The real toffee

Of late, Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi has been thought-lessly and in a hurry jumping into every available situation, without verifying basic facts, to criticise the Bharatiya Janata Party. His speech writers seem to be letting him down. In his latest speech, at a public meeting at Latur, Maharashtra, Mr Gandhi came up with a “toffee model” theory. Referring to the land acquisition and allotment policy in Gujarat, he accused Narendra Modi’s government of selling land at Re 1 a metre. When it is land is it metre or square metre,

Mr Gandhi? A slip of the tongue, shall we say, or is your hurry getting the better of you again? However, we shall let that be.

Let’s see the facts which Mr Gandhi conveniently distorts. The Congress Party’s institutional memory, if honest, should corroborate this for its vice-president. If a “toffee model” was ever executed it was in 1997 in Gujarat, during the Congress-supported Rashtriya Janata Party rule under the leadership of Shankersinh Vaghela. Mr Vaghela allotted 1.21 million sq. m. of land in village Dhrab, Mundra, at the “toffee” rate of Re 1 per sq. m.. He allotted within a year roughly another 2 million sq. m. of land, thus totalling to 3.23 million sq. m. of land.

Currently Mr Vaghela is in the Congress and is the Leader of the Opposition in the Gujarat state Assembly. During the Congress’ rule of 1985 and 1995 in Gujarat, there are about 28 instances of industrial houses being allocated land at the rate of Rs 2 or less per sq. m.. In 1993, a cement company was allotted land by the Congress government at paise 0.23 sq. m.. In 1982, Larsen & Toubro was given land by the Congress at paise 0.74 sq. m.. Let it be reiterated here that the land allotted to the Adani Group in Kutch on the “toffee model” was not during the Modi government.

During Mr Modi’s term, the Adani Group applied for 60 lakh sq. m. in Mundra, 9 lakh sq. m. in Zara-para and 1.41 lakh sq. m. in Dhrab. The established three-layered process for determining land price factors in the market rates for comparable land in the immediate neighbourhood over the previous five years. For the above-mentioned application too this due process deter-mined the rates at Rs 4.25, Rs 6 and Rs 25 per sq. m. respectively. However, the Council of Ministers recommended that for all three plots applied for, the higher rate of Rs 25 be charged.

The Gujarat government has adopted a transparent price fixing process involving the district collector, the chief town planner and the state evaluation committee. If the valuation is over Rs 50 lakh, it shall be rechecked at two other stages by two separate committees. It will be useful to recollect here that the Supreme Court of India in a matter dealing with forcible land acquisition in Uttar Pradesh commented: “The land Acquisition Act has become a fraud. It seems to have been devised by people with a sick mind who had scant regard for the welfare of the common man. It is time the Act is scrapped. But there is one state from where we do not receive any such complaints. Look at Ahmedabad which is developing but there are no complaints from that place. They have the same officers of the same cadre as in the rest of the country.”

Since 1956, the policy of allocating lands to industrial houses by the state governments is in effect in Gujarat and most issues raised relate only to government land; therefore these do not have an impact on farmers. Even on the issue of gauchar/grazing lands the facts can make the Congress vice-president run for cover. Of the total land allotted between 1985 and 1990 (Congress governments), 94 per cent was gauchar lands. Since 2001, after Mr Modi became the Chief Minister, only 4.97 per cent of the total allocated land is gauchar land.

In a state like Gujarat, which is rain fed, livestock is a source of additional income for farmers. Grazing land, thus, is of great importance because it is the only source of fodder.

Since the 1960s, different Congress governments gave away more than 16,000 acres of land at throwaway prices to select parties in the Kandla Port area. In 2011, when they came for renewal, the port was asked to renew these even as a public interest litigation was pending in the Delhi High Court. Why didn’t the “toffee model” theory appear then? Though he was not his party’s vice-president then, Mr Gandhi did wield as much power in his party then as he does now.

The Congress expects such pouring out of outrage at the BJP to be accepted in silence. When they are rebutted, some of their leaders choose to write letters with contrived anger and contempt, betraying their shame at being caught. On April 13, 2014, Mr Modi recalled the words of Jairam Ramesh in a public meeting in Chikmagalur, Karnataka. Mr Modi said, in Hindi: “…Ek videsh mein padh-likh karke aaye mantri… toh aa karke kehte hain… duniya mein Hindustan dirtiest hai, Hindustan filthiest hai.” The then minister of state for environment, Mr Ramesh, releasing a TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute) report at a function on November 20, 2009, had said: “Our cities are the dirtiest cities of the world. If there is a Nobel prize for dirt and filth, India will win it.” Mr Ramesh reaffirmed his words again as minister for drinking water and sanitation at a function in Delhi on November 14, 2011: “We do remain the dirtiest and filthiest country”. Again, on November 16, 2012, as minister for rural development, Mr Ramesh said, “In many poor areas of India, the public health system simply does not exist.”

Mr Ramesh shot off a letter to Mr Modi saying, inter alia, “…your accusation against me is bizarre.” Is it bizarre because he translated Mr Ramesh’s blunt English words into Hindi? After all, the translation is faithful!

In essence, the Congress Party exudes hubris and cussedness which when challenged gets the typical response. Smacking of a certain “How dare you?” attitude, they reply not with clarification but hit back with only hate and vitriol. Both Mr Gandhi and Mr Ramesh have displayed the Congress’ essential trait of distorting facts to mislead people.

The writer is spokesperson of the Bharatiya Janata Party. The views expressed in this column are her own.