Andhra’s capital errors
There are better ways of ensuring inclusive development
The Andhra Pradesh government’s decision to scrap Amravati as a “super-capital” and build three capitals instead in different parts of the state defies all logic. Nevertheless, with a majority of 151 in the 175-member Assembly, Chief Minister Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy had little trouble in getting the necessary legislation passed. Thus, Amravati, which Mr Reddy’s predecessor Chandrababu Naidu had made considerable headway in developing, will be retained as a legislative capital housing the state Assembly. Visakhapatnam, 367 km away, will be the executive capital, where the state secretariat and the Raj Bhavan will be based. Finally, Kurnool, 692 km from Visakhapatnam and 343 km from Amravati, will be the judicial capital with the high court. Mr Reddy’s ostensible logic for this dramatic shift from Mr Naidu’s blueprint is disingenuous. He says he wants “inclusive development,” the latest term in the national political lexicon that usually hides a multitude of motives. Even if Mr Reddy’s reasoning is taken at face value, it is hard to see how the argument progresses beyond a real estate play. Inclusive development, in its original form, is embedded in the concept of administrative efficiency for all. It is not clear how decentralising the three key organs of governance by hundreds of kilometres will achieve this. To offer just one example, a land-loser to a government project contesting compensation will find herself saddled with huge travel costs shuttling between Visakhapatnam and Kurnool, in addition to legal fees.
That said, there is a strong case for bringing administration to the people through decentralisation. If Mr Reddy were truly concerned about this, it would make sense to develop mini-secretariats in each major region, just as Haryana and Uttar Pradesh have done with Gurugram and Noida, respectively. This has the dual benefit of allowing farmers in these regions to gain from land acquisition and people to access administration easily. The immediate prognosis is that Mr Reddy is unlikely to follow this sensible policy because of ingrained caste rivalries between the coastal Kammas, represented by Mr Naidu and his followers, and the Reddys from the Rayalseema (or southern) region. The former are said to have gained from the Amravati land deals, which is why Mr Reddy is seeking rebalance for the caste he represents via this decentralised scheme. He has, nevertheless, said he would make good on promises made by Mr Naidu to farmers who are awaiting full compensation for land surrendered for Amravati, and has even doubled the amounts. But with state’s debt burden, it is difficult to see how he can do this as well as raise money for his tri-capital plan.
No less damaging are the signals to potential investors. Reneging on renewable energy contracts, announcing job reservations for state residents, and demolishing buildings dating to Mr Naidu’s tenure can scarcely be considered encouragements for business houses seeking stability and sanctity of contract. The fate of the Bill lies with the upper house, in which Mr Naidu’s Telugu Desam Party holds 28 of the 58 seats. Rather than any “inclusive” concerns, the confrontation between landed interests and caste configurations will decide whether this five-year-old state will have three capitals or one.