Showing posts with label food. Show all posts
Showing posts with label food. Show all posts

Thursday, April 28, 2016

Saudi Vision 2030, also known as Utopia

Mohammed bin Salma, the thirty year old deputy crown prince of Saudi Arabia, has just announced his country’s transition to Utopia. He calls it, Saudi Vision 2030. The concept essentially envisages a day when the Saudis will learn living without oil, or rather the money earned from oil. To achieve this a sovereign wealth fund is on the anvil. When created it will have assets worth US$ 2 trillion (according to IMF estimates, India’s GDP for the year 2015-16 was US$ 2.4 trillion). Bin Salman, second in line to the throne, also hinted at social reforms in an ultra-conservative country. He touched upon sensitive matters like women’s rights. He wants the country to start living off oil, 2020 onward. This means reducing subsidies and introducing taxes. All This will happen in just about three and a three quarters of a year from now. 
Such news makes extremely good global PR. You can read the coverage by Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal, Reuters, The Economist, etc. But the PR apart, is the Kingdom ready for the bold steps the prince proposes? Indian Affair thinks it is not. Here is why –

The foundation
The entire euphoria the prince is trying to generate is based on an assumption that 5% of Aramco (the state oil company and apparently the largest corporation in the world) will fund the Saudi Utopia. However the problem is that no one knows what the actual worth of Aramco really is. There are no records in public domain and given the oil prices plummeting to US$ 40 a barrel, the crude under Aramco’s control might be worth much less now. Another problem is the location of oil. Most of the oil in Saudi Arabia sits on its eastern coast. That is also the region with a restive Shia  population (who are systematically persecuted by the Sunni majority). The most serious of the problems is transparency. In his prerecorded telecast the prince did not give details of how the wealth fund will be created or how the citizens will be impacted by subsidy cuts. The economic situation of the country is not pretty. Various reports suggest a huge budget deficit in the range of 13% - 15% for the year 2015. The country is expected to run high budget deficit in the next four years. The foundation of the dream is indeed shaky.

The society
Saudi Arabia is the most populous of all the GCC countries. With a large population comes the responsibility of feeding it. The Saudi citizens get unimaginable subsidies like a tax free income (both personal and corporate), heavily subsidized food (the price of a three liter milk can, at SAR 10, has not changed since at least 2010), cheap petrol and no taxes like VAT, GST or sales/service tax. These subsidies however benefit even the resident expats. On top of these are subsidies for overseas education, a lavish unemployment allowance (estimated 30 – 40% youth unemployment), soft loans to purchase residential land, a free hand in importing cheap labour from Asia, protection from foreign competition by forced partnerships with local firms (HSBC is called SAAB in Saudi Arabia), etc.

I shalt take back the subsidies from thee
Photo courtesy - Bloomberg
Like all authoritarian regimes (the Communists, the theocracies and monarchies), Saudi Arabia too has bought legitimacy by bribing its citizens with freebies. Take these freebies away from them and the subjects will rise and challenge the authority. The recent hike in water and petrol prices met with strong Twitter protests (the only uncensored protest platform). Such was the outburst that the minister for water and electricity was sacked, for his “poor handling of price increase". One can only imagine how the citizens will react if the government introduces taxes, while at the same time asks the unemployed to forego the allowance and actually work.

The women in Saudi Arabia are a suppressed lot, mandatory covering up in the abayya, no driving, male consent for surgery and overseas travel, arbitrary divorce, no jobs and so on. While the prince has some bright ideas to emancipate women, slowly; certain sections of the society might not be ready for such reforms, that they might find “radical”.

Saudi Arabia was far more liberal in the 70s than it in the twenty first century. But things changed after the siege of Mecca in November 1979, the same year the Islamic Revolution in Iran overthrew the Pahlavi dynasty. Post the siege the monarchy was forced by the Wahhabis to impose an austere or rather a radicalized version of Islam on its people. Public beheadings are common and laws are not codified. Social changes proposed by the prince might face stiff resistance from the powerful Wahhabis and the citizens alike. Weaning off a population addicted to freebies and alienating the clergy can be an explosive mix in a conservative country like Saudi Arabia.

The Utopia
The target of 2020 to start living without oil money is not ambitious by foolhardy. The general population has long resented the lavish lifestyle of the royal family. The stories of the king and his entourage spending millions on shopping in Marbella have earned enough bad press. The people feel that the royal family is having a good time at the cost of its own citizens. Now when the prince finally promises them Utopia, he wants to make their lives more miserable by cutting down subsidies and imposing taxes. A double whammy.

There are far too many risks in implementing the plan 2030. The risk of the citizens turning against the monarchy, the expats not willing to come to the country because the social reforms are too slow for their comfort and cost of living too high post the economic reforms and finally the clergy denouncing the establishment of walking away from the religion.

The environment
The reforms apart, the monarchy will have to survive in the dynamic environment the world is functioning. It has to survive the drastic steps that are being taken around the world to minimize oil dependency. Commercial nuclear fusion energy is in sight in a few decades, countries are planning to ban oil run cars, bio fuels are tested for both cars and aircraft and solar is coming up in a big way. India plans to add 20,000 MW of grid connected solar power by 2020.

Given the global aversion of oil dependence and a reducing crude price, the US$ 2 trillion wealth fund looks a bit too far away. What looks scarily close is the Corniche in Jeddah, swarmed by the Saudis seeking elections to the presidential office. 

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Cash in my pockets


For the fiscal year 2011-12 India poured in a total of 2.16 lakh crore rupees (USD 39.7 billion) in subsidy. The three major heads under which this subsidy is rolled out are food, fertilizer and fuel. All three heads have equal share in the booty. The total cost of subsidy is three times the planned outlay for ministry of health and family welfare or just bit lower than the total planned outlay for defense at USD 40.44 billion. It’s not too difficult to get a perspective on how much money is spent on subsidy. Most of the subsidy under all the three categories either fails to reach the true beneficiary or is misused. The public distribution system (PDS) (barring in Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh) is highly corrupt and inefficient. Food grains are siphoned off and sold in the open market. Grains meant for PDS rots in open due to lack of proper storage. Cheap fertilizer has lead to indiscriminate usage and reduced soil quality and has made food unsafe. Free power and subsidised fuel has also done little benefit to the farmers. A report by Central Ground Water Board has indicated sharp decline in water table in Northern India. Most of the decline can be attributed to overdrawing of ground water due to free access to electricity and fuel. A big hole is burnt in the national budget with little benefit to show.

Cash or kind? 
The government has finally woken up to the fact and will roll out the first direct cash transfer scheme in the country. It will start in the New Year beginning 1st January 2013. The idea is to transfer cash directly into the accounts of entitled families and selling the food grains in open market. The argument given by the government is that this will increase the supply in open market (food which was held back to be distributed through PDS will now enter the market) and hence bring the prices down marginally. People will have a choice to buy what they want and when they want. Corruption in the system will be put to an end. These arguments seem plausible, given that such schemes have benefited poor people in other countries as well. The move is also seen as a trump card by the central government for the general elections due in 2014. The scheme is intended to be fully operational by that time. Some states are however unhappy about the scheme. The chief minister of Chhattisgarh has written to the prime minister to withdraw direct cash transfer. He has a valid reason. The credit for good governance will no longer go to the local government, which streamlined the PDS system in Chhattisgarh.

Subsidies are bad for an economy and are worse the way they are handed out at the moment. The new step is indeed a much needed change. The government however should not make it easy for the beneficiaries to get the money. The idea of subsidy is to help the poor balance their budgets so that they can come out of poverty over a period of time. Handing out cash without any conditions will not bring about that change. Proven systems of conditional cash assistance exist in the developing world. The most effective and recognized being the “Bolsa Familia” of Brazil. It is aimed at reducing poverty by direct cash transfer. The aid is linked to the beneficiaries sending their children to school and getting them vaccinated as per the schedule. The cash assistance helps them to top up their limited incomes and schooling and timely vaccination of their children helps in creating a healthy and educated workforce for future.

The Indian system should learn from such schemes and implement some checks and balances. First step would be to set a limit to such assistance. People should not be given lifelong subsidies. Once they know it is unlimited the incentive to work towards it is gone. The benefit should be set to last a certain number of years and after that it will automatically cease. This will ensure that the beneficiaries will utilize the money judiciously. The benefit should also be tied to milestones like in the Brazilian system of children attending school or regular vaccination. Demographic measures like population control and balancing the sex ratio too can be incorporated in the system. Biometric identification (which will be linked to each bank account) of all family members should be used to verify the claims. There is a whole lot which can be done to pull millions out of poverty. The government should be judicious the way it uses public money and make its welfare schemes sustainable rather than populist.