
at other times they have no work. We have been spending
crores and crores of money which we have got from our
people and from outside loans and aids yet, after 15 years
of freedom and 12 years of planning, we find that 27 million
people have work for one hour a day. How do we account
for this state of affairs after having spent so much money
on planning, after having practically fleeced the people
for the sake of the Plans?
The
other problems today are that our sterling balance has
dwindled, our exports have fallen, aid from foreign countries
is likely to be cut down, indirect taxation is on the
increase, prices are rising, direct taxes are being evaded
and black money is on the increase. And it is stated that
Rs.118 crores of income tax is in arrears. May I ask the
Finance Minister to point out, why such a colossal amount
has been left uncollected? With what audacity can he come
to the people and say that because of the Plans they have
to pay the taxes? Why should he not take up cudgels against
the income tax arrears of Rs.118 crores? If he had only
taken sufficiently stringent measures to collect at least
half of this sum of Rs.118 crores, there would not have
been any necessity for taxing the people. But he is not
merely taxing the people. But he is not merely taxing
the people for filling up that gap because he says right
royally that these changes will bring in a revenue of
Rs.71 crores. Therefore, he has not a collector’s mind
not the mind of a development officer of this sub-continent
of ours.
My
friend My Bhupesh Gupta, wanted to know the philosophy
behind all these economic implications. The first charge
that I am emboldened to make is that because of the lack
of a political philosophy you are leading the country
blindfold into blind alleys, and therefore we do not know
what would be the consequences of all these taxes. They
have been saying that taxation and an increase in taxation,
is an index of prosperity. I accept it as an index of
prosperity, but it has to be answered, prosperity of whom,
of which section? That has not been answered. Therefore
it is that the indirect taxes, especially on essential
commodities ought to be curtailed, even though the Finance
Mnister has got the Finance Bill passed in the Lok sabha.
Even then, if the Finance Minister he is reputed to be
philosophically minded were to take note of the criticisms
advanced by Members of the ruling Party itself, he would
see that nobody supported him in these new taxes. But
then, their vote was got only by whipping them into submission.
Therefore he has no moral right to levy these indirect
taxes and he would be doing a great favour, not merely
to the poor people, but to the philosophy to which he
is stated to be wedded, if he takes the criticism offered
by Members of his own ruling party into consideration.
And
therein, Madam Deputy Chairman, I may be permitted to
deviate for a short time into the strange and curious
working of democracy in this country. Members of the ruling
party, in both the Houses, offered criticisms against
the ruling party’s new taxation measures, in as vehement
a manner as Members on this side. Yet when they go outside,
they are forced to defend the present Government and according,
to the whip issued, they have to vote for the Government.
Presently, this month, the Communist Part, the Jana Singh,
the Swatantra Party and the Party to which I have the
honour to belong each one of us separately are organizing
protest meetings against excessive taxation. When we address
the masses about the impracticability of these taxes,
about how these taxes are going to undermine the poverty
strickmen people still further, it is these same Congress
Members, Members of the ruling party, who are going to
come and defend the Government. But do not think that
the people will accept your words. People do not merely
read the reports about what it said outside this House
to defend their case. They also read what is said inside
this House. That is why I am very glad that Members of
the ruling party have spoken very correctly and very boldly
in attacking the indirect taxation policies of the Finance
Minister. The Finance Minister may turn round and say,
“But I will have to get the money.” One way of getting
money, if I may say so, is to collect the income-tax arrears,
find out the evaders and get all the loopholes plugged.
But I am not going to repeat what my Hon. Friend, Mr.
Bhupesh Gupta, was saying, because you may not digest
it. I would say that even in your present set-up, if you
economise the various departments of the administration,
if you plug the loopholes in the various administrative
sections, you can find enough money for carrying on the
administration and even to implement the plan. But whenever
we from this side say that the administration is lopsided
that there is corruption and nepotism in this administration,
Members of the Cabinet turn round and say, “Prove it.”
As they Hyderbad Economy Committee Report points out;
“ Corruption, it is said, is often difficult to prove.
All the more reason why there should not be the least
hesitation in investigating every matter in which there
is ground for complaint.
Mr
Gorwala, whom the Government themselves commissioned to
report on the reforms to be carried out in public administration,
is pleased to state about the income-tax system in his
report as follows :
“On
the Income-tax side the real complaint of the public is
that while small men are often troubled quite unnecessarily,
tax-evaders, whose assessment should rung into lakhs,
seem to escape. The failure of the Income-tax Investigation
Commission to produce any real results and the ease with
which the most blatant tax-evaders seem to be able to
manage their affairs undisturbed has caused a very widespread
belief in the impotence of Government when pitted against
really influential and weatlthy people.”
The
word used is, ‘impotence’; I would have thought twice
before using such a strong word, but Mr Gorwala, because
he had been commissioned by the Government to report on
public administration, says ‘impotence’ of the Government.
May I ask the Members of the Cabinet, what right have
you to ask us to pay crores and crores of rupees when
Mr Gorwala says that your Government is impotent? Therefore
I would like to see some more potency and vitality in
the administrative set-up.
And
here is another stricture and this is about the commerce
Ministry :
“The
Commerce Ministry had gained an unenviable notoriety in
respect of the amenability of some of its principal officials
to the wishes of big business.”
Perhaps
this is what Mr T.T. Krishnamachari means by “man-eaters
on the prowl”. How he able to come to the conclusion that
man-eaters are on the prowl, I have not been able to understand
unless I make a bold conjecture and say, that having been
the Commerce Minister himself, he might have had some
curious experiences. The Commerce Ministry is notorious
for favouring bid business in issuing licences. If these
things are reformed, there will be what the Hon. Member
preceding me had stated, some enthusiasm in the people
for the plan. But when growing larger and larger in dimension,
when they find that the present state of the Government
is such that they cannot even provide the necessities
of life, how do you expect the people to be enthusiastic
about the Plans? Of course, there are people who have
got to say something in favour of this or that item in
the fiscal policy of the Government. Apart from the fact
that I belong to party which demands separation of Dravida
Nadu from India may I point out that the way in which
you have planned out the industrial reorganization will
make it impossible to get the maximum output from the
whole sub-continent. Economic activity has been lopsided,
industrial organization has been lopsided. It is only
late in the day that the
Bhupesh
Gupta : You give up your Dravida Nade demand and we shall
join you in fighting for more industries for Tamilnadu
within the Republic of India. Let us have that deal. Will
you have it?
I
am thankful to Shri Bhupesh Gupta for his anxiety to be
with me, but I would not like to have him as an ally,
giving up my ideal.
I
way saying that it is only late in the day that the Government
have come to realize that their policy of industralisation
has been lopsided. They are now using an economic policy
behind which there are many political philosophies the
meaning of which most of them do not divulge fully. They
are talking about regional, economic reconstruction. They
say that particular regions are today economically advance
and therefore it is the policy of the Government of India,
as far as industries are concerned, to give more attention
to the neglected parts of the country as a whole. Therefore,
it means that all these twelve years of planning, you
have had a defective planning, a lopsided economic planning.
The
other day the Hon. Member Shrimati Devaki (Gopidas) when
she was giving a very lucid accound of how Kerala is being
let out in matters of development, stated that when plans
are formulated, the special features and special standards
of the Kerala State ought to be taken into consideration
and remedies found out, otherwise it will be a thorn in
the further development of the India Union. This statement
comes from one who believes that India should remain one
and indivisible. If you do not take into consideration
the special standards or the special features of Kerala,
Kerala would remain a thorn.
Here,
Madam Deputy Chairman, I would, through you, ask the Hon.
Mr. Bhupesh Gupta to pay attention to this; “It will be
a thorn in the further development of the Indian Union,”
she says. What do we do with thorns? We take them away.
That is what we do. If there is a thorn in the body politic,
or in the body what we do is, we take away the thorn.
Therefore
Madam, even people who have an abiding faith in the Indian
unity think that if the particular region in which they
live, remains industrially disorganized, the problem of
unity will remain unsolved.
Bhupesh
Gupta : I think your separation movement would weaken
the democratic movement in Tamilnadu and it will spoil
the case of Tamilnad. It would neither bring what you
want which of course, we do not want nor will it bring
industralisation to that part.
To
Mr Bhupesh Gupta’s advice I will pay very serious attention.
We will try to be as democratic as possible.
What
I am trying to formulate is, that there is a very real
grievance in the minds of members of every political party
that there is a regional disparity. I am pointing out
this, not for separation, but because of the fact due
to lopsided growth we have not brought out the maximum
output that this country could give. That is my point.
For
separation I have got other reasons, but I would not deviate
into that even though one Hon. Member deviated into it
and delightfully asked me to go to Ceylon to propagate
it. I do not know whether he is more attached to me or
to Ceylon. He has however admitted that he is a Dravidian.
I may say categorically, that neither cannons nor contempt
is going to deter me from the mission to which I wedded.
About that there can be no compromise.
From
the economic point of view, to prove that there is regional
disparity I am giving you a very delightful fact. I was
talking about the income-tax arrears. It has been given
State-wise or circlewise. Bombay City-I and Bombay City-2
and Bombay Central account for Rs.36 crores and West Bengal,
Calcutta town, accounts for Rs.43 crores. Therefore, the
Finance Minister should get his gun towards these two
regions, wherein blocks of money remain unpaid.
Bhupesh
Gupta : West Bengal has big capitalists. Mr Shanti Prasad
Jain bought a house recently for Rs.60 lakhs.
Most
of the capital of West Bengal is from outside. The economic
disparity is being proved by statistics of State-wise
distribution of income from agriculture. In Madras we
have got in 1958-59 Rs.343.3 crores whereas in Uttar Pradesh
it is Rs.1,146 crores and in West Bengal it is Rs.427
crores. I do not grudge U.P. or West Bengal’s becoming
rich and wealthy. But may I point out that if there had
not been this lopsided economic arrangement during these
Plans, we would have been getting very much more than
even Uttar Pradesh in the matter of agriculture. Even
now, the yield per acre in tamilnadu is the highest in
the whole of India, though we do not have many irrigation
programmes and we do not have a Bhakra Nangal or even
many smaller schemes.
S.
Channa Reddy (Andhra Pradesh) : You have the Kunda Dam.
That
is more for power than for irrigation purposes. So without
all that we are able to increase our output per acre.
If such sturdy, intelligent and understanding agriculturists
are to be found there, is it not the duty of the planners
to apply their eyes more to the South with regard to planning
the agricultural sector? They could have developed the
fishing industry in the South. They could have developed
the transport industry in the southern area. There are
so many other things that can be done. There are so many
opportunities. They have not only missed those opportunities,
but have been shelving the issue wherever an issue like
this was raised. When such issues were raised, they used
to say/ “There is a strict economic principle that industries
can be established only if the raw materials are to be
found there.” But they have now come round to recognize
the principle that regional disparities should be done
away with once and for all. For the information of the
House I may say, that the very same problem arose in Italy.
Southern Italy was industrially very backward compared
to Northern Italy and then the Italian Government took
very intelligent, very bold and very radical steps formulating
a special scheme for Southern Italy. They offered tax
concession for new Industries to be started in Southern
Italy. They gave loans and other aids for this purpose
in order to improve this part of Italy. I am not leading
you on to the tempting ground where you can rise up and
say we will follow that example. You may follow it. I
do not ask you not to follow it. Do follow it. But I should
not, I cannot and I need not guarantee, that my political
party will give up its philosophy because of that. Its
philosophy is quite apart from such compromises or such
subsidies. I am only pointing out that if the economics
of the South had been taken into consideration, we could
have produced more wealth by this time. I may point out
that the sea-coast in the South is one of the best in
the whole world. There are many ports, used and unused,
and I hope my Hon. Friend Mr. Dahyabhai Patel will not
come to grips with me when I say that he has got Kandla
Port and yet we have not got our Tuticorin. Two days back
the Industries Minister of our State, while addressing
the Merchants’ Chamber at Tuticorin stated that it is
not enough to accept the proposal. The Government of India
should move in the matter to get things done. Therefore,
I say if at least economic reorganization had been carried
out throughout the country, especially in the neglected
South, then the demand to pay taxes would not have been
felt to be so heavy. Therefore it is that the South especially,
finds itself being taxed too much for the benefit not
of its own territory, but for some other territory and
so the tax-pang comes as a double dose. It is our request
to the Finance Minister and through him to other Ministries
that they should find out how they could reorganize or
reconstruct the South economically so that more wealth
may be produced and less taxation be indulged in.
There
is another erroneous impression that is being created
by the Members of the ruling party. They say : “Do not
ask for distribution of the profits now. You go on producing.
It is your duty to produce. So produce more and more.
But do not talk about distribution now, because distribution
comes only after production.” Let me add that only in
economics books does production come in the first, and
distribution in the second chapter. But in actual practice,
while you produce you distribute. You do not go on producing
and then pile up all the goods and one fine morning come
and say : “Now we shall have distribution.” That is not
the way in which economic activities are to be conducted.
That is only the way in which economic books should be
written. Therefore, the Members of the ruling Party should
not trot out such a weak argument. We on this die say
that which is being produced is not being properly distributed.
If the goods had been properly distributed, if there had
been proper distribution of wealth, there would not have
been so much poverty in this country of ours. Our distribution
is such that in my State, old men and old women who are
destritute are to be pensioned off by the State. I am
glad that my State Government has got such a proposal.
But that is an index of the destitution to be found in
the country. Why is it that after producing so much wealth
we find so much of poverty? It is because the question
of distribution has not been paid enough heed. That is
why there is wealth produced and we find newer and newer
cadillacs and newer and newer bungalows and newer and
newer business houses. I read the other day in the papers
that even the Prime Minister was astounded to find that
when the Government is not able to get cement, private
contractors are able to it is too strong a word to be
used/ it is very shamefuel for a national government to
find these two words current blackmarket and black money.
We are using these words in a casual manner. When speaking
of any article, we ask; what is its price in the open
market and what it its price in the blackmarket? I was
astounded to read in another paper that one of the Cabinet
Ministers, not the present Minister for Steel, once stated
that he was well conversant with the blackmarket price
of steel. Therefore, it is clear that the Government knows
that there is this blackmarket, and the Government knows
also how the blackmarket is being conducted. The Government,
however, also knows that to book these blackmarket people
will work havoc in their elections. Therefore, blackmarketeers
are being allowed to flourish. When there is the blackmarket,
there is also black money and this black money cannot
be ploughed back into industry. When a private concern
gets profit in the open it can bring it out and reinvest
it in the business. But when they get black money which
is not capable of being accounted for, they cannot bring
it out, or put it into the industry. Therefore it goes
into ostentations living. It was with a view to curtail
that ostentatious living that the other Finance Minister
thought of the expenditure tax. But the present Finance
Minister perhaps thinks that this ostentatious living
has gone down, or that ostentation is good. He has taken
away this expenditure tax. It might not have yielded much
revenue. I find from the papers that it bagged only Rs.77
lakhs. But whatever be the amount, the social value behind
that tax has significance and yet it has been taken away.
On the other hand taxes on kerosene, match-boxes and tobacco
are being increased more and more and the other day in
the Lok Sabha the Finance Minister flourished a match
box and said: “Here is a match box and I got it at the
correct price”. I would now ask him to get the match boxes.
Now, the price of a match box has goe up and the price
of everything has gone up because even though the Financie
Minister, like Kind Canute, has stated that prices would
not rise, neither the waves stood silent before Canute,
nor the prices before the Finance Minister. Therefore,
whenever there are taxes, prices are bound to go up and
if at least the government is capable of controlling price
rise, then it has got not a reason but an apology for
excise taxation or these indirect taxes. The Finance Bill
is a fleecing Bill. I can understand fleecing rams and
sheep for weaving blankets, but you are fleecing men,
you are fleecing the poor people and you are fleecing
the people in the name of the Plan, you are making the
people look with horror at the plan. Whenever you say
that because of the Plan all these taxes are being levied,
they not only condemn the taxes, but begin to doubt the
very necessity for a Plan. In a way, you are undermining
the planning system, of which you have been a votary yourself.
I would ask the Finance Minister not to advance arguments,
intelligent logic, sandwiched with statistics but to take
into consideration the poverty stricken people, their
plight, their unemployment etc. Their taxable capacity
has been reached and therefore, you should take away the
indirect taxes, especially on essential commodities and
try to get money from elsewhere, but I can assure you
that even if these taxes are taken away, he is going to
get more money because whenever he presents a Budget,
the estimate is always given on a lower scale so that
afterwards he can come up, stand before Parliament like
a conjurer and say, I expected only Rs.23 crores but I
got Rs.32 crores.” Therefore, I say, there is no necessity
for such indirect taxation to fleece the people.