- 4 hours ago
In an exclusive interview with India Today, senior Congress leader P Chidambaram discussed the ongoing debate over delimitation and its potential impact on southern states.
Category
đź—ž
NewsTranscript
00:01So once again, the focus is on the debate over delimitation.
00:05And joining me here on India First is Congress MPP Chidambaram
00:09to explain why he and the opposition feel that southern states
00:13would have lost out if the delimitation bill had been passed.
00:16Mr. Chidambaram, thank you for joining us here on India Today.
00:20You saw what Mr. Narell Okesha said in an interview recently on delimitation.
00:24And clearly you've taken to social media to say, sir,
00:27that you believe his version is in the right perspective.
00:30So let me again highlight for the benefit of our viewers what Mr. Narell Okesha says.
00:34According to him, if Article 81 of the Constitution is followed,
00:39it is immediately a loss for southern states.
00:42And so the constitutional amendment that was defeated
00:45has ensured that Article 81 remains.
00:48Your view, first of all, sir, on what Mr. Narell Okesha says.
00:54We all know Article 81.2a.
01:00That requires that every parliamentary constituency
01:05has a same number of voters
01:10as far as possible
01:13with any other constituency
01:16depending upon the population
01:20to the population of India
01:24which is simply one man, one vote principle.
01:33One person, one vote principle.
01:36That's certainly correct.
01:39That's certainly correct.
01:39And when the founding fathers wrote the Constitution,
01:43it was absolutely correct.
01:46But they assumed that
01:48that the population of all the states of India
01:52will grow at an even pace.
01:55We introduced a family welfare
01:59and family planning project,
02:05program to stabilize the population.
02:09The TFR, the total fertility rate of India
02:14at that time was in excess of 3%,
02:17maybe 3.5%.
02:19But the TFR has come down
02:23in the southern states
02:25and one or two other states
02:27on the west
02:27to 1.6% and 1.7%.
02:32But in four Hindi-speaking states,
02:38what we call loosely North Indian states,
02:42the TFR is much higher.
02:46Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh
02:50and Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh
02:56and one more state
03:01in the north, Rajasthan,
03:04the TFR is much higher.
03:07Therefore, the population did not grow evenly
03:11throughout India
03:14while the southern states
03:16have more or less stabilized their population.
03:21The population of the northern states,
03:24four or five states,
03:25is growing at more than the national average.
03:30In fact, they are growing at 2.1, 2.3,
03:35maybe even 2.5.
03:38Therefore, if you apply article 81.2a today,
03:46it will mean that the southern states
03:49will lose parliamentary seats.
03:52For example,
03:53the southern states have 120
03:56or 121 parliamentary seats.
03:59They will collectively lose
04:02as many as 16 to 20 seats
04:07and these seats will be added
04:09to the Hindi-speaking states
04:13like Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh.
04:18We are not against the principle,
04:20but if you apply the principle today,
04:2576 years after the constitution came into being,
04:29it will mean that the relative representation,
04:33I underline the word relative,
04:37proportionate representation
04:39of the southern states
04:41will sharply decline
04:43and the four or five northern states
04:47will sharply increase.
04:50Whether you do that
04:52in the current 543 seats
04:55or whether you do that
04:58in the increased strength of 815
05:03is the same.
05:04The mat is the same.
05:07Therefore,
05:08the proposal of the central government
05:10to increase the number of seats
05:12by 543 to 815
05:16is an illusion.
05:17It's meaningless in mathematics.
05:22So then, Mr. Chidambram,
05:24you know what Mr. Narayalokesh's argument is,
05:27is that the constitutional amendment
05:29serves for exactly that,
05:30to ensure that the 2011 census
05:32was followed
05:33instead of a post-2026 census.
05:37Because, you know,
05:37you look at it either way,
05:38from what you've said as well,
05:40it's inevitable, therefore,
05:41that the South loses out irrespective.
05:43And it's only a question
05:44of which situation is worse.
05:46Many, therefore,
05:47would argue
05:47that a post-2026 census,
05:51as per Article 81,
05:52is actually the worst-case scenario
05:54for southern states.
05:58If you apply the 2011 census,
06:02it will be slightly better
06:03than applying the 2021 census
06:08did not take place.
06:09The census will take place
06:11in 2026 or 2027.
06:14If you apply the 2026 or 2027 census,
06:19it will be worse
06:20for the southern states.
06:22If you apply the 2011 census,
06:26it will be slightly better.
06:28But still,
06:30the southern states
06:31will lose seats
06:32and the northern states
06:34will gain seats.
06:35For example,
06:39Tamil Nadu today,
06:40including Pondicherry,
06:42has 40 seats
06:44to the UP's 80 seats.
06:48Now,
06:49this balance is
06:50one is to two.
06:53But after you apply
06:55Article 81.2a,
06:58whether you apply
06:59the 2011 census
07:01or the 2026-27 census,
07:05the proportion
07:06will be disturbed
07:08against the southern states,
07:11against Tamil Nadu
07:12and Pondicherry,
07:13and in favor of UP.
07:15Take, for example,
07:17Andhra Pradesh.
07:18It has 25 seats
07:20as against UP's 80 seats.
07:24The proportion is
07:2625 is to 80.
07:28That is,
07:295 is to 16.
07:31That is,
07:321 is to
07:323.2.
07:35But if you apply
07:36the Article 81.2a
07:40to whichever census,
07:43it will
07:44worsen for...
07:47The ratio will worsen
07:49for Andhra Pradesh
07:50and it will
07:51improve for Uttar Pradesh.
07:53That's simple arithmetic,
07:56simple mathematics.
07:57Sure, sir.
07:59But,
07:59so essentially,
08:00you know,
08:00post-2026 census
08:02is the worst-case scenario.
08:04A 2011 census
08:05also isn't ideal.
08:07How, then,
08:08do we ensure
08:09adequate representation,
08:11representation
08:11that's fair
08:12for the southern states?
08:18The 2011 census
08:20also showed
08:21that the total fertility rate
08:24of the southern states
08:26declined sharply
08:27and the northern states
08:30declined slowly.
08:33Therefore,
08:34whether the 2011 census
08:36is applied or not,
08:37it will be bad,
08:39it will be worse
08:40for the southern states
08:41in terms of
08:42a relative proportion,
08:44relative representation
08:46in the Lok Sabha.
08:48therefore,
08:49the answer is
08:50to devise
08:51another formula
08:52which combines
08:54the one-person,
08:56one-vote principle
08:58as well as
09:00the fact
09:01that
09:01the southern states
09:03have stabilized
09:03their population.
09:05So,
09:06see,
09:07when the founding fathers
09:08wrote the constitution,
09:10they did not anticipate
09:12that the population
09:14of India
09:15will grow unevenly
09:17in different states.
09:19They assumed that
09:20the family planning
09:22and the family welfare programs
09:25will have a
09:26uniform impact
09:28throughout the country
09:30and the TFR
09:31of all states
09:33will decline
09:34at the same pace.
09:36But they were
09:37ambitious.
09:39they were
09:40actually
09:41aspirational.
09:43But that
09:44did not happen.
09:45We know
09:46after the 76 years
09:48of the constitution
09:50that the southern states
09:52TFR
09:53has declined
09:53more rapidly
09:54than the northern states.
09:57Therefore,
09:57whichever census
09:59we apply,
10:00if article
10:0081-2A
10:02is literally
10:03and strictly
10:04applied,
10:05it will be worse
10:06for the southern states.
10:07Therefore,
10:08the southern states
10:09have proposed
10:11revisiting article
10:1281-2A.
10:14We are not
10:15against the
10:16one person,
10:17one vote principle,
10:19but
10:20moderating,
10:21modifying it
10:22to take note
10:24of the
10:24stabilization
10:25of population
10:26achieved in the
10:28southern states.
10:29But then,
10:30Mr. Chidambram,
10:31you will have
10:32essentially a situation
10:33where every
10:35state then
10:36will put their
10:36hand up
10:37an object
10:37and say,
10:38you know,
10:38we're not happy
10:39with this kind
10:39of representation.
10:40I ask you again
10:41what really
10:42is an ideal
10:43fair delimitation
10:45then?
10:46And whichever way
10:47I look at it,
10:48you know,
10:48southern states
10:49will pay the price.
10:50So then,
10:50do we look
10:51beyond population?
10:56ideal delimitation
10:58ideal delimitation
10:59will take into
11:01account
11:01the current
11:03proportion
11:03of the population
11:04and devise
11:06a formula.
11:06I mean,
11:07I can't give
11:08off-the-cuff
11:09answers.
11:10This has to be
11:12deliberated
11:14in a
11:15interstate
11:16council
11:17and all
11:18the states
11:18would have to
11:19agree
11:20that
11:21the formula
11:22is better
11:23than
11:23simply
11:24literally
11:25applying
11:26article
11:2781
11:282A
11:29to the
11:30present
11:31population.
11:33I mean,
11:34I can't give
11:35a formula
11:36that will
11:37satisfy
11:38all the states.
11:39It is only
11:40the collective
11:42deliberation
11:43of all the states
11:44that will
11:45yield the formula.
11:47It has to be
11:48a compromise.
11:49We are not
11:50against a compromise.
11:51It has to be
11:52a compromise.
11:53But a compromise
11:54must meet
11:56the grievances
11:58of the southern states
11:59as well as
12:00the reality
12:01of the population
12:02of the northern states.
12:05I'm not sure
12:06and, you know,
12:07the basis
12:08of what we're
12:08debating and discussing
12:09right now,
12:10Mr. Chidambra,
12:10is, of course,
12:11the conversation
12:12that we saw
12:12between you
12:13and Mr. Narelo Kesh.
12:14I'm not sure
12:14if you saw
12:15what Mr. Narelo Kesh
12:16said in response
12:17to your detailed
12:18post on delimitation.
12:20But this is a question
12:21constantly NDA BJP
12:22asks of the Congress.
12:24That this
12:24constitutional freeze
12:26itself
12:26was something
12:27that was extended
12:28under the Congress
12:29governments
12:29as a temporary
12:30measure
12:30and not
12:31a permanent
12:32solution.
12:32So,
12:32therefore,
12:33did the Congress
12:34also kind of
12:35avoid confronting
12:36the underlying
12:38Article 81
12:39problem,
12:40left it there
12:40for decades,
12:41leave the crisis
12:42for future
12:42governments
12:43to deal with?
12:46That was done
12:47by Vajpayee
12:48government,
12:50Mr. Vajpayee's
12:50government.
12:51And I think
12:52that was a
12:53temporary solution.
12:55At least for
12:5625 years,
12:57let's freeze
12:58the representation.
13:00That's one
13:01obvious solution.
13:02Freeze the
13:03current
13:05seats
13:06of each state
13:07in the Lok Sabha
13:08and freeze it
13:09for another
13:1025 years.
13:11That is a
13:12simple solution.
13:13But I'm not
13:14sure
13:15that will be
13:16acceptable to
13:17everybody.
13:18But if you
13:19freeze the
13:22seats,
13:23it will be
13:27acceptable to
13:28the southern
13:29states,
13:29at least we
13:30don't lose.
13:32And at
13:33least we
13:34don't,
13:35in relative
13:36representation,
13:38we don't lose.
13:39But that
13:40will be
13:42the cause
13:43of an
13:44outcry in
13:45the northern
13:46states whose
13:47populations have
13:48grown at a
13:49faster pace.
13:49therefore I
13:51think there
13:52is a way
13:54to find a
13:55solution between
13:57freezing the
13:58current
13:59representation and
14:01applying strictly
14:0281-2A.
14:0481-2A and
14:06the freezing the
14:07current representation
14:08are extreme
14:09poles.
14:10We'll have to
14:11find the
14:11solution in
14:13between, a
14:14compromised
14:14solution midway.
14:18My final
14:19question to
14:19you, Mr.
14:20Chitamram,
14:21since you
14:21mentioned the
14:22TFR, which is
14:22the total
14:23fertility rate,
14:24and that's
14:24something that's
14:25been a bit of
14:25a concern in
14:26southern states,
14:27you had a
14:28couple of
14:28days ago the
14:29Andhra Chief
14:29Minister, Mr.
14:30Chandra Babu
14:31Naidu,
14:31announcing a
14:32policy to
14:32incentivize
14:33families to
14:34have a third
14:35child, to
14:35have a fourth
14:36child.
14:36Is that the
14:37way to go?
14:38That in
14:39states,
14:39particularly in
14:40the south,
14:40where the
14:40TFR is low,
14:42where the
14:42states have
14:43worked on it,
14:43now they're
14:44kind of focusing
14:45on bigger
14:45families?
14:50Allowing
14:51families to
14:52have more
14:53than two
14:54children is
14:56reversing the
14:58path that we
15:00have followed
15:00for the last
15:0150, 60
15:02years.
15:04We are the
15:05most populous
15:06country in the
15:07world.
15:08We have
15:08overtaken
15:09China.
15:10What is the
15:11point of adding
15:12to the
15:12population?
15:14The current
15:15TFR, or
15:16India TFR,
15:18is a little
15:18more than
15:19two.
15:20At the
15:21current TFR,
15:22and given
15:23the age of
15:23the population,
15:25this population
15:27will stabilize,
15:28according to
15:31statistics
15:32projected,
15:34this population
15:35will stabilize
15:36stabilize at
15:37about 160
15:38crore by
15:40the year
15:412050 or
15:422055.
15:44It may
15:45take a
15:46few more
15:47years,
15:49or a few
15:49less years.
15:50I'm giving
15:50a ballpark
15:53figure.
15:53It will
15:54stabilize at
15:55160 crore.
15:57Out of
15:58160 crore,
16:00there is a
16:00huge infrastructure
16:02deficit,
16:03there is a
16:04growing problem
16:06of pollution,
16:09water scarcity,
16:11land scarcity,
16:13urban land
16:14scarcity.
16:15And what
16:16is the
16:17point of
16:18proposing
16:19something which
16:20will add to
16:21the population?
16:22I mean,
16:23I think,
16:23with great
16:24respect to
16:25my friend
16:26Chandra Babu
16:27and I do,
16:28we used to
16:29call him
16:29Babu
16:30when the
16:31United Front
16:32Government,
16:33he will,
16:34I know him,
16:35he knows me,
16:36and there's
16:37no purpose
16:38at all in
16:39adding to
16:39the population
16:40of each
16:41state.
16:41It will
16:42worsen the
16:43problem.
16:43It will
16:44worsen our
16:45current
16:45problems,
16:46starting from
16:49budget
16:50allocation
16:51to
16:51climate
16:52change.
16:53The answer
16:54is not
16:55to
16:55increase
16:56the
16:57population
16:57but to
16:58stabilize
16:58the
16:59population
17:00all over
17:01India.
17:02The
17:03China
17:03adopted a
17:05three-child
17:06policy.
17:08The
17:08China
17:08adopted
17:09a
17:11program
17:12of
17:12incentives
17:13to
17:14children,
17:15to
17:15families
17:16to have
17:17more than
17:17one
17:17child.
17:18It has
17:18failed,
17:19completely
17:20failed.
17:20In the
17:21last three
17:21years,
17:22the
17:23Chinese
17:23population
17:24has
17:24declined.
17:25But that
17:26is because
17:27they
17:28continued
17:28the
17:29one-child
17:30policy
17:30for too
17:31long.
17:32The
17:32one-child
17:33policy
17:33was
17:34wrong.
17:34And I'm
17:35afraid,
17:36I say
17:36respectfully
17:37to
17:38Babu,
17:39that the
17:40three-child,
17:41four-child
17:42policy is
17:42also
17:43wrong.
17:44The
17:44two-child
17:45policy is
17:46correct.
17:46The
17:47two-child
17:47policy will
17:48stabilize
17:49the population
17:50in the
17:51short to
17:52medium
17:52term.
17:53And I
17:54don't
17:54think we
17:55should
17:55reverse
17:55the
17:56two-child
17:57policy.
17:59Okay.
18:00I appreciate
18:00you taking
18:01the time
18:01out and
18:02joining us
18:02here on
18:03India Today.
18:04Mr. Chitambra,
18:04it's always a
18:05pleasure to have
18:05you with us,
18:06sir.
18:06Thank you
18:07very much.
Comments