Exposed: Arvind Kejriwal’s lies about Gujarat SME sector


Last week Senior BJP leader Arun Jaitley remarked that if Goebbels is alive today he would be in Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). His assertion is spot on. Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister of Nazi Germany, believed that If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. Arvind Kejriwal is the modern day Joseph Goebbels. He tells big lies and keeps repeating them. Unfortunately, Indian media parrots the lies spread by Arvind Kejriwal without doing fact-check.

From the past couple of months Arvind Kejriwal has been ranting about Small-medium enterprises (SMEs) in Gujarat.  He said SMEs in Gujarat are in the pathetic state, and are closed down. He even shot an “open” letter to Narendra Modi in which he asked:

In the last 10 years almost two-third small industries have shut down in Gujarat. We found that in a small place like Mehsana alone 140 of the 187 small industrial units have shut down. under such circumstances, what is your model of development? Will you shut down all small, medium industries in the country and handover industry in the country select business houses?


He repeated the same lie in Maharashtra, Delhi, and Uttar Pradesh. He repeated it again and again in various fora. No one in the media challenged this blatant lie. Kejriwal doesn’t have even an iota of awareness of how industry actually works. He pontificated that nearly two-third of small-medium industries have shut-down in Gujarat in the last 10 years! He didn’t bother to quote his source. He even says 140 out of 187 small industrial units have shut-down in Mehsana alone. Here again he didn’t quote his source. If two-third of SMEs are really shut down then the industrial production index of Gujarat would have plummeted to abysmal levels. There would have been unprecedented recession, massive unemployment levels, chaos, and unbelievable misery in Gujarat. Even in recession hit Greece not more than 28% of SMEs were closed down. But Kejriwal has no qualms in saying that nearly 2/3 of SMEs were shutdown in Gujarat.

No doubt that Kejriwal is under delusion that the entry of Tatas, Birlas, Ambanis and Adanis in Gujarat will lead to exit of existing SMEs. By definition, if the investment in plant and machinery is less than 2 Cr, 5 Cr and 10 Cr then we call it Micro, Small,and Medium enterprises respectively. So SMEs play predominant role in sectors like food processing, pharmaceuticals, textile and garments, furniture, gems & jewellery, retail and other services. Moreover as per law certain items are reserved exclusively for small scale and cottage industries . The large scale enterprises are prohibited from manufacturing such items.

If TATA has set-up its NANO auto plant it will not harm the SMEs in anyway because No SME manufactures motor cars. TATA is not in competition with any SME in Gujarat. On the contrary, hundreds of new SMEs flourished in and around the TATA Nano factory as ancillary units which supply spare parts to Nano. Similarly, Ford, Maruti, Suzuki, GM, etc will help SMEs. The large scale industries are complementary to SMEs. If Ambanis, and Adanis develop SEZs, ports, refineries, power plants etc it will naturally help SMEs to prosper, after all, better infrastructure, logistics, electricity etc are lifeblood to the SMEs.

In 2006-07 Gujarat had around 3 lakh registered MSMEs. By 2011 it rose to over 400,000 registered SMEs employing more than 18,00,000 people. The SMEs are the backbone of Gujarat model. Gujarat contributes around 15% of operational MSMEs in India. As per ISED Small Enterprise Observatory, Gujarat stood first integrated overall performance of SMEs at the national level. According to the Fourth Census of SMEs done by Govt of India, Gujarat stands first in terms of the asset base of the SME sector. There has been a phenomenal reduction in the number of closed units from 22.04%(2001-02 3rd MSME survey) to 12.27%(2006-07 4th MSME survey). And as on 31st of March 2012 the percentage of closed SMEs came down further to just 5%.


 Arvind Kejriwal claimed 140 of 187 small units were shut down in Mehsana. He is nowhere close to the figure.  The new SMEs once start commercial production are  required to file EM-II form with DICs. As per Central Government’s MSME Annual Report 2012-13,  the growth rate of SMEs in india is 19.06% (2.37 lakh new units in 2011 to 2.82 lakh new units in 2012), while in Gujarat the growth rate in 85%!!( 27,939 new units in 2011 to 51,781 new units in 2012).

chartgo (1)

Gujarat has 83 identified SME clusters. 56.13% of SMEs are located in the clusters with an employment contribution of 48.92% The duty on electricity is waived off in these clusters if they have common power source. The Gujarat government provides cash subsidies, cheap loans, assistance for technology acquisition, patent tracking, quality up-gradation etc. A 54,000 hectare Special investment region(SIR) was already under process in Dholera area. Industrial Estates and Parks(IPs) are developed. Several Special Economic Zones(SEZ) are developed to boost the export turnover of SMEs. ( Read more: SME policy of Gujarat Government). Gujarat Government organises SME Conventions (as part of Vibrant Gujarat Summits).

In the recent Vibrant Gujarat summit (2013), Out of 17,719 investment intentions signed during the summit, 12,886 investment intentions came from the SME sector.  The MSME sector accounted for 28 percent of the Gross State Domestic Product in 2011.



Duplicity and sycophancy of the Congress

 Rahul Gandhi, the scion of Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, is the Vice President of the Congress party. The dynasty worshipers sing paeans of him even though his contribution to the party is zilch. In the Congress the sycophants compete with each other to set a new zenith. It resembles the feudal middle ages where a group of people won’t hesitate to say that the king/prince was an Indra or Chandra or Manmada even though the King/Prince was an ugly dimwit who wouldn’t have become even a watchman of the palace had he not born in the dynasty.raul milk

The primary reason for sycophancy is an inherent desire to obtain some material benefit. If sycophants are rewarded then it induces others to follow the same suit. The dynasty does exactly the same. It rewards the sycophants and crushes those who speak the truth. Merit has nothing to do in the party. The loyalty to the dynasty alone works. This has been proved on various occasions. In 2011, Amin Khan, the then Minister of Panchayati raj in Rajasthan, told party workers that their loyalty to the first family will definitely be rewarded at appropriate time. He said Pratibha Patil became President because she cooked food and washed utensils for Indira Gandhi when she was thrown out of power in 1977. Sycophancy rules the AICC meetings. The speakers invariably spend most of their talk time singing paeans to Sonia and her kids. Real issues are only secondary. Phases like “Pride of the world” and “Pride of womanhood” are lavishly used to impress the queen(Sonia).

Abhishek Singhvi went to the extent of equating Rahul Gandhi with “the divine“.  Oscar Fernandes equated Rahul Gandhi with Mahatma Gandhi. He said “Only two Gandhis are famous in the country. One is Mahatma Gandhi and the other is Rahul Gandhi . Just like Mahatma Gandhi who had toured the country before taking up his fight for independence, Rahul Gandhi is also going to the houses of Harijans and the poor, spending nights in their homes and eating with them”.  Rajya Sabha member E M Sudershan (Congress), while speaking during a discussion on the Working of the Rural Development Ministry, referred to Rahul Gandhi as a saviour of the rural poor and the downtrodden. He didn’t stop there. He said Rahul Gandhi, after his visit to Uttar Pradesh, had become a ”Yuvraj for the local poor and was being treated as a ”Yuvraj”. In spite of repeated objections from BJP the congress leader didn’t stop calling Rahul “Yuvraj“.  Almost all media channels called him “Yuvraj” or “Prince”. Dynasty channels like NDTV sycophantically promoted Rahul Gandhi on every occasion.


Narendra Modi rightly referred to Rahul Gandhi as Congress’ Shahzada. Shahzada is a Persian word meaning the son of Shah (or king) i.e. Prince.  Media went gaga over it. Congress and its media chamchas vilified Modi by saying he has reduced the public discourse to a new low by calling Rahul Shahzada. People like Barkha Dutt, Rajdeep Sardesai, Sagarika Ghose etc blamed Modi for his so-called “uncivil” language.

The hypocrites in media and congress forgot the words they used for Modi. Here are a few samples taken from Deshgujarat website:

In 2007 election rally in Gujarat Sonia Gandhi called Narendra Modi “Maut ka Saudagar“(Merchant of Death). The people of Gujarat became angry with the remark. People gave emphatic victory to Narendra Modi led BJP. The Congress got routed in the election.


In March 2012 then Congress spokesperson Manish Tiwari, a well known rabble rouser and a foul mouth, has compared Narendra Modi with Dawood Ibrahim. He also compared Gujarat’s development with Germany’s development during Nazi regime.



On  7 June, 2013 another foul mouthed Congress party leader Renuka Chaudhary described Narendra Modi as a Virus called ‘NaMo-nitis’ which is like pneumonia.



Rashid Alvi, congress spokesperson called Narendra Modi “Yamraj“!


Gujarat Congress Chief Arjun Modhwadia  in his election rally speech in October 2012 said that Modi got infected with rabies. He called Modi a monkey. Then in November in an election rally he called Modi a failed husband referring to his alleged child marriage. Later Modhwadia lost his own seat in the election!


Mani Shankar Aiyer, a shameless dynasty sycophant, is known for his arrogance.  In March 2013 he called Modi a “dirty man”. He said Modi was a snake and a scorpion. In November 2012, in an election rally he called Modi a Lahu Purush (blood man), Asatya ka saudagar(Merchant of lies).



Digvijaya Singh in November 2012 compared Modi to Ravan. He compared Modi to Hitler.



In June 2013 Salman Kurshid abused Modi as Monkey. He said just like People come to watch a monkey performing a show on the street side, people also throng to Modi’s rallies. Then in August 2013 Salman Kurshid referred Modi as Khalnayak(Villain). The very next day he called Modi a frog.



On 17 August 2013, Gulam Nabi Azad passed a casteist remark on Narendra Modi. He called Modi a “Gangu Teli”. Teli is oil presser. Modi belongs to oil presser caste. Teli community is one of the extremely backward castes in India.



In June 2013, Jairam Ramesh, an arrogant Congress Minister, called Modi “Bhasmasur” .



In July 2013, Beni Prasad Verma, an uncouth Union Minister, called Modi a “Mad dog”.

hariprasadIn 2009 AICC General Secretary B K Hari Prasad described Modi as ‘Gandi Nali ka kida

Other Congress Leaders:

In 2009 Gujarat Congress General Secretary Rizwan Usmani called Modi Badtamiz, Nalayak. He fumed “Who is your father?, Who is your mother?”

Congress Rajya Sabha MP Hussain Dalwai, speaking at a rally said “Modi is just a mouse”

Congress Rajya Sabha MP from Goa Shantaram Naik called Modi Hitler and Polpot.

Congress Party’s Bheem Afzal said “Narendra Modi was a dictator, is a dictator and will remain a dictator”.

Congress MP Soma Ganda Patel called Modi a Ganchi(oil presser caste).

When Congress leaders indulged in personal abuse neither Media nor Congress high command rebuked them. But when Modi called Rahul Gandhi “Shahzada” all hell broke loose.  Media bigwig Rajdeep Sardesai never hesitates to hurl “f” word to his critics but he found “shahzada” uncivil.

The whole issue exposes the hypocrisy and duplicity of Indian media and Congress.

Media and fake encounters

Of late there has been a lot of hullabaloo in the media about the so-called fake encounter killings. I don’t want to get into the debate of whether the fake encounter killings are justified or not. What triggered me to write this article is the way in which our media handled the Ishrat Jahan ‘fake’ encounter case.
Congress sponsored media houses like NDTV and CNN-IBN ran programmes several hours of their air time painting a negative picture of Gujarat Government in general and Narendra Modi in particular. Anyone watching those programmes will ultimately have to come to a conclusion that Gujarat government is silencing the voice of muslims by killing them in fake encounters. Out of curiosity I made a simple attempt to look into fake encounter cases in various other states. Then I stumbled on a column written by eminent columnist and Chartered Accountant S Gurumurthy in The New Indian Express. He described the facts relating to Sohrabuddin’s fake encounter case, and fake encounters in other states of india.  I am surprised to learn that Gujarat stands nowhere in the picture. During 2002-2007, 440 fake encounters are registered with Human Rights commission. Out of 440 only 5 cases pertain to Gujarat, almost the lowest in the country. Uttar Pradesh tops the list with 231 cases, followed by Rajasthan 33, Maharashtra 31, Delhi 26, Andhra Pradesh 22, Uttaranchal 19, Assam 12, Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka 10 each, Tamil Nadu 9, West Bengal 8, Bihar and Haryana 6 each. Not a single one of those cases is given any attention by the media.
Media houses made several insinuations against Modi and Amit Shah. Some sections of media, especially NDTV, tried to create an impression as if Ishrat Jahan and others were innocents, and have got killed just because they were muslims. They made several shows with cinematic background music creating a sympathy wave for the terrorists. They paraded family members of the terrorists and gave ample time to their lawyers. They tried to manipulate the public opinion by flooding one-sided stories. The trial has not even begun in the court, but the TV studios already delivered their judgement. They projected as if Police and intelligence agencies are villains and anti-muslim. Nevertheless There is a stark evidence to suggest that Ishrat Jahan has associated herself with terrorist activities. The associates of Ishrat Jahan were in touch with Muzamil, a LeT commander in Pakistan, over a satellite phone. The IB tapped the conversations, Those tapes are now available in the public domain. It clearly revealed their sinister plans. Moreover, the 26/11 conspirator David Headley has confessed before American FBI that Ishrat Jahan was indeed a Lashkar-e-Taiba operative. This further corroborates the claim of Indian Intelligence officials.
The left-liberal media never misses a chance to communalize the issue and bring in religion where it is irrelevant. It suits the congress party’s agenda very well. The so-called secular parties always want the Muslims to believe that  all the institutions like Police, IB, Army, Judiciary, Bureaucracy etc are filled with “communal” and “bigoted” Hindus who are hellbent to destroy the Muslims. They want Muslims to believe that the Congress Party alone could act as a bulwark and save them from the impending danger in hands of these “communalized” institutions.  They use media to demonize BJP and create a fear psychosis in the minds of Muslims so that Muslims would always be on their side as a permanent vote-bank. In the whole process of creating the vote bank the Congress Party and its paid-media forget the simple fact that they are destroying not only the institutions but also the very nation.

Rebuttal to Katju’s blogpost on Gujarat’s development

Yesterday, when I was casually going through my Facebook I found a post from Justice(retd) Markandey Katju about Modi and Gujarat’s development. I understood that this time it’s Modi’s turn to receive brickbats from Katju. I then clicked on the link to read his blog post. And yes, as expected by me, it was a quick attempt by Mr Katju to downplay the Gujarat’s growth story. Most of the people who read news papers regularly do not need any introduction about Mr Katju, as he is popular for his infamous 90%-Indians-are-idiots comment.

Justice(retd) Katju is currently working as Chairman, Press Council of India. He is appointed by Sonia Gandhi led UPA Government after his retirement as Judge of Supreme court of India. Apart from that, Mr Katju is also grandson of Mr Kailashnath Katju, former Congress Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh. Mr Kailashnath was also a Minister in Nehru’s Cabinet. It is not a surprise that Justice Katju too hold Nehruvian socialist-secular views. In short, he belongs to the same brigade, which believes that the Mughals were ‘seculars’ but BJP/RSS men are ‘communal’.

Mr Katju can give sanctimonious lectures on any topic under the sun — Mathematics, Sciences, History, Economics, Politics, and even Medicine. He strongly believes that 90% of Indians are fools. Reason? They believe in astrology, religion etc. I don’t have problem with Katju holding Nehruvian ideology, after all, our liberal Hindu ethos allow both atheists and theists to co-exist peacefully. But I feel that there is a need to rebut Mr Katju’s article on Gujarat’s development, as he ignored/misrepresented various facts.

I have been asked my opinion about Mr.Modi.Till now I avoided commenting on him since I thought that my views may bemisconstrued as if I wish to influence the Gujarat elections. Now that the elections are over I may speak out.”

In a society like ours, everyone has right to hold a view about anything. In case of private citizens, this is an irrefutable fact. But for those who are holding offices in bureaucray, judiciary etc, while expressing their opinions, there is a need to maintain some restraint. People – Right wing or Left wing – repose their faith in them. People expect them to be not only impartial but also appear to be impartial. Taking stand on political issues or political leaders is not wrong but announcing them publicly will do no good. If Mr.Katju really wants to comment on political issues then he should get ready to be branded as “Congress Chamcha”. Whether it is true or not is a different issue, but people in general identify his ideas with Nehruvian school of thought. So it is quite natural to identify him with Congress party in general, and Nehru dynasty in particular. His silence about Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Indira Gandhi, Scams under the nose of Manmohan Singh etc gives credence to the argument.

“The test of every system is whether the standard of living of the masses is rising or not. Modi was no doubt successful inprojecting an image of ‘Gujarat Shining’ under him. But the stark reality is very different.”

Of course, everyone agrees that the standard of living of masses is an important criterion to test the system. But what Mr.Katju missed is the fact that Mr Modi never claimed that Gujarat is fully developed. Modi always says that he is still removing pebbles and weeds of previous congress governments but his dream of building “Divya Bhavya Gujarat” is yet to be done. Modi projected what his Government has done to Gujarat. Every Government projects its rule as “golden period”. No Government projects its rule as “gloomy period”. Ultimately, people are the witness. If “stark reality” is very different, as Mr Katju says, people will never vote the government back to power. No politician can escape the anti-incumbency factor. The greatest feat of Modi is to retain Gujarat by facing election in the year of drought. Seriously, any seasoned politician can tell you how difficult it is to fight election for the incumbents in the year of drought. Drought in the election year is a curse for the incumbents and a boon for their rival parties.

“Apart from what was done to Muslims in 2002, let us consider a few facts.”

Mr Katju is completely unaware of the facts of Gujarat riots. His understanding is limited to the newspaper reports and editorials written by Anti-Modi brigade, which are starkly different from the reports of investigative agencies, judicial commissions and courts. I wonder whether Mr Katju ever spoke about what Congress did to Sikhs in 1984. As Mr Katju restrained himself from speaking about 2002 riots, i too feel it is not necessary to comment about it.

“(1) Child malnutrition at 48 % in Gujarat is higher than the national average, far higher than the poorest African Sub Saharan countries of Somalia and Ethiopia where the rate is about 33%. When Modi was confronted with this he said thatgirls in Gujarat do not eat or drink milk for fear of becoming fat, the people are vegetarians, etc which is all nonsense. Should the Gujarati children eat the factories, roads and electricity Modi has created ?”

Here Katju conveniently ignored to mention several important things. What is India’s malnutrition figure? Who has done this survey? And more importantly, when was the survey done? Katju never mentions those things, as mentioning them will only debunk his claims. Now let me reveal some interesting things about this so called “malnutrition”.

This figure is from NFHS-III. It was done in the year 2005. i.e. almost 7 years ago. The next round of survey is due in 2013-14. I don’t know how far the survey that was done in 2005 could be used as an index for measuring Modi Government’s performance in Gujarat in the year 2012. Also Mr Katju didn’t even bother to check out the initiatives taken by Modi government during 2005-13 in health sector and the achievements and improvements brought in by Modi’s Govt. One more important thing Katju misses (or hides?) here is the malnutrition figure of India. The malnutrition figure of India is 47%. (only 1% less than Gujarat). I wonder whether Katju questions Manmohan Singh and Congress Government for this dismal figue. After all, it is Central Govt which formulates plans and allocates funds for health schemes like ICDS. Modi started working on it from 2005. He alerted the central government to come up with a comprehensive plan.

Gujarat’s focus on social sector began in 11th plan period (2007-12). In 2007, Gujarat Govt introduced “Bal-Bhog” scheme, to address the micro-nutrient malnutrition Dudh Sanjeevani Yojana– The scheme provides 100 ml pasteurized, flavored, fortified milk twice a week to the children in the age group of 3 to 6 years in 10 backward blocks of 6 districts. There is another scheme for providing fruits to the children of anganwadi. Apart from these, there are selected area activity schemes and nutrition programmes like Vanbandhu Kalyan Yojna, Saheri Garib Samruddhi Yojana, Sagarkhedu Sarvangi Vikas Yojana etc. There are predetermined targets at the time of releasing funds. So performance of Modi should be assessed based on what he has done and what his achievements are with respect to targets.

Ok. Leaving aside what Modi Govt has done to tackle the Malnutrition issue, who is basically responsible for malnutrition in India? I say people like katju are responsible for malnutrition in India. Katju contemptuously questioned “Should children eat factories, roads, and electricity Modi has created?”. “Omniscient” Katju is under belief that malnutrition in India is because of food insecurity. Not only Katju, but also almost all those socialist types who ruled India since independence were under the same delusion that lack of money to buy food (or non-availability of food) is the primary reason for malnutrition. This whole idea of ‘food insecurity’ as a reason for malnutrition came up because of Sub-Sahara African experience. India has been implementing ICDS since 1975. Katju type of people who were in bureaucracy during socialist days have thought that food insecurity and poverty were the main reasons for malnutrition. Hence they concentrated only on food distribution schemes to below poverty line people. Therefore the response to malnutrition in India has been skewed towards food-based interventions and has placed little emphasis on schemes addressing the other determinants of malnutrition. e.g. improving child-care behaviors and educating parents how to improve nutrition using the family food budget.

“Omniscient” Katju rubbished altogether Modi’s point that vegetarianism might be the reason. But the fact is that there are some scientific studies which confirm that vegetarianism may lead to subclinical malnutrition. However some people try to argue that protein rich food can be made available to vegetarians in form of soyabeans etc. But the question is how many vegetarians include such items in their diet? Even comparison between two vegetarian states is not proper because a Gujarati’s everyday vegetarian meal is different from a Punjabi’s everyday Vegetarian meal. “Nutrition” Journal carried an article in its February 2012 issue (Vol 28, Issue 2, Pages 148 -155). It was a research paper which concluded that Vegetarianism can cause subclinical malnutrition.


In a socialist country like India, we crave for political correctness. The Nehruvian socialistic society worships poverty. We try to attribute every problem of life to economic inequality. We cheat ourselves saying repeatedly that problems are only for those who are poor and there shall be no problems for those who are rich. The same is the case with malnutrition. The socialists are first in queue to blame economic inequality or distributional inequality for malnutrition. Standing for the poor is a kind of heroic act everybody craves for. People who are rubbishing Gujarat Chief Minister will never tell the exact reasons for malnutrition or give any constructive suggestion to eliminate it. If we confront the socialists they say the routine socialist balderdash that Government failed to take care of the poor and hence malnutrition. When Modi said middle class women are not health conscious and they are not giving same level of importance to health as they give to keep their beauty, almost all his rivals swarmed him and blasted with all kinds of abuses. But they never bothered to look into the facts. If you see NFHS-III it can be understood that nearly 55.3% of women in Gujarat state are having anemia. Now socialists will try to project as if these women were poor and were not having money to buy nutritious and iron rich food. The statistics also reveal the wealth Index of those women who were surveyed. An interesting point that is to be mentioned here is that anemia is prevalent in all the five levels of wealth index (lowest, second, third, fourth and highest). Nearly 47.9% of women (of Highest wealth index) are having anemia. If poverty and insufficiency of food are the primary reasons, then how come women belonging to highest wealth index are anemic?

Similarly, If we see food habits, Gujarat, despite being the largest milk producer in India, only 54.6% of women in Gujarat have milk or curd on daily basis. 11.6% of women in Gujarat never drink milk (In Kerala it is 11.2%). But Gujartis are mostly Vegetarian. 69.8% of women never eat fish/chicken/meat and only 2.5% of women eat fish/chicken/meat on daily basis. In case of Kerala, it is exact contrary. 65.8% of Keralite women eat fish/chicken/meat on daily basis and only 3.3% of women never eat fish/meat/chicken. It can be argued that sufficient iron can be obtained by vegetarians even by eating vegetarian food like soyabeans, pumpkin, beans, spinach, broccoli, apricots etc. But the question is how many would like to include them in their traditional everyday meal.

Actually there are many myths about malnutrition in India. Most people think that it has something to do with starvation. But the fact is completely different. Between 6-18 months, food availability within the household is usually not the critical factor causing malnutrition. It is more often inadequate knowledge about feeding practices that are best interests of the child. As A.K Shiva Kumar writes, “The denial of as little as 200-300 calories in a young child’s daily diet is what makes the difference between the normal growth and the faltering that starts the descent towards illness and death. Another myth spread by people is that poverty causes malnutrition. Most Sub-Saharan countries report higher levels of poverty than India even though levels of child malnutrition in India are consistently higher. WHO has fixed a common anthropometric standard. It was imposed on us without proper study about sub-continent growth patterns. Arvind Pannagariya, Chief Economist to ADB and Professor of economics, Columbia University says to Tehelka, ” WHO et al have bulldozed us into believing that a single standard is scientifically right. Remember that all this ultimately ties into the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), which has behind it a huge lobby of very powerful international organisations, academics, NGOs and journalists. Without this common standard, it would be very difficult to assess progress on the MDGs. This is perhaps one reason that everyone has played along without asking tough questions. The belief is so deep-seated, especially in Delhi, that they refuse to see the obvious”.

“(2) The infant mortality rate in Gujarat is 48 per thousand, which is the 10th worst in India”

I don’t know way Katju quotes old statistics. This figure of 48 was in 2009. Moreover, it is improper to take absolute figures to assess Modi. No person can bring down the infant mortality to “Zero” in a one or two terms of government. We have to see the infant mortality of the previous years. It is also required to see the targets fixed by Central Government. As per Planning Commission data, the Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) of Gujarat came down significantly from 50 in 2008 to 41 in 2011. The aim is to achieve Millennium Development Goal (MDG) target of 27 by 2015. “10th worst in India” is a bit misleading. Gujarat’s IMR is better than India’s. If ranking alone determines the status then we have to reconsider many of our notions. For example As per 2012 CIA world fact book, USA ranks 50 in terms of IMR i.e. there are 49 countries which performed better than USA. Countries like Bermuda, Macau, Cuba are ahead of USA. Now does that mean USA is not developed? Similarly, Sri Lanka ranks 77 and China ranks 114. Does that mean Sri Lanka is well developed than China?

“(3) More than a third of Gujarat’s adult men have a body mass index of less than 18.5, the 7th worst in India. “

This is too lame argument. These kind of metrics are genetical and reflections of distant past. I don’t understand how can it be used to write off the performance of Modi’s government.

“(4) Gujarat has a high maternal mortality rate.”

Here also Katju used a vague argument. Gujarat’s MMR is 148 during 2007-09. For the same period, India’s average MMR is 212.

“5) Education, health and income levels in Gujarat place it after 8 other Indian states.”

Absolute figures are not to be used to assess the performance of any Govt. The performance has to be assessed basing on what is achieved. The Gujarat state’s literacy rate saw a 10.17% growth. There are 79.31% literates in the state, which is higher than the national rate that stood at 74.04%. The significant achievement of Modi govt is girl child education. The gap of literacy between males and females was very high in 2001, the 2011 data revealed that it has narrowed down. In 2001, the male literacy rate was 79.66% while for females it was 57.8%. This saw an increase in 2011. Literacy rate for males had gone up to 87.23% while for females it was 70.73%.

“(6) rural poverty is 51% in Gujarat, 57% among STs, 49% among STs, and 42% among OBCs.”

This is really misleading. I don’t know from where Katju got them. He didn’t even reveal his source. If we see Planning Commission data, it is very much evident that Gujarat has brought down rural poverty figures significantly. During 2004-05 the rural poverty was 39.1% but in 2009-10, the poverty came down significantly to 26.7%. This is mainly due to trickle down effect. The success story of reduction in rural poverty figures in Gujarat is lauded by many economists as well.

“No doubt Modi has given huge concessions to big industrial houses, giving them cheap electricity, land, etc and has built roads, etc. But what about the standard of living of the masses ? The figures given above paint a totally different picture.”

The standard of living of masses will surely improve because of development. The increase of wealth will gradually help the poorest. This is called trickle down effect. Industrialization and standard of living go hand in hand. see any industrialized country and the standard of living of its masses. Gujarat state govt provides opportunities to grow. Gujarat has least unemployment rate in the country. Rapid industrialization and infrastructural investments will eventually raise the standard of living of the masses. Mere distribution of freebies will not bring improvement in the life of the masses. Asset creation, wealth creation and capital investments will benefit not only the present generation but also the future generations.

“I am sure the people of Gujarat will one day learn the truth”

This statement of Katju is the hallmark of Nehruvian snobbishness. People of Gujarat are not fools to vote for Modi in spite of whole media working against him. They are the ones who enjoy the fruits of development. 24/7 power supply, good roads, employment opportunity, excellent law and order, No haftas or extortions, better health services, 10% agri growth etc, are provided by incorruptible Modi. What more reasons do Gujaratis need to vote for Modi?

Malign Modi Campaign – Version 2.0

It is a well-known fact that the Anti-Modi brigade in Media never misses a chance to malign Modi by cooking up fake data, and spreading concocted stories about Godhra riots of 2002 and thereby create a feeling of hatred against Modi in the psyche of gullible readers who are ignorant of the facts and depend entirely on the stories disseminated by the biased media houses. Worst of all, most of the casual readers did not even know the political agenda of media houses behind publishing ‘opinions’ in the name of ‘facts’. Thanks to internet. Now a days there is a tremendous change in the way in which people perceive these Media houses. People are slowly realizing the truth about media houses and the ‘fiction’ spread by them in the name ‘facts’. After the Supreme Court appointed SIT gave clean chit to Mr Narendra Modi, the anti-Modi brigade lost its ground completely. Now there are no takers for their fiction. The anti-Modi brigade failed to secure even prima facie evidence to file a FIR and prosecute Modi for his alleged role in Gujarat riots, forget sufficient evidence that is required for conviction. The more they talked about the role of Modi in Gujarat riots, the more stupid they appeared to the public. Meanwhile, Modi dedicated himself to the cause of Gujarat’s development by working tirelessly and by providing good governance to the people of Gujarat. Modi got recognition for being incorruptible, honest and able administrator. Naturally, under the visionary leadership of an able and incorruptible administrator like Mr. Modi, Gujarat outperformed several states in India and even started competing with Chinese Provinces. The people of Gujarat repeatedly voted for Mr Modi, in spite of mud-slinging and calumny by Media for the past 10 years.

Now it seems like anti-Modi brigade changed their strategy. Of late, Everyone in anti-Modi brigade turned into an “expert” in econometrics. Earlier, when they wrote about 2002 riots, they behaved like “eminent” Jurists. They declared Modi as guilty even before trial, such was their juristic expertise. Now, they changed their avatars from ‘Jurists’ to ‘Economists’. They started interpreting ‘chosen’ statistics to show Gujarat’s development in poor light with a diabolical intent to ‘prove’ that Modi is not so efficient administrator.

Yesterday when i was casually going through the timeline on Twitter i saw a tweet, where I found a link to an article on Not a surprise, as Gujarat elections are approaching, I found a senseless article by two women(?) named Sonali Ranade
and Shaelja Sharma, on Narendra Modi. This time it is not about Godhra 2002, perhaps they ran out of cooked up stories, but about Narendra Modi’s image as Vikas Purush. The citation mentioned that one of the authors, Sonali Ranade is a trader in international market, without disclosing the nature of commodities traded by her(?). Ok. Now coming to the article, the main intention of the authors is to prove that Modi has no role in Gujarat’s development and Gujarat has always been a developed state even before Modi taking over as Chief Minister of the state in Oct 2001. The authors ostensibly wanted to attribute the development of Gujarat, if any, to the innate entrepreneurial skills of Gujaratis.

The spin doctors of anti-Modi brigade (Sonali Ranade and Shaelja Sharma) “used” the data of Planning Commission to “prove” their hypothesis. But there are several inconsistencies and blunders in their selection and interpretation of data.

Firstly, the authors presented Growth rates pertaining to three different time blocks (1980-81 to 1990-91; 1990-91 to 1997-98 and 2002-03 to 2011-12) for five states namely Guj, MH, TN, KTK, and AP. The authors claimed that the rationale behind using three time-blocks is to segregate the timeline into three periods, namely, Pre-reforms period (1980-81 to 1990-91), Post-reforms (Without Modi) period  i.e, 1990-91 to 1997-98 and Post-reforms (With Modi) period  i.e, 2002-03 to 2011-12. Under these three time blocks, they have presented some figures, which they claimed to have taken straight from planning commission for the first two time-blocks, and for the third time block, they computed the CAGR on their own basing on the available data with Planning commission.

Here is the data presented by those authors in their rediff article:

Rates of Growth of gross GDP:
State 80/81 to 90/91 90/91 to 97/98 02/03 to 11/12
Gujarat 5.08 9.57 10.28
Maharashtra 6.02 8.01 9.90
Tamil Nadu 5.38 6.22 8.92
Karnataka 5.29 5.29 8.39
Andhra 5.65 5.03 8.23

From the above data, the authors, basing on the difference in basis points between Pre-Modi period and Modi Period, pontificated that Modi did little to improve the GDP of Gujarat when compared to the leaders of other states. They concluded that the other states performed better than Gujarat. Hence Modi’s claim of fastest growing state is a myth.

Here I would like to draw the attention of the readers to the intention of the spin doctors behind omitting the period beginning from 1998-99 to 2000-01 from the second time block (Post-reforms but Pre-Modi) without stating any reason. Was that because it won’t suit their agenda? exactly.

The reforms began during the Financial Year (FY) 1991-92 . Also the benefits of reforms could not be reaped from the day one. The results of liberalizaton like removal of restrictions on licences, quotas and permits will yield monetary benefits only after a gestation period of a year or two from the time of liberalization. So it is logical to assume that the monetary benefits of liberalization began from 1993 on wards.

So let us reconstruct the three different time blocks:

1) 1981-82 to 1993-94 (Pre liberalization period)
2) 1993-94 to 2000-01 (Post liberalization period without Modi)
3) 2002-03 to 2011-12 (Post liberalization period with Modi)

* 2001-02 is not considered in any of the time blocks as Gujarat’s economy faced a lot of problems throughout the year like clumsy handling of post-earthquake rehabilitation, political inconsistency, regime change, WTC collapse and reduction in export sales, Godhra riots etc.

Now let us take data pertaining to the first two periods straight from Planning Commission’s website. {Page 123 } and the growth rate of the last block as computed by rediff authors basing on planning commission data.

Rates of Growth of gross GDP:
State 81/82 to 93/94 93/94 to 00/01 02/03 to 11/12
Gujarat 5.13 6.16 10.28
Maharashtra 6.57 5.92 9.90
Tamil Nadu 5.51 6.23 8.92
Karnataka 5.61 8.24 8.39
Andhra Pradesh 5.75 5.46 8.23

From the above data it is very clear that Gujarat’s growth rate has increased by 4.12% from 6.16% to 10.28% during Modi’s tenure. While the growth rates of Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh increased by 3.98%, 2.69%, 0.15% and 2.77% respectively.

From the above data one can say that the benefit of reforms were truly enjoyed by states like Karnataka, While the states like Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh have performed adversely during post-reforms period. There is only a marginal improvement in growth rates of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu due to reforms. Hence the claim of spin doctors that Gujarat’s Growth rate is only due to 1991 reforms but not because of Modi’s administration is proven false.

Secondly, After goofing up with growth rates, the authors presented figures pertaining to the percentage of people below poverty line (based on Suresh Tendulkar methodology) in the five states for two different periods (2004-05 and 2009-10). They presented the difference between those two years as ‘reduction’. The authors said that the states do not either fund or decide on the total money to be allocated to poverty alleviation. They merely implement centrally sponsored and funded schemes so the differences in poverty alleviation rates do not reflect priority given to poverty alleviation but mere administrative efficiency.

Here is how the authors presented it:

State Total poor 04/05 Total poor 09/10 Reduction
Gujarat 31.60pc 23.00pc 8.60pc
Maharashtra 38.20pc 24.50pc 13.70pc
Tamil Nadu 29.40pc 17.10pc 12.30pc
Karnataka 33.30pc 23.60pc 9.70pc
Andhra 29.60pc 21.10pc 8.50pc

From the above data, basing on the reduction, they concluded that Narendra Modi’s administrative efficiency is not up to the mark as he reduced only 8.6% while the reduction percentages of other states (MH, KTK, TN) are higher.

The authors misunderstood the concept of efficiency with gross amount of achievement. Just like Production is different from Productivity, efficiency is different from gross achievement. For example, Central Govt gave Rs 1 Cr to reduce poverty to ‘X’ State, and the State utilized the money and reduced the percentage of people below poverty from 20% to 10%. Similarly, the Central Govt gave Rs 1.5 Cr to ‘Y’ state, identical to ‘X’ state, to reduce poverty. State ‘Y’ reduced the poverty from 20% to 9%. Now if we go by gross figures alone then state ‘Y’ performed well as it reduced 11%, while state ‘X’ was able to reduce only 10%. But truly speaking, it is incorrect to say that State ‘X’ was inefficient, as it used less money when compared to ‘Y’ state.

Similarly, before accusing Modi as ‘not so efficient’ for failing to reduce poverty like other states, the authors should have revealed the amount allocated by Central Government to the States for poverty alleviation along with the number of people below poverty line. It is also necessary to look into the targets set by Central Government while allocating those funds. The efficiency of Modi can be determined only on the basis of the ability of his Government in reaching the set targets. It is a well-known fact that the allocation of money by central government is not same for all the states. Hence it is foolish to conclude about ‘efficiency’ without taking into account the actual amount of central allocations made under various poverty alleviation schemes and the corresponding targets set by Central government to the states. Nevertheless, all these key factors didn’t deter these prejudiced spin doctors from declaring Modi as no so efficient.

Also the authors have committed an unpardonable mistake, ignorantly or intentionally, by conveniently hiding the fact that Suresh Tendulkar methodology follows different poverty line for each state. So it is not proper to compare the percentage of people below poverty line between two states as the yard sticks used for two states are different.

For example, the poverty line of Tamil Nadu is Rural Rs 639.0 / Urban-Rs 800.8 per month. Hence the percentage of people below the line will be obviously lower. Similarly if we increase the line then more number of people will fall within the ambit of Poverty and hence the percentage of people below poverty line will he higher. That is what happened to Gujarat. The poverty line for Gujarat is Rural Rs 725.9 / Urban Rs 951.4 per month. Hence, the number of people within the poverty line is more when compared to other states.

The following are the poverty lines of five states. (Source: Planning Commission )

State Rural Poverty line Urban poverty line
Gujarat 725.9 951.4
Maharashtra 743.7 961.1
Tamil Nadu 639.0 800.8
Karnataka 629.4 908.0
Andhra pradesh 693.8 926.4

Finally, The authors of the rediff article declared that the Gujarat’s development claims are just PR propaganda. But I wonder why not other states engage the same PR personnel/firm? Is that because they lack money or because they are ‘saints’ bound by moral principles unlike ‘evil’ Modi? No democratic state can run successfully for 10 years with just PR propaganda. The corporate houses, which are queueing up to invest in Gujarat, are not fools to fall prey to sarkari PR propaganda. If Gujarat Govt fails to deliver then they won’t stay there even for a single minute. They are businessmen and they knew about marketing and propaganda much more than the sarkari babus in Gujarat Govt. So it is utterly risible and foolish to think that Gujarat Govt thrives on PR propaganda. The whole media is against Modi and spews venom upon Gujarat, in general, and Modi, in particular. No person got vilified by media as much as Modi in the indian political history. It is not PR but P(Public) which is behind Modi.