Aman Singh: What India can learn from Brexit

The disadvantaged citizens of India have been patiently casting their votes in the hope that somebody cares about their aspirations too. The answer is a truly inclusive growth agenda

With the gradual cooling down of the ashes of the Brexit poll, a more rational analysis of Brexit is emerging which offers socio-political and economic lessons for India. The sharp divide visible in the voting pattern between urban Britain and the English countryside has echoes of India's urban-rural divide. British Prime Minister Theresa May has signalled a shift toward economic populism with plans to overhaul governance and narrow the gap between the rich and the poor. In a delicious inversion, the developed world's advisory of "inclusive growth" to the developing countries has come back to haunt it.

The similarities are striking, and hold a beacon to our own future. According to The Economist, broadly, the 48 per cent who wanted to remain in the EU tended to be young, well-educated, liberal-minded and confident of their place in the new global order. They came from London and other cosmopolitan centres like Bristol, Manchester and Cambridge. The 52 per cent who voted against and won, tended to be older, poorer, less educated and live in rural Britain or in provincial towns. For them, it was a vote against multiculturalism, liberalism, capitalism and the internet.

It's a lesson we can ignore only at our own peril. The young, confident and educated work in India's big cities, live on social media and drive policy despite being a miniscule minority. In the other corners of Bharat live the less fortunate, the less educated, underemployed people of India's agrarian economy for whom change has not been fast enough. Economic and social inequalities between these two entities are stark and appear to be growing wider. India's 10 biggest cities currently contribute more than 27 per cent of the nation's GDP while being home to less than five per cent of the population. Agriculture employs nearly 55 per cent of India's workforce but contributes less than 17 per cent of the country's GDP. In urban-rural terms, the urban population (31 per cent) contributes 63 per cent of India's GDP while the rural population (69 per cent) contributes only 37 per cent.

According to a McKinsey Global Institute report, by 2030, there will be 61 cities in India with a population of more than one million, 13 cities with a population of more than four million and six mega cities with a population of 10 million or more. The report predicts that these cities alone will account for more than 70 per cent of the country's GDP. This means that around 12 per cent of the population or around six per cent of the workforce (India's urban labour force participation rate is around 47 per cent) will account for 70 per cent of the GDP. In regional terms, the inter-state disparity is visible in terms of both per capita income and social indicators.

Meanwhile, another counter-intuitive phenomenon has been quietly taking place in India's Parliament. While the median age in India is currently 27 and 74 per cent of the country's population is below 40, India's parliament has been growing steadily older. At the time of being sworn in to the Lok Sabha in 2014, only 13 per cent of MPs were under the age of 40 while 41 MPs were over the age of 70, with the oldest being 86. In the first Lok Sabha in 1952 nearly a third of the House was under the age of 40. The proportion of under-40 MPs has been falling continuously and is the lowest in the current Lok Sabha. How can an ageing parliament be expected to look after the aspirations of a young India?

India has had an impressive growth rate over the last 25 years and is today the fastest growing large economy in the world. While all may not have benefitted equally, millions of people have been lifted out of poverty. Yet economic and social inequalities have only grown and led to greater marginalisation of the already-marginalised groups. Growing inequality is also due to the faster growth in incomes at the top. Violent protests have frequently surfaced in various parts of the country against what is seen as an apathetic and unrepresentative State. Still, the relatively disadvantaged citizens of Bharat have been patiently casting their votes in the hope that somebody cares about their aspirations too. It is a pot that is on the verge of boiling over.

Brexit is seen as a vote against globalisation. It is an undisputed fact that many countries including India have been major beneficiaries of the globalisation process. Against this backdrop, it is extremely challenging for policymakers to ensure more inclusive growth in India. However, a truly inclusive development agenda with greater reforms is the only solution to the growing divide. There is a need for a multi-layered strategy if we have to overcome the centrifugal tendencies of the marginalised groups.

After Brexit the clamour for such referendums has increased. Voters are not always rational and logical. They can also be myopic, emotional and capricious. Should we then be thankful to the framers of our constitution for leaving no provisions for referendums or plebiscites? However, if several sections of people get left out of India's growth story, eventually someone will want to "take back control". And then it may not even require a referendum. Let Brexit educate us.

The writer is principal secretary to the chief minister of Chhattisgarh. These views are his own