By Paul Lyngdoh
The on-going debate on the desirability or otherwise of Meghalaya opting for rail connectivity was sparked off by a casual remark I made to a local editor of a vernacular daily when asked whether I would consider railways as an option for Meghalaya in view of the spiraling cost of fuel , especially petrol. My answer was clear: while passenger trains to Byrnihat and beyond will only add to the pressure of unchecked infiltration, more particularly the movement of cheap labour (a phenomenon we share with the rest of the North-east), I made a fine distinction as far as freight or goods trains go. I said- and still maintain- that I see no way out for a landlocked state with limited connectivity like ours but to explore the option of such freight trains in the near future.
I very well knew the pitfalls of speaking up (even casually) on a matter perceived to be as sensitive as the railways, and holding contrarian views to the prevalent, popular opinion. But are leaders supposed to be guided by the herd instinct always? Bertrand Russell, whose “The Conquest of Happiness” provided delectable food for thought during my college days, pointed out that one of the many factors responsible for a person’s unhappiness is the fear of public opinion. The fear of being hurt due to non-conformity can have a debilitating effect on a person’s choice to act freely, exercise his sense of judgment and stymie his moral and intellectual growth, says Russell. I recall a poster I had on my wall during my KSU days which says, “What is right is not always popular. What is popular is not always right”.
To be candid, I see a very tenuous link between influx and the introduction of goods trains( For heaven’s sake, please don’t commit the folly of mixing them up with passenger trains. Goods trains, also known as freight trains, carry goods or cargo. On the other hand, passenger trains carry travellers !). I believe the KSU-sponsored agitation on the issue in the 1980s (it never cropped up during the 1990s, contrary to some theory in this regard ) had to do with the fear that passenger trains would facilitate the smooth and hassle-free movement of hundreds of passengers commuting by trains on a daily basis, thereby rendering Meghalaya doubly vulnerable to being swamped by outsiders. It is another matter that the inflow of migrant labourers- the major contributory factor to the phenomenon of large-scale influx into Meghalaya- has seen an upward surge in the last three decades since despite the total absence of rail-links .
. The reasons are not difficult to identify: the weak socio-cultural structure of the local indigenous communities, the inability to rein in the mining and industrial lobby due to the laissez-faire system of land tenure and the economic and political clout of these moneybags, the weak application (if not total non-application) of laws aimed at strengthening the social fabric of tribal communities, the prevalent attitude towards work culture and manual labour in particular, among others. If laws alone are sufficient to safeguard Meghalaya’s indigenous population, we have little to fear. But the reality is otherwise. We have the Land Transfer Act in place, but cases of its circumvention and dilution are galore. We have the Benami Act , but Benami transactions are thriving under our very noses! We have traditional institutions and Dorbars, but as recently as last week there were reports of a particular Syiem Raid disposing off ancestral landed property to a non-indigenous entity. Man does not live by bread alone. Likewise, a people does not live by laws alone. It requires vision, wisdom and robust moral fibres to keep a people from losing track on its onward march ahead. Else it is doomed to perish.
To come back to the goods train issue, I see at least a few distinct merits in the proposition. One, the rising cost index of essential items (with Meghalaya topping the list in the country, as per reports in The Shillong Times last week) needs to be tackled head on. The possibility of doing so will rise dramatically if goods trains are introduced. Two, the probability of unauthorized / illegal persons entering the state will stand drastically reduced once the number of goods-carrying trucks is minimized (it is a known fact that a good number of labourers are ferried across the state through this mode of transport). Three, good trains are known to be fuel-efficient (running over 400 miles on a gallon of fuel) and environment-friendly. I am no expert on the subject, so let me quote liberally from a well-researched article by S.E. Smith, an authority on the subject: (available on www. wisegeek.com ):
“People have been using freight trains for cargo ever since the train was invented.Trains have a number of advantages when it comes to shipping cargo, including the capability of pulling a very heavy load with a surprisingly low use of energy. A single powerful locomotive can pull a very long train of freight cars, with some companies using multiple locomotives in what is known as a locomotive assist. Locomotive assists are used for extremely long freight trains to ensure that the train has enough power to get over steep hills…The energy efficiency of using a freight train also became a selling point in the early twenty-first century when many companies wanted to engage in more environmentally-responsible business practices and the cost of fuel began to rise radically making energy efficiency appealingly cheap as well as environmentally sound.”
Finally, but most crucially, is the fact that our truck-choked roads and highways badly need a respite fom the chaotic, ecologically disastrous scenario we are now too familiar with. Traffic jams lasting for several hours apart (which have even claimed human lives), what rights do truckers have to endanger our lives and health through noxious fumes, noise pollution, rash and drunken driving? Should we not opt for something safer, more eco-friendly and more economical? The following excerpts from the article are more revealing:
“ Large volumes of goods can be transported on long distances quickly and with minimum impact on the environment. Compared with automobile or air transport, rail transport produces the lowest amount of emissions and requires much lower cost on regeneration to damaged environment. From the total amount of reduction of negative impacts of transport industry on environment, only 8 % comes from rail transport, while upto 90% comes from road transport, even though its traffic performance is 50% lower than the performance of railway transport”.
According to Wikipedia, the relative advantage of freight trains over trucks is obvious: “Economics of scale are achieved because LESS labour and energy is required to haul the same amount of cargo”.
On the larger question of influx, I have repeated myself ad nauseam on the need to adopt an efficacious mechanism wherein the inflow of the labour force is regulated, monitored and streamlined. Time for delivery and results is long over-due because the state cannot afford to deny to itself the much needed stimulus for growth by remaining stuck- and failing to resolve- a singular issue of immense importance for more than three decades. I am happy to have been instrumental in pushing the issue of labour permits forward. There are adequate safeguards in-built in the Inter-state Migrant Workmen Act, but it requires political will and strict enforcement for the Act to have any tangible effect at the ground level. Sadly, that is our Achilles heel both as a political class and as a community.
Let us be clear of one thing: the issue of unchecked influx needs to be addressed adequately, with or without the railhead project. In fact, to go a step further, this is not an either/ or proposition. It is not a choice between the railhead project and the control of influx. We need both, and the success of the former is contingent upon popular perceptions on what the state would do on the latter. What is preventing the state Govt. from enforcing the work permit system and the three-tier card system to a degree that convinces people of both their efficacy and the sincerity of the Govt.? why should development and demographic balance not go hand in hand? It should take not more than six months before a foolproof immigration policy is put in place; it will take at least six years for the goods train service to have any signs of visibility on the ground!
To me- and I believe to all budding, young leaders- leadership is about infusing dynamism, change and growth. Of course, we need strong fundamental s and principles to steer us through the challenges we encounter as we discharge our responsibilities.But fear we must not, for the only thing to fear is fear itself. As a state and its stakeholders, we need to objectively analyse any given situation and, based on sound and unbiased inputs, we should rationally take decisions. If all we do is to be guided by populist considerations and the herd instinct, then we are guilty of allowing the led- who have mandated us to lead them – to lead us instead. There can be no worse dereliction of duty than that.
