Can Smaller States Promise Better Governance?

Bangalore: Is Small is Beautiful and Better? - India's political circle furiously debates as Mayawati's cabinet clears the proposal to divide Uttar Pradesh into four parts. And the often asked but unanswered question arises again - Are Smaller Sates ruled Better?

There seems to be no end for the Telengana struggle in the near future and with Maya's demands for splitting UP into four, the union government will undoubtedly have to deal with more calls for separation. Gorkha Janmukti Morcha has been campaigning for a separate state of Gorkhaland for many years. Similar demands have been heard from Assam, Vidarbha, Kodagu etc and it would be a tough task for the central government to grant the just demands.

The evidence of growth and development in cases of large states and small states or for that matter, large or small countries, are very neutral. The debate would turn worthless looking at the way India and China are growing, if the argument goes as bigger states lacks growth. However, when the Chief Minister of the State says that the state, massive in size and population, cannot be governed as it is; she needs to be heard.

Arguing against the division, any states regardless of its size and population, will remain undeveloped if the devolution of funds, functions and functionaries are not done e ffectively to the local bodies. As long as the inequalities in income are widening so drastically, there cannot be an overall development in the state as most of the states' and the central government's core focus is only on economic reforms with a total neglect of quality of living or basic needs such as health, education, employment or other basic requirements. Development largely depends on the extent to which power is devolved to the local authorities. It's well proven over the years as how a small state like Kerala under different chief ministers over the years and a bigger sate like Bihar under Nitish Kumar have seen tremendous development. And to cite an example, Jharkhand created by dividing Bihar, could not make any significant developments over the years. The demands for smaller states arise from ethnic identities and from the sense of insecurity which are valid reasons; however, development or good governance is largely depends on devolution of power.

On the other hand, UP's neighboring states such as Haryana and Uttarakhand have prospered after being separated and become part of smaller states. People in bigger states undeniably face this problem of the sense of alienation from the power centre.

As Mayawati's move can very well be the make or break factor in the upcoming polls, her decisions has created a dilemma among the other players. BJP which had created three states during the NDA rule and that supports the demand for a separate Telengana states remains undecided. While Congress, unsure of the actual impact of the move, nothing should be decided in haste and fears that this can take the sheen off the proposed RLD-Congress alliance, Samajwadi Party, as always, opposes any division of the state.

The power to create any new state is vested with the union government through parliamentary consent and the recent developments shows that the government acts only when people get violent, only time will tell how the map of Uttar Pradesh would look like in the future.

The above is from Silicon India.

Watching the agitation for separate states of Telengana and Gorkhaland, I had remarked earlier, there is nothing in it for the people.
These are just agitations by politicians to devolve power unto themselves so that there are more funds they can misappropriate.

The British could rule the whole of India from Britain because they did not play favouritism and there was only so much they could take back home. However the politicians and bureaucrats live in India and have to build palatial houses for themselves, families and in-laws. After some time, they find the scope becomes limited in looting one state and demand bifurcation so that there are more crumbs to loot.

Jharkhand and Chattisgarh have proved that division does not improve administration of efficiency. It only breeds more corruption.