2024 Lok Sabha Elections Exit Polls & Results

[Deans]

^^Deansji:
Cost Overruns for Roads and Highways are less as compared to Railway, NPCIL, Hydro and Waterway Projects.
NHAI's debt are increased as No Budgetary Support was provided to them and were raising money from Bonds.
Also they Land Acquisition costs are also increased 8 folds and thanks to UPA II for making that change and NDA has to go with it.

Please refer this for Govts plan wrt to NHAI - https://www.livemint.com/news/india/cen ... 55346.html

NHAI is not allocating the tenders till required land is acquired. It may have reduced the cost overruns for them, which is not in the case of Railways.
I think in case of Railways, there should be different entities for operations and building the infrastructure. Just like DFCs operations.

Coming to Basu and Dalal, they are hand in gloves with Khan market cabal and not 100% impartial.

As a % of total cost it is correct that road project overruns are lower, but in absolute terms they are high.
NHAI has increasingly gone in for bonds, because there is a limit to Budget support that was around 165000 crore last year. That's a lot of money
(which crowds out other demands for money) but should have been enough if there were no overruns. GoI has realized this belatedly which is why
they are talking about asset monetization of PSUs (of which hardly anything has happened), for NHAI to generate revenue and repay bonds.

If land acquisition cost is known (as it should) there should be no cost overruns. Acquisition is 20% of project cost.
In fact, highway construction under NDA increased sharply, because people were much more willing to part with land, since compensation
was higher (slightly less than double the compensation per acre, compared to UPA, not 8 fold).
Some of the increase was inflation, but the holder of land gained by selling.

There are both time and cost overruns. Till 2019 end (after that covid delayed projects) 35% of road projects has time overruns,
27% cost overrun and 19% time and cost overrun.

I have followed Basu-Dalal since the 90s and they have been scathing on all govts if they see inefficiency. In any case, Swarajya makes the
same points.

[Deans]

^^Deansji
If the two biggest overruns are Road and Rail projects:
As a Mango-man to me it suggests : main factor Land or green clearance for Land based project!
or is it the natural calamity(a la Hand of God)
If its Land then is it related to acquisition of Land or is it the NGO's or interested parties going to court and getting a stay!
Because the overruns are a general malaise what is the answer for this
How can governments overcome this issue??

I don't have the answer. Ultimately the bureaucrats who have to deliver, are the same, between UPA and NDA.
If there are going to be overruns, perhaps the answer is not to overpromise, or allot more funds for `leaking' projects at the expense
of rural schemes.
Consider railways; I think Ashwini Vaishnav is probably the world's most qualified railway minister.
However, a disproportionate share of his tweets and insta posts are on Vande Bharat trains, as if a key factor for voters are how many such
trains there are. I understand modernization is important, though the pace has meant we imported steel for tracks and wheels from China,
as we could not develop local capacity fast enough. Should be it at cost of over Rs 240,000 crore in time and cost overruns ?

There's a bit more to delays than inefficiency. The problem is often not land acquisition, but WHICH land to acquire. Politicians buy the land in
advance and then sell it to the developer. So highway routes get modified, or airport plans change.

Railway projects:
My biggest peeve is the delay in connecting the railway upto Srinagar. It was delayed 10 years in 2014 and the delay is now 20 years.
More than anything else this project can transform Kashmir (increasing the capacity of tourist flows 10X compared to air traffic, which is the
only convenient way for tourists to reach Srinagar now. Earlier the State govt was blamed, but since 2017 there has been central rule,
no Article 370 and no attacks on construction workers. What should have been a project of the greatest national importance, is now just one of the
300+ delayed railway projects.

Khurda Road - Bolagjir (Odisha). Delayed for 18 years due to litigation and forest dept / environment permissions (for which the UPA minister
at the time was blamed).

Lalitpur-Satna-Rewa-Singrauli. Railways does not provide a reason for the 17 year delay. The project is almost entirely in MP (BJP state
and land is acquired).

Kotlpalli-Narsarpur (Andhra). Delayed for 18 years, as the AP govt (both CBN and Jagan) have not acquired half the land, because the AP
govt had and has no funds - a minor detail left out when planning the project.

[Deans]

There's a related point on Infrastructure, which may provide a clue as to what went wrong in the election.
This concerns Civil Aviation, which I have worked in (UPA time) and has no cost/time delays.

One of the NDA achievements, as per some of the pre election ads and social media memes was that 72 new airports were opened.
The cost to the govt was around 90000 cr.
In almost all these airports, there are only 3 possible destinations to fly to;
- Delhi, Mumbai & The State capital - if the capital is further enough from the airport.

Delhi and Mumbai are too saturated to accept any traffic from a new airport.
The State capital is too close in many cases. So, many of the airports are non starters.
As an airline rep, back in 2011, I have said in meetings at the DGCA advising against increasing airports for this reason.
As an example in my State, Karnataka Mysore airport has no flight to Bangalore, because road and rail connectivity is fast.
Mysore, which is a city of over a million and had its airport built in 1940, has flights only to Chennai and Hyderabad.

Not all the airports operational even in 2014 (94, and not the lower figure the govt claimed) are viable in 2024.
The 100th airport opened, Pakyong in Sikkim is a classic example.
It was opened hastily to accommodate the PM's visit, where he inaugurated it.
Only 1 flight - a ATR from Kolkata operated to Pakyong. It was soon stopped because poor visibility and weather on many days made
it dangerous. Then the edge of the airstrip caved in, making it non operational.

For a fraction of the cost of 72 new airports, if we install night landing facilities in all airports, lengthen some airstrips, have
ILS to operate in foggy conditions we can boost traffic to existing airports, save fuel and improve airline profitability from higher
capacity utilization.
Phuket and Maldives each have 10 times (at a min) the number of tourists coming to the Andamans, because their airports
(like Port Blair, 1 runway on an island) can operate 24 hours and take large aircraft.

In all fairness, 15 of the 72 airports were authorized in UPA time. Earlier, Latur and Baramati airports were built for Shivraj Patil
and Sharad Pawar. Kingfisher agreed to fly there for obvious reasons.
Politicians like new airports because airports are sexy. They can buy up the land near the airport.
There is money to be made in construction (which is why roofs collapse). Private jets for the local MP or local industrialist can use it.
The IAF base at Jamnagar is like the private airport of the Ambanis.

Private companies won't bid to run these new airports (unless its a reverse bid, or they get real estate rights, as they know it is unviable, but the govt can hide the cost by putting it under AAI.

I had a feeling of disquiet even in the run up to the election, with the hype around how many Vande Bharat trains started, airports opened and
miles of highways built, but a lot of defensiveness around MGNERGA or jobs.

[arshyam]

@Deans sir, the biggest factor with land acquisition is not the money, but the will to actually acquire the land. This contributes to most of the delays and cost escalations. Since the land itself becomes valuable due to the proposed project, the market value of the land increases, and the delay helps the land owners who demand more compensation, which overshoots the initial budget allocated for land acquisition. So cost escalates. This is a vicious cycle that keeps feeding on itself and aided by local politicians who usually buy up land around any upcoming project to make a killing. A delay is a good thing for them as they'll get an even better value for their land, never mind the costs.

Not to mention the whole land aquisition process has to be fully handled by the state, whose administration may not always be aligned with the centre, and even if they are, politically, it may not be the case at the bureaucratic level.

I see this in multiple projects in TN and KA, though the past BJP govt in KA made a difference that they eventually completed a few projects like the Mysore expressway and the land aquisition for the STRR, Bangalore-Chennai expressway, etc. But there are still challenges - the PRR was abandoned by the NHAI after prolonged delays and the BDA has made zero progress since. In TN, the state govt has a deliberate unspoken policy to not cooperate with central projects so that they can blame Modi for not completing it - the existing NH46 between Ranipet and Chennai is a case in point - it's been under expansion for almost a decade now with completion nowhere in sight. The re-tendered Chennai port-Madurvoyal elevated corridor is again headed toward a deadlock due to some "objections" raised by the state's PWD. Such "initiatives" also force contractors to abandon work as they don't get paid without meeting goals, and then the project goes for re-tendering with even most cost estimates.

If we want to truly make a difference to the cost overrun issue, this entire setup needs to be reworked, maybe even grant powers to the centre to directly work with the district administration for centrally funded projects. But implementation would remain messy since the collectors and the entire machinery would still be employees of the state and they may be forced to toe the state's line. Not mention the implications of such a policy change when the shoe is on the other foot with a UPA govt at the centre.

Ultimately, the people will have to demand accountability for completing development projects and case their vote accordingly. The 2024 elections proved that they are quite far from that mindset and still swayed by freebies and random pie-in-the-sky promises, and their ignorance of how things gets done is played by the politicians to get votes.

[nandakumar]

The problem with newer airports is this. They can never be the originating point for long distance destinations (distances upwards of 500 kms). The traffic simply does not exist. The air travel for distance upto 500 kms too is not viable as it takes a minimum of 6 hours. A journey such as Chennai-Bangeluru can be completed in the same time at half the cost. The railway stations are more centrally located compared to airports constructed in the last 20 years.
Unfortunately doubling and trebling railway lines is problematic. There is land acquisition, EIA etc is horrendously difficult. On the other hand with a permissible fiscal deficit of 5% of nominal GDP the Government has a lots of spending cash. So what do they spend it on? Airports to nowhere!

[Deans]

The problem with newer airports is this. They can never be the originating point for long distance destinations (distances upwards of 500 kms). The traffic simply does not exist. The air travel for distance upto 500 kms too is not viable as it takes a minimum of 6 hours. A journey such as Chennai-Bangeluru can be completed in the same time at half the cost. The railway stations are more centrally located compared to airports constructed in the last 20 years.
Unfortunately doubling and trebling railway lines is problematic. There is land acquisition, EIA etc is horrendously difficult. On the other hand with a permissible fiscal deficit of 5% of nominal GDP the Government has a lots of spending cash. So what do they spend it on? Airports to nowhere!

Yes. As road and rail connectivity gets better the need for air travel for distances under 400km is reduced. 400km was a study done by
Airbus (ATR aircraft are part of the same group), which I was part of. In a country like Italy for e.g (with a fairly long North-South distance)
there are hardly any internal flights - except to the island of Sicily. High speed trains are more efficient.

A lot of the new highway construction in India is just doubling of existing 2 lane highways to 4.
Since 2018 the method to count highway length changed. The distances of highway built are in terms of lane km.
For e.g. if the govt says 12,000 km of highway built, it can be 6000 km of 2 lane.
That's why my disquiet over the govt chasing metrics that look good in the media, but have limited impact or electoral value.

For railways, about 55% of track laid is new lines, 40% is doubling of tracks and 5% is gauge conversion.

[Deans]

@Deans sir, the biggest factor with land acquisition is not the money, but the will to actually acquire the land. This contributes to most of the delays and cost escalations. Since the land itself becomes valuable due to the proposed project, the market value of the land increases, and the delay helps the land owners who demand more compensation, which overshoots the initial budget allocated for land acquisition. So cost escalates. This is a vicious cycle that keeps feeding on itself and aided by local politicians who usually buy up land around any upcoming project to make a killing. A delay is a good thing for them as they'll get an even better value for their land, never mind the costs.

Not to mention the whole land aquisition process has to be fully handled by the state, whose administration may not always be aligned with the centre, and even if they are, politically, it may not be the case at the bureaucratic level.

If we want to truly make a difference to the cost overrun issue, this entire setup needs to be reworked, maybe even grant powers to the centre to directly work with the district administration for centrally funded projects. But implementation would remain messy since the collectors and the entire machinery would still be employees of the state and they may be forced to toe the state's line. Not mention the implications of such a policy change when the shoe is on the other foot with a UPA govt at the centre.

Ultimately, the people will have to demand accountability for completing development projects and case their vote accordingly. The 2024 elections proved that they are quite far from that mindset and still swayed by freebies and random pie-in-the-sky promises, and their ignorance of how things gets done is played by the politicians to get votes.

Quite true. My point is when the govt knows there will be these kind of roadblocks, be more realistic in goals. Moreover a minister like Gadakri ji
has the ability to cut across party lines and tell states like TN they get no highways if they don't cooperate. Why be obsessed with how many
more km of roads you laid compared to UPA ?

[Deans]

The UPA business model for infrastructure was different (and worse).
There was cheap bank credit made available to selected entrepreneurs (who won contracts in a non transparent process).
They inflated project costs, to borrow more, siphoned off money, had little intention of paying back the loan, so the taxpayer was suffered the loss that the PSU banks took. It took the IBC legislation to stop this practice.
The specialist infra lending firm - ILFS, was hit by scams over more than a decade.

There was therefore limited appetite in the private sector to talk all the risks of projects, once the NDA govt starting clamping down, which
is why the govt has not more involved in directly building and funding infrastructure.

[arshyam]

Quite true. My point is when the govt knows there will be these kind of roadblocks, be more realistic in goals. Moreover a minister like Gadakri ji
has the ability to cut across party lines and tell states like TN they get no highways if they don't cooperate. Why be obsessed with how many
more km of roads you laid compared to UPA ?

I suppose if they set a more realistic target in line UPA achievements (as an example), they'll reach half of that. Gadkari-ji's method is to set higher targets so even what's achieved is significant. So with a cooperative state machinery, even more could be done. UP is a case in point.

But if they read the riot act to TN, it won't help them electorally as the local politicians will spin it as an assault on regional pride and what not, and the BJP is looking to grow in these parts. So instead, they try to publicly engage with the SG to convey where the road block is - for example, the NHAI once threatened to foreclose the NH-46 widening project due to non-cooperation by the SG but the SG gave some bureaucratic response (which alone was widely reported in the local media) followed by token cooperation for some time, but things are back to where they were. In addition, there was a well publicized visit by Gadkari to Chennai to unblock infra projects, specifically the Port-Maduravoyal e-way which resulted in a joint inauguration function where both the centre and the state were present. But the project made little progress and is under threat again since the voting public at the end of the day are not interested in those finer points. They'll simply listen to what their local neta spouts and (more importantly) hands out. Gadkari or Modi are politicians at the end of the day, so they have to account for that side of things in their approach.

So I guess what I am saying is, this is a difficult issue to resolve within our current setup. If there were an easy solution here, I'm sure it would have been tried by now. And radical changes are going to be difficult given the reduced strength in the third term. So the cost overrun issue is something we have to live with for the foreseeable future and be happy that at least projects are being attempted.

[Deans]

Back to election analysis - specifically UP.
I was looking at data since 2014. There is data from 3 LS elections and 2 state assembly elections.
There is an alarming trend and a factor we have not discussed so far.

Two basic points true of all states:
1. BJP performance in ALL assembly elections in its core states since 2014, is lower than the previous LS election for that state:
- a 4-8% lower vote share.
This is not surprising. The BJP would be preferred on issues of national importance and Modiji's appeal is a bigger factor in a LS election.
2. BJP does worse when there are fewer parties competing (top 2 parties have over 85% of the vote)

The BJP vote share in UP has not crossed 50% (49% in LS 19) and not dipped below 40% (State assembly 2017).
In LS 2019, the BJP got a higher vote share than 2014, but fewer seats. That's because SP gained at the expense of other non BJP
parties, so the opposition was more united.

In 2024, while the BJP lost vote share from 2019, it was similar to 2014, but with a much more united opposition.
INDIA got the same vote share as BJP, but won seats by narrower margins, giving them more seas overall.

Similarly in the 2022 Assembly elections, the BJP got a 1.6% higher vote share than 2017, but fewer seats. That's because SP got more
seats, with SP votes transferring to it (that trend started in 2019)
What's important is not the BJP vote share, but the gap between BJP and the no 2 and share of 1+2.
Until 2014, a party would sweep UP with 30% vote share in a 4 way contest (like Labor swept UK with 30% share in a 4 way contest).

BJP won in 312 assembly seats in 2017, 275 in 2019 (LS), 255 in 2022 and just 174 (incl NDA allies) in LS 2024.
In 2022, 57 seats were won by the BJP with a margin of under 2%. These were lost in 2024 because the gap between BJP and INDIA reduced
from 7% to 0. If BJP in 2022 got the same vote share as 2017, they would have dropped from 312 to 200.
(I'm leaving out BJP allies as it complicated calculations, without changing the conclusion).

If, in the 2027 assembly poll, BJP gets a lower vote share than LS 2024 (which it has, in every state they have run) and the INDIA
alliance is intact, the BJP could get as little as 120 seats out of 403.
I'm assuming 39.5-40% share to BJP and 46% to INDIA (which is how vote shares moved in 2017 & 2022).

In 2023 Rajasthan, the BJP won with 41% vote share, because the top 2 parties had 80% share (20% wasted vote)
In 2023 MP the BJP needed a 48% share to win a similar % of seats as RAJ, because the top 2 parties had 88% vote share.
Similarly, BJP needed 46.5% to win Chattisgarh by a smaller margin, as the top 2 parties has 88% share.
BJP could not retain Himachal with a 43% vote share in 2022, but won UK with 44% as the Cong was 37% (compared to 44 in Himachal)
In WB BJP got the same vote share in 2024 (38%) as 2022.

Most of India is now a BJP vs INDIA contest. A 40% vote share wont win a state.
BJP needs a 48% vote share overall, or 58% of Hindu votes, to win a state.

There is no state, except Gujarat, where BJP has that vote share.

[KL Dubey]

UPA at the end of its term had 749 running infrastructure projects of 150 cr+ The NDA today has 1443 running projects.
Cost overrun for UPA was 19.9% For NDA it is 19% but the absolute cost overrun for NDA is much more, because the spends under NDA doubled
(after adjusting for inflation).
For both UPA and NDA only 25% of projects were completed on time and within budget

In my opinion, there is no point in anyone trying to duplicate the job of the CAG, which releases a lot of such reports on cost overruns and timelines.

If a cost/timeline overrun is faced due to various reasons, either accept it, or find ways to mitigate it, or cancel the project. If I was AK Antony I'd cancel all projects for cost overruns.

The key issue is risk management and accountability, which is not addressed by just poring over statistics. For large infrastructure projects, nobody can really predict many of the cost escalations which depend on many external factors.

NDA/Modi sarkar has done a great job compared to any other government in our history on infrastructure and improving productivity (whether that's a salaried job or not).

[KL Dubey]

A lot of the new highway construction in India is just doubling of existing 2 lane highways to 4.
Since 2018 the method to count highway length changed. The distances of highway built are in terms of lane km.
For e.g. if the govt says 12,000 km of highway built, it can be 6000 km of 2 lane.
That's why my disquiet over the govt chasing metrics that look good in the media, but have limited impact or electoral value.

For railways, about 55% of track laid is new lines, 40% is doubling of tracks and 5% is gauge conversion.

That's the way it should be. Building new road surface whether new lanes or an entirely new road - achieves the same or similar goal. I don't understand why you think this is a misleading metric. A lot of the infrastructure bottlenecks can be eased by expanding existing infrastructure, of course many greenfield projects are also needed.

Unlike the wasteful spending in China, where even "tier-3" or "tier-4" cities and towns have 2-3 superhighways running through them, which are usually deserted with low traffic.

Regarding cost overruns, it depends on where the overruns are. If its increased cost of labor, raw materials, etc, and if they are sourced domestically, then that cost overrun often boosts the economy. If it is just land acquisition cost overruns, it depends how the people getting paid use the proceeds. My guess is that most will have to plough the proceeds back into real estate (i.e. more construction).

[Deans]

In my opinion, there is no point in anyone trying to duplicate the job of the CAG, which releases a lot of such reports on cost overruns and timelines.

If a cost/timeline overrun is faced due to various reasons, either accept it, or find ways to mitigate it, or cancel the project. If I was AK Antony I'd cancel all projects for cost overruns.

The key issue is risk management and accountability, which is not addressed by just poring over statistics. For large infrastructure projects, nobody can really predict many of the cost escalations which depend on many external factors.

NDA/Modi sarkar has done a great job compared to any other government in our history on infrastructure and improving productivity (whether that's a salaried job or not).

Dubeyji, Its' not about trying to duplicate anything. These are govt figures, not something got independently.

I have seen various CAG reports - from the armed forces CDS/ ECHS schemes, to Gas cylinder supplies. They provide good guidelines for what
can and is going wrong. The larger issue (as you rightly say its about risk management and accountability) is if they are addressed. I have not found
info - which should be in the public domain or with CAG, as to what the concerned ministry or dept did after that. Just like internal audits in the private sector, one can either have an adversarial relationship with the auditor, or work with the auditor to improve.

One can take a view that there will invariably be time and cost overruns and budget for it accordingly. If budgeting is more realistic, perhaps
20% of projects will be found to be unviable and that money can be transferred to existing social schemes that were underfunded.
RBI has just introduced new project financing guidelines, which assume some cost overruns will be there (more when all the land is not
acquired, of the project hasn't started yet).

Of course our infra today is much better, because we're spending more on it. That `more' is however coming at the cost of something else.
I cannot second guess which schemes should have priority. But with the benefit of hindsight and the election result, my hypothesis is that
drops in spending on things like MGNREGA - in order to finance additional infrastructure spends, had an impact on the elections.

[Deans]

A lot of the new highway construction in India is just doubling of existing 2 lane highways to 4.
Since 2018 the method to count highway length changed. The distances of highway built are in terms of lane km.
For e.g. if the govt says 12,000 km of highway built, it can be 6000 km of 2 lane.
That's why my disquiet over the govt chasing metrics that look good in the media, but have limited impact or electoral value.

For railways, about 55% of track laid is new lines, 40% is doubling of tracks and 5% is gauge conversion.

That's the way it should be. Building new road surface whether new lanes or an entirely new road - achieves the same or similar goal. I don't understand why you think this is a misleading metric. A lot of the infrastructure bottlenecks can be eased by expanding existing infrastructure, of course many greenfield projects are also needed.

Unlike the wasteful spending in China, where even "tier-3" or "tier-4" cities and towns have 2-3 superhighways running through them, which are usually deserted with low traffic.

Regarding cost overruns, it depends on where the overruns are. If its increased cost of labor, raw materials, etc, and if they are sourced domestically, then that cost overrun often boosts the economy. If it is just land acquisition cost overruns, it depends how the people getting paid use the proceeds. My guess is that most will have to plough the proceeds back into real estate (i.e. more construction).

I wanted to make a more nuanced point than implying `misleading metric'.
For simplicity - Let's say UPA built 100 km of highway. This was greenfield, so land acquisition etc was more difficult doing it the 2nd time.
The NDA built 150 km of greenfield highway and doubled lanes on another 100 km. So they built 2.5 times more highway.
Saying 2.5 more is perfectly fine when advertising achievements to the media, except that my sense was it became a metric the govt was
chasing rather than it being a means to an end (i.e Spending boosts the economy, what's the best way to do it). Beyond a point there is
diminishing marginal returns. Building the 70th new airport has less impact on the economy than the 1st new airport.

The reality (above example) would be that NDA built twice the highways (in terms of work involved) by spending double the money. At some
point, investing more money or starting a new highway project would not give the same return as for e.g. spending that on MGNREGA.
Ultimately cost overruns are financed by the govt - it pays more interest to lenders (sometimes foreign lenders) and the deficit increases,
which is inflationary for everyone.

The joke about MGNREGA in the old days, was that the govt was pretending to pay people (a lot of it leaked, as dummy workers were shown
on the rolls) for non existent work. This has improved a lot and therefore the need for the debate on which area of spend - transport infra
or rural development, has a more positive impact on the economy.

China went about transport infrastructure differently. they first increased the standard of living of their rural population (which is levels ahead
of us in power, water, education health), then set up massive capacities for steel etc and then started building. That has its own problems - as you
point out, there are ghost cities, bullet trains to nowhere etc - financed by banks who are hiding losses, with deposits from people who have no
other way to invest.

[AmolJ]

[/quote]

If land acquisition cost is known (as it should) there should be no cost overruns. Acquisition is 20% of project cost.
In fact, highway construction under NDA increased sharply, because people were much more willing to part with land, since compensation
was higher (slightly less than double the compensation per acre, compared to UPA, not 8 fold).
Some of the increase was inflation, but the holder of land gained by selling.

[/quote]

Please find the article from Business Standard:
"https://www.business-standard.com/econo ... 257_1.html"

They mention as that Land Acquisition cost is increased by 5 times. Also they mention that cost of Ring Road and Wider Flyovers was not considered.
We can call it out as bad planning but Ring Roads may be accepted at the request of local govts.

[AmolJ]

If land acquisition cost is known (as it should) there should be no cost overruns. Acquisition is 20% of project cost.
In fact, highway construction under NDA increased sharply, because people were much more willing to part with land, since compensation
was higher (slightly less than double the compensation per acre, compared to UPA, not 8 fold).
Some of the increase was inflation, but the holder of land gained by selling.

Please find the article from Business Standard:
"https://www.business-standard.com/econo ... 257_1.html"

They mention as that Land Acquisition cost is increased by 5 times. Also they mention that cost of Ring Road and Wider Flyovers was not considered.
We can call it out as bad planning but Ring Roads may be accepted at the request of local govts.

[Supratik]

My analysis of the 2024 lok sabha election will come in the future. I am still waiting for the full BSP data which I do not have.

MH and HY vote percentage between both alliances is very close. The alliance that micro manages the election best will win. JH is for BJP to loose.

[chetak]

If land acquisition cost is known (as it should) there should be no cost overruns. Acquisition is 20% of project cost.
In fact, highway construction under NDA increased sharply, because people were much more willing to part with land, since compensation
was higher (slightly less than double the compensation per acre, compared to UPA, not 8 fold).
Some of the increase was inflation, but the holder of land gained by selling.

Please find the article from Business Standard:
"https://www.business-standard.com/econo ... 257_1.html"

They mention as that Land Acquisition cost is increased by 5 times. Also they mention that cost of Ring Road and Wider Flyovers was not considered.
We can call it out as bad planning but Ring Roads may be accepted at the request of local govts.

Amol0922 ji,


The Land Acquisition act was a deliberately sown landmine, a "gift", as it were, a poisoned chalice even, by the deceitful congis before they got ousted by the BJP

It was done to impede progress and make things extremely difficult for the new govt The dynaasts have learned well

Their idea of India was an extremely underdeveloped country that opened up untold possibilities and opportunities for rent seeking

As you can see, the concerned "beneficiaries" have risen to the occasion in an exemplary manner

[Deans]

If land acquisition cost is known (as it should) there should be no cost overruns. Acquisition is 20% of project cost.
In fact, highway construction under NDA increased sharply, because people were much more willing to part with land, since compensation
was higher (slightly less than double the compensation per acre, compared to UPA, not 8 fold).
Some of the increase was inflation, but the holder of land gained by selling.

Please find the article from Business Standard:
"https://www.business-standard.com/econo ... 257_1.html"

They mention as that Land Acquisition cost is increased by 5 times. Also they mention that cost of Ring Road and Wider Flyovers was not considered.
We can call it out as bad planning but Ring Roads may be accepted at the request of local govts.

I don't want to hair-split, just to clarify a couple of things from the numbers in the article.

The original project cost in 2017 was 535000 cr. 30,000 cr was land acquisition. ( under 6% of total cost)
The revised cost is 1064000 cr. Of this, land is apparently 150000 cr. (5 fold increase).

In 2017, the cost of land acquisition arising out of the UPA's 2013 land acquisition bill was known. The ministry has a manual on how land is to
be acquired in keeping with the 2013 bill. I don't see why the land cost would be estimated at 30,000 cr, unless someone was misquoted.
The current cost of 150,000 (14% of total) is closer to my earlier estimate of 20%

The states share of land acquisition and other costs is under 10%

[Hriday]

Back to election analysis - specifically UP.
I was looking at data since 2014. There is data from 3 LS elections and 2 state assembly elections.
There is an alarming trend and a factor we have not discussed so far.

.....
....


Most of India is now a BJP vs INDIA contest. A 40% vote share wont win a state.
BJP needs a 48% vote share overall, or 58% of Hindu votes, to win a state.

There is no state, except Gujarat, where BJP has that vote share.

So as per Deans, BJP going to lose all states except Gujarat in the next assembly elections if the opposition is united. Maybe I have missed it, but other prominent psephologists hadn't made this important point. Can Deans ji or others comment on how much probability for this scenario?

Now if the above scenario becomes true, then all states can unite in blaming the centre for not allocating funds for freebies and ultimately bring down the BJP govt in the centre. Kerala is doing this, but not getting wide acceptance amongst voters as other states don't make much issue of this.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

Back to election analysis - specifically UP.
I was looking at data since 2014. There is data from 3 LS elections and 2 state assembly elections.
There is an alarming trend and a factor we have not discussed so far.

.....
....


Most of India is now a BJP vs INDIA contest. A 40% vote share wont win a state.
BJP needs a 48% vote share overall, or 58% of Hindu votes, to win a state.

There is no state, except Gujarat, where BJP has that vote share.

So as per Deans, BJP going to lose all states except Gujarat in the next assembly elections if the opposition is united. Maybe I have missed it, but other prominent psephologists hadn't made this important point. Can Deans ji or others comment on how much probability for this scenario?

Now if the above scenario becomes true, then all states can unite in blaming the centre for not allocating funds for freebies and ultimately bring down the BJP govt in the centre. Kerala is doing this, but not getting wide acceptance amongst voters as other states don't make much issue of this.

There's no need for Blue on Blue here. Deans is a member of long standing. And he's presented an argument on his data analysis.

Why not dissect it? And examine his conclusions.

BRF needs to have unpopular viewpoints as long ad they are backed by data. If we just welcomed videos that resonated with what we want to hear then BRF will become a poor echo chamber disconnected from reality.

Please refrain from personal attacks.

[Hriday]

^^^
I am surprised, no personal attack here. I only asked how much probability of this happening. About Deans ji, I had only admiration and respect for his in-depth analysis.

[Deans]

^^^
I am surprised, no personal attack here. I only asked how much probability of this happening. About Deans ji, I had only admiration and respect for his in-depth analysis.

No offense taken. As far as my personal views go, I am X'tian and a BJP supporter. I base my support on facts, more than ideology.
I have worked abroad, but chose to live and retire in India.

In 2019, my peer group (from IIM Ahmedabad) who are mostly in senior positions, collectively underestimated NDA's seats by 60.
This time we overestimated it by 60. So we have as little idea of outcomes as anyone else.

The learning however, is that we had no clue about rural India. That's what promoted me to look at data - hence my posts on rural distress.
I then asked WHY allocations for rural schemes were cut, which led me to look at overspending on infrastructure as a possible reason.

The reason I looked at vote share data, was my sense that if INDIA had got its act together early, it would have got more seats.
9 seats were won by NDA by just 0.1% margin. If they had flipped, INDIA would have been ahead of BJP, (240 vs 234 would have
instead been 232 : 243 ). N & N may have switched sides and La Famiglia would be running the country. It was a close thing.

If you think I'm being alarmist, consider this: In Himachal, BJP got 69 % vote share in LS 2019, but only 43% in Assembly 2022.
The 26% vote share drop had nothing to do with Muslims, low turnout (it was the same), fake videos etc.
43% share might have been enough to win almost any state, but not HP where it was a 2 party contest.

In the Rajasthan assembly elections of 2023 & 2018, Cong got the same vote shares (39.3 & 39.5% respectively). They won in 2018 and lost
in 2023. Opposition unity works both ways.

My point is every state election for BJP is going to be tougher than LS. The BJP has to work on getting a vote share in the high 40s,
or 60% of Hindu votes and assume they will face a joint opposition candidate where they are the ruling party.

[Mukesh.Kumar]

[quote=Deans post_id=2625607 time=1721658211

No offense taken. As far as my personal views go, I am X'tian and a BJP supporter. I base my support on facts, more than ideology.
I have worked abroad, but chose to live and retire in India.

In 2019, my peer group (from IIM Ahmedabad) who are mostly in senior positions, collectively underestimated NDA's seats by 60.
This time we overestimated it by 60. So we have as little idea of outcomes as anyone else.

The learning however, is that we had no clue about rural India. That's what promoted me to look at data - hence my posts on rural distress.
I then asked WHY allocations for rural schemes were cut, which led me to look at overspending on infrastructure as a possible reason.

The reason I looked at vote share data, was my sense that if INDIA had got its act together early, it would have got more seats.
9 seats were won by NDA by just 0.1% margin. If they had flipped, INDIA would have been ahead of BJP, (240 vs 234 would have
instead been 232 : 243 ). N & N may have switched sides and La Famiglia would be running the country. It was a close thing.

If you think I'm being alarmist, consider this: In Himachal, BJP got 69 % vote share in LS 2019, but only 43% in Assembly 2022.
The 26% vote share drop had nothing to do with Muslims, low turnout (it was the same), fake videos etc.
43% share might have been enough to win almost any state, but not HP where it was a 2 party contest.

In the Rajasthan assembly elections of 2023 & 2018, Cong got the same vote shares (39.3 & 39.5% respectively). They won in 2018 and lost
in 2023. Opposition unity works both ways.

My point is every state election for BJP is going to be tougher than LS. The BJP has to work on getting a vote share in the high 40s,
or 60% of Hindu votes and assume they will face a joint opposition candidate where they are the ruling party.
[/quote]

Deans, there's no reason to explain who you are. We have seen your posts. More than than that the data and arguments should speak for themselves whenever backed by data.

[Hriday]

^^^
I am surprised, no personal attack here. I only asked how much probability of this happening. About Deans ji, I had only admiration and respect for his in-depth analysis.

No offense taken. As far as my personal views go, I am X'tian and a BJP supporter. I base my support on facts, more than ideology.
....
.....
....
If you think I'm being alarmist, consider this: In Himachal, BJP got 69 % vote share in LS 2019, but only 43% in Assembly 2022.
....
....

Deans ji, I apologise if the way I put my reply caused any misunderstanding. I am not saying that you are an alarmist. I believe what you are saying. To me, you are a trustworthy person and subject expert. I thought your posts were not getting the attention and the discussion they deserved. Also, I think it is me who brought forward your posts on rural distress which was originally posted about 2 pages back. If people remember I can be seen agreeing and thanking Deans on his posts. Just recently I even requested him to write a blog/book on economic literacy with my readiness to pay him money.

[Deans]

Deans ji, I apologise if the way I put my reply caused any misunderstanding. I am not saying that you are an alarmist. I believe what you are saying. To me, you are a trustworthy person and subject expert. I thought your posts were not getting the attention and the discussion they deserved. Also, I think it is me who brought forward your posts on rural distress which was originally posted about 2 pages back. If people remember I can be seen agreeing and thanking Deans on his posts. Just recently I even requested him to write a blog/book on economic literacy with my readiness to pay him money.

Thanks Hridayji. I appreciate your comments. We are on the same side and a robust exchange of views makes all of us better informed.

[Deans]

BJP Vote share

LS-2019 Assembly LS-2024

Gujarat 62.2 52.5 61.8
Himachal 69.1 43 56.4
Ut'khand 61 44.3 56.8
UP 52.9 41.3 43.8
MP 58 48.6 59.3
Rajasthan 59.1 41.6 49.2
Haryana 58 36.5 46.1
Karnataka 51.3 36 46.1
Assam 43.2 44.5 43.6 (with AGP)
WB 40.7 38.1 38.7

This summarizes the concerns from my earlier post across states.
I've listed states where BJP is ruling, or a strong no 2.
Maharashtra and Bihar left out as the NDA composition changed, so there's no credible like-like comparison.

Assam and MP have done better both in LS 2024 (compared to 2019) and in their assembly (relative to other states).
Is good local leadership responsible ?
The biggest fall in vote share in the assembly compared to LS is in HP, UK, Raj & Haryana, where Muslim voters are low.

[Sachin]

The biggest fall in vote share in the assembly compared to LS is in HP, UK, Raj & Haryana, where Muslim voters are low.

Could it be because of apprehensions on Agniveer scheme, or fear of taking off reservations? IMHO; these states also contribute bigger man power to the Army. And to put it bluntly, the IA job is also one of the easier government job for poorly educated people from these areas.

[Deans]

The biggest fall in vote share in the assembly compared to LS is in HP, UK, Raj & Haryana, where Muslim voters are low.

Could it be because of apprehensions on Agniveer scheme, or fear of taking off reservations? IMHO; these states also contribute bigger man power to the Army. And to put it bluntly, the IA job is also one of the easier government job for poorly educated people from these areas.

I believe Agniveer is an issue in LS '24 and the Himachal & Sikkim assembly elections .
As you know, HP, UK, Har (and Jammu) have the highest intake into the army, on a per lakh basis. The services are the biggest recruiter after the
State govt. There is a sharply reduced number of applicants in Haryana for e.g. (as per Maj Gen Mor, who coaches boys for an army career).

In Sikkim, where again army is the biggest recruiter, SKM won (with a bigger vote share) after breaking ties with the BJP.

[sanjayc]

The biggest fall in vote share in the assembly compared to LS is in HP, UK, Raj & Haryana, where Muslim voters are low.

Could it be because of apprehensions on Agniveer scheme, or fear of taking off reservations? IMHO; these states also contribute bigger man power to the Army. And to put it bluntly, the IA job is also one of the easier government job for poorly educated people from these areas.

This can be addressed by increasing the duration of Agniveer service to 8 years. At the end of the period, each soldier will get about 25-30 lakhs in the kitty after adding gratuity. Good enough to settle them for life by starting a small business (shop, taxi, etc.)

[fanne]

The whole idea of Agniveer is that Govt does not want to commit to pension. All worlds forces are moving to this model. Currently our pension budget is bigger than the current salary of 1.2 million strong army and way bigger than our capital budget. If left unchecked, we will not have money to buy bullets and eventually to pay current salaries. Everything will get consumed by pension.

[Sumeet]

Most people look for various type of Govt jobs because it will last a lifetime and has great benefits and eventually guaranteed pension.

However, there are many families who take pride in being in the armed forces generation after generations. To them a defense force job is not a way to get pension or perks, its matter of pride and their lifestyle. How does one explain Agniveer to them ?

[Sachin]

The whole idea of Agniveer is that Govt does not want to commit to pension.

Most people look for various type of Govt jobs because it will last a lifetime and has great benefits and eventually guaranteed pension.

From my understanding. In India, Army is the most slowest to imbibe the changes and also retains a large colonial past. Caste based, region based regiments etc. Agniveer should have been piloted first in IN & IAF; where the kind of caste/religion based regimentation is not there. The recruits also would be much more qualified, and with the technical training received in IN, IAF be in a position to take up alternate careers quickly. Infact I have seen many IAF NCOs who just hang on for their minimum service to get over, because of no other option, and then write state level PSC exams and qualify. In the IA; there are more "technical units" where again it is not the caste/religion/region based concepts which are used. Agniveer can be piloted there.

To them a defense force job is not a way to get pension or perks, its matter of pride and their lifestyle. How does one explain Agniveer to them ?

Agniveer does have a scheme for permenant enrollment as well. The people who consider it as pride & lifestyle should be informed of the option of permenant enrollment. Again, who gets such enrollment would depend on the Armed forces.

[Deans]

Off thread, but since we're discussing Agnipath, I had analysed it in my last blogpost
https://rpdeans.blogspot.com/2024/06/ag ... rward.html

I argue that all the assumption behind it were incorrect and present data from other countries.
The way out is to let people leave early (based on incentives).

[venkat_kv]

^^^
I am surprised, no personal attack here. I only asked how much probability of this happening. About Deans ji, I had only admiration and respect for his in-depth analysis.

No offense taken. As far as my personal views go, I am X'tian and a BJP supporter. I base my support on facts, more than ideology.
I have worked abroad, but chose to live and retire in India.

In 2019, my peer group (from IIM Ahmedabad) who are mostly in senior positions, collectively underestimated NDA's seats by 60.
This time we overestimated it by 60. So we have as little idea of outcomes as anyone else.

The learning however, is that we had no clue about rural India. That's what promoted me to look at data - hence my posts on rural distress.
I then asked WHY allocations for rural schemes were cut, which led me to look at overspending on infrastructure as a possible reason.

The reason I looked at vote share data, was my sense that if INDIA had got its act together early, it would have got more seats.
9 seats were won by NDA by just 0.1% margin. If they had flipped, INDIA would have been ahead of BJP, (240 vs 234 would have
instead been 232 : 243 ). N & N may have switched sides and La Famiglia would be running the country. It was a close thing.

If you think I'm being alarmist, consider this: In Himachal, BJP got 69 % vote share in LS 2019, but only 43% in Assembly 2022.
The 26% vote share drop had nothing to do with Muslims, low turnout (it was the same), fake videos etc.
43% share might have been enough to win almost any state, but not HP where it was a 2 party contest.

In the Rajasthan assembly elections of 2023 & 2018, Cong got the same vote shares (39.3 & 39.5% respectively). They won in 2018 and lost
in 2023. Opposition unity works both ways.

My point is every state election for BJP is going to be tougher than LS. The BJP has to work on getting a vote share in the high 40s,
or 60% of Hindu votes and assume they will face a joint opposition candidate where they are the ruling party.

Deans Saar,
I really appreciate you crunching these numbers and going about the reasons for BJP's reduction of seats. This analysis would probably help with the feedback mechanism to the any party functionaries for governance related and messaging issues. Otherwise this could turn into an echo chamber.

However having said that i don't think that these numbers are the reason why BJP has lost the rural votes share especially in UP or Maha, Rajasthan etc. I seriously do doubt if the rural voter cared about the roads being built or what amount was cut with respect to MNREGA scheme to fund airports or roadways.

I agree with Ambar Saar that this election had no national issues to make it a pan india issue. In 2019 the opposition was busy asking proof for balakot while the BJP was seen to be giving robust response to provocations. This time the Pakis waited till the elections were done to launch their Jammu attacks.

The BJP was giving free 5 kg rations which you are against, but want to increase MNREGA payouts (both are same in my opinion freebies). The reasons why rural parts of UP went against BJP is that the
1.Congress promised 10kgs of free rations a month with 8500 for ladies and the other extra for unemployed youth, which caused "a section of voters" to turn away for freebies.
2. Dalits ambedkarites and jatavs of mayawati party to vote Congress to protect the constitution and reservations (the congress and its twisting of the constitution is well known).
3.BJP own MP's not coming out to campaign as they felt Modi Shah and BJP machinary will get them the victory.
4. The RSS not supporting BJP in certain states (UP, Maha) where they felt the candidate selection of Kripa shankar singh of 26/11 RSS ki saazish was given a ticket or Ashok Chavan or praful patel of NCP being taken in by the BJP.
5. The reasons why BJP did well in MP was the RSS conducted about 1 lakh big and small meeting at local levels to get the BKP supporter to vote. Contrast this with UP where booth level people havenot come out to distribute or take their supporters to vote. Madhya Pradesh is seen as a real test laboratory of the RSS than say nagpur or gujarat. They have greater presense on the ground and are quite heavily involved.
6. the general apathy of the BKP voter thinking that this is already in the bag so even if i don't vote my single vote will probably not cause any issue.
7. The BJP vs rest angle this time where the vote transfer has taken place in UP and Maharashtra. I have seen the first instance of BJP vs thr rest in 2015 Bihar elections where Nitish, lalu and congress swept the elections with BJP getting just 65 odd seats in 239 vidhan sabha seats there about.
8. In UP there were only 5 seats for Yadavs and all for Akhilesh Yadavs family and about 5 seats for muslims, the rest of the 70 seats seem to have various caste combinations to break the Hindu vote and it has succeeded this time. something similar in maharasthra.
9. there was an anlysis by Raka Sudhakar in an interview where he said that the BJP might have seen its numbers as not meeting expectations and have hence tried to align themselves with jayant cahudary, CBN, Nitish Kumar - that doesn't quite jell with the arrogant BJP trying to finish the other parties narrative. Even though the party has been saying 400 paar they felt they needed more alliances to get ahead so there was OP rajbar or Jayant chaudary who didn't win any seat in previous two elections being aligned with BJP.

[Deans]

I agree with Ambar Saar that this election had no national issues to make it a pan india issue. In 2019 the opposition was busy asking proof for balakot while the BJP was seen to be giving robust response to provocations. This time the Pakis waited till the elections were done to launch their Jammu attacks.

The BJP was giving free 5 kg rations which you are against, but want to increase MNREGA payouts (both are same in my opinion freebies). The reasons why rural parts of UP went against BJP is that the
1.Congress promised 10kgs of free rations a month with 8500 for ladies and the other extra for unemployed youth, which caused "a section of voters" to turn away for freebies.
2. Dalits ambedkarites and jatavs of mayawati party to vote Congress to protect the constitution and reservations (the congress and its twisting of the constitution is well known).
3.BJP own MP's not coming out to campaign as they felt Modi Shah and BJP machinary will get them the victory.
4. The RSS not supporting BJP in certain states (UP, Maha) where they felt the candidate selection of Kripa shankar singh of 26/11 RSS ki saazish was given a ticket or Ashok Chavan or praful patel of NCP being taken in by the BJP.
5. The reasons why BJP did well in MP was the RSS conducted about 1 lakh big and small meeting at local levels to get the BKP supporter to vote. Contrast this with UP where booth level people havenot come out to distribute or take their supporters to vote. Madhya Pradesh is seen as a real test laboratory of the RSS than say nagpur or gujarat. They have greater presense on the ground and are quite heavily involved.
6. the general apathy of the BKP voter thinking that this is already in the bag so even if i don't vote my single vote will probably not cause any issue.
7. The BJP vs rest angle this time where the vote transfer has taken place in UP and Maharashtra. I have seen the first instance of BJP vs thr rest in 2015 Bihar elections where Nitish, lalu and congress swept the elections with BJP getting just 65 odd seats in 239 vidhan sabha seats there about.
8. In UP there were only 5 seats for Yadavs and all for Akhilesh Yadavs family and about 5 seats for muslims, the rest of the 70 seats seem to have various caste combinations to break the Hindu vote and it has succeeded this time. something similar in maharasthra.
9. there was an anlysis by Raka Sudhakar in an interview where he said that the BJP might have seen its numbers as not meeting expectations and have hence tried to align themselves with jayant cahudary, CBN, Nitish Kumar - that doesn't quite jell with the arrogant BJP trying to finish the other parties narrative. Even though the party has been saying 400 paar they felt they needed more alliances to get ahead so there was OP rajbar or Jayant chaudary who didn't win any seat in previous two elections being aligned with BJP.

Venkat ji, I think we agree on most points.

I agree that there was complacency among BJP workers and MP's, many of whom simply assumed that Modi ji will get them to 400 votes.
At a time of severe rural distress, the party should have been more mindful about people's concerns and understood that it was going to be
a tough fight. Certainly the RSS did not play the role they could have, if the BJP was not so complacent.
In all state assembly elections in BJP ruled states, their vote share is significantly lower than LS, so governance is a real issue and the
party should have sensed that, especially after covid.

My point about freebies wasn't that BJP shouldn't have done it. I had said we shouldn't criticize the opposition for offering it, when the BJP was
doing it (free food). It was crowding out schemes of the State govts. For e.g. FCI has no stock to offer the Karnataka govt for their scheme,
so they have to buy from the market.
In the past MGNREGA was inefficient, but in recent years, leaks have been reduced (Aadhar based attendance) and real assets created, so it
is more useful to do it than free foodgrains. MGNREGA's presence will not give you votes, but it's absence may cost you.

Subsidies in 2023 increased 58% compared to 2014, which is unchanged, adjusted for inflation.
As a % of budget UPA spent 16.3% of the budget on subsidies in 2013-14. Its slightly lower now. (don't have the exact figure yet)
In 2014, the food subsidy under UPA was approx. 110000 cr. This year it is approx. 210000 cr (the same level after adjusting for inflation).

Pt 7 - Yes, it illustrates what can happen when opposition is united.

Pt 9 - When there is a united opposition, there is no future for a 3rd placed party. If the leading party can't cross 45% vote share it has to ally.
Alliances with N & N saved the party. I argued earlier that the BJP should have gone in for an alliance in TN and in Punjab irrespective of what
Akalis and AIADMK had done to them in the past.

[Deans]

X posting from the Modi 3.0 thread:
https://rpdeans.blogspot.com/2024/07/ka ... e-370.html

This is my latest blogpost analyzing the situation in Kashmir 5 years after 370.
A point related to what I have been posting here, is that abrogating 370 was a pathbreaking decision. The security forces have done their job
in curbing militancy and people (and tourists) are keen to experience normalcy. However there are serious gaps in governance. The potential gains
from infrastructure are not yet visible. In a year of a poor apple crop, the govt imported a record quantity of apples, which hit the price realization
for the reduced quantity apple farmers had to offer. I mention this as an example of a decision taken in Delhi without regard to how it will affect farmers in Kashmir.

[isubodh]

In a year of a poor apple crop, the govt imported a record quantity of apples, which hit the price realization
for the reduced quantity apple farmers had to offer. I mention this as an example of a decision taken in Delhi without regard to how it will affect farmers in Kashmir.

With reduced yield, the prices would have skyrocketed. The orchard owners are not the only stakeholders in this equation. The consumers are also equally important. Prices should be stable for both.
Why only Kashmiri apple orchard owners be given preferential treatment. Isn't it similar to appeasement done earlier.
How much they contribute in the years they make profits.

[Deans]

In a year of a poor apple crop, the govt imported a record quantity of apples, which hit the price realization
for the reduced quantity apple farmers had to offer. I mention this as an example of a decision taken in Delhi without regard to how it will affect farmers in Kashmir.

With reduced yield, the prices would have skyrocketed. The orchard owners are not the only stakeholders in this equation. The consumers are also equally important. Prices should be stable for both.
Why only Kashmiri apple orchard owners be given preferential treatment. Isn't it similar to appeasement done earlier.
How much they contribute in the years they make profits.

Subodh ji, I used do business with Afghanistan - albeit decades ago and later sold imported fruit incl. apples when running part of a national
retail chain, so I have a basic understanding of what I wrote about.

I doubt Afghanistan has ever exported apples. Showing Afghanistan as country of origin for apples to avoid import duty is a fairly obvious
trick and would be picked up, unless the import/trader lobby wanted to make money (at the expense of Indian farmers). The import duty on
apples was also reduced.

If there is a bad crop, prices go up as you rightly said. All growers - in Kashmir, Himachal, UK and Arunachal would have benefitted and it would
have compensated them for losses made during the two covid years. Apples are not price sensitive, where the public gets upset over high prices.
We have never imported large quantities of fruit, because local prices were high.
If for e.g. the crop of apples is 20% lower, prices go up 20%. Demand falls 20%. The farmer gets roughly the same income.
Those who want apples pay a bit more, those who can't afford them, buy a lower priced fruit. There will always be something else that has a
bumper crop and lower prices. When there is a bumper crop, local prices fall. Farmers can normally make more money by exporting, but not
apples, because the cost of taking apples from Kashmir/Himachal to a port is very high.
There are other problems - in other states cold storages are operated by, or subsidized by the govt. In J&K, they were transferred to a private cartel that charges farmers high prices for storing surplus crop.

Given the sensitivity of Kashmir in our national security, the commerce ministry should have thought through the implications. Kashmir
grows over 75% of India's apples. I did mention that the govt started a MSP for Kashmiri apples last year.

The reverse happened with onions in Maharashtra. There were flips-flops on allowing exports. Exports were banned till just before elections.
Onion famers were ruined and the NDA lost every seat in the Onion belt.

[ramana]

Doing an amateur psychology analysis results in the conclusion that anxiety emotion was driving the feedback. It was a close call hence the anxiety of loss.
To calm this emotion we need proper perspective.
- Modi 3.0 govt formed
- BJP Speaker elected and is proactive from the first day.
- Mix of old and new ministers sworn in with proper portfolios. Gives experience to new people.
- Budget presented. It's focused on infrastructure, job creation, and skills. Has a package to assure NDA allies to stay in the alliance.
- Foreign Policy: Modiji went to G-7 in Puglia, Italy, and Russia. Jaishankar went to ASEAN and QUAD. BRICS swift mechanism in work.