Green    Politics

The toll that polls take on environment…

Democrat candidate Barack Obama has won the US presidential elections. And the entire world is talking about his ‘historical’ victory. Not only because he is the first Afro-American President, but also because he has won the elections with a huge margin, leaving his Republican counterpart John McCain far behind. Speculations about the reasons behind this win are on in full swing.

According to experts, the most potent driving force behind Obama was the fact that his was “the best political campaign in the history of the United States of America” (Obama’s victory speech). Yes, it was. And a vast amount of money was spent on it. Millions of North American citizens contributed to his poll kitty.

Obama had an extremely broad donor base – developed through Internet. His supporters donated a whopping US$650 million – more than the amount spent by both presidential contenders in 2004 combined! What was done with the money? It was used to fight and win the war. In some states, in the final weeks of the campaign, Obama outspent McCain by a ratio of four to one.

Yes, an enormous amount of money is spent during elections. Not only in the US, but everywhere in the world. The scale of elections in the US is no doubt pretty huge. But, what about India? Well, now is the perfect time to talk and know more about this because the State Assembly Elections are already on in the country. And Delhi has just been through all the tamasha.

   The Electroal System  

The Parliament of India comprises of the President, and the two Houses, which form the Legislature. The President of India is elected for a five-yearterm by an electoral college consisting of members of federal and state legislatures.

The Parliament has two chambers – the House of the People (Lok Sabha) and the Council of States (Rajya Sabha).

Lok Sabha has 545 members – 543 members elected for a five-year-term in single-seat constituencies and two members appointed to represent the Anglo-Indian community.

Rajya Sabha has 245 members, 233 members elected for a six-year-term, with one-third retiring every two years.The members are elected by legislators of the state and union (federal) territories. The twelve nominated members are usually eminent artists (including actors), scientists, jurists, sportspersons, businessmen and journalists.

  Indian Polls  

India is a constitutional democracy with a parliamentary system of government. Elections are, thus, at the heart of the system. They decide the composition of the government, the membership of the two houses of Parliament; the state and union territory legislative assemblies; and the Presidency and vice-presidency. So, how big are the events?

  The scale  

Here are some facts and figures from the 2004 Parliamentary or Lok Sabha elections:
● There were – 1351 candidates from 6 National parties, 801 candidates from 36 State parties, 898 candidates from officially recognised parties and 2385 independent candidates.
● A total number of 38,99,48,330 people voted out of total electorate size of 67,14,87,930.
● The Election Commission employed almost 4 million people to run the election.
● The electorate for the Lok Sabha (Lower House of Parliament) exceeds 670 million electors in about 700000 polling stations spread across widely varying geographic and climatic zones.

And elections are expensive. The Election Commission of India prepares a budget, which is approved by the government. If elections are being held only for the Lok Sabha, the expenditure is borne entirely by the central government. But if the polls are for a state legislature, the expenditure is borne by the state government concerned. Here are some cost figures…

Now, under the Election Commission’s guidelines, each candidate can spend between Rs10 to Rs25 lakh, depending on the constituency. Out of this, Rs4 lakh has to be set aside for the campaign of national or state level leaders. Every item of expenditure is recorded. And before spending anything, the candidate has to inform the commission’s expenditure monitors.

What are the actual expenses? No one knows. Candidates spend as much as they like, and put in the name of their parties and friends, which is non-accountable.

But the main question is – where do they spend it? There are many options, but let us look at those that are accounted for. In the US for example,

Here is an example of the expenditures of two leading political parties in India during Assembly Elections in 2004 in the state of Maharashtra:

Hey! Look at the money they spent on travelling! Look at the US elections, the amount is enormous – US$134,593,527!

Politicians have to travel for campaign. After all, they have to make their presence felt. But what are its upshots? Emission of harmful greenhouse gases. And travelling is not the only way elections harm the environment…

Paper: Used for bills, pamphlets, handouts,
posters, dummy balloting papers, and ballot papers.

Travelling: By motorised vehicles, and
airplanes and helicopters, causing
harmful emissions.

Plastic: Used in buntings, posters, banners, badges,
flags, cut outs, audio and video cassettes,
balloting units, electronic voting machines.

Mess: wastes left behind after the campaign is over.

   Green Irony   

Elections harm the environment in various ways. However, it forms one of the main agendas for elections world over. Here are some extracts from the manifestos of some parties in India, United Kingdom, and United States.

India  

Nationalist Congress Party (Election Manifesto, Parliament Elections 2004) “Environment Protection: Development programmes would be implemented in such a way that in the process of development the concerns of environment protection are taken cognizance of a National Bio-diversity law would be enacted with special care to help protect the Traditional Knowledge of the local and tribal communities and connected intellectual property rights.”

The Bharatiya Janata Party (Chapter 14, BJP Election Manifesto, 1998) “Ecological Security for Sustainable Development: The BJP will ensure institutional measures to bring about ecological security so that all developmental programmes are in conformity with the principles of sustainable development… It is essential to ensure production with lower inputs of energy, water, chemicals, and at tower costs. This will call for significant scientific research, new technologies and implementation strategies… Introduce a National Environment Policy incorporating a healthy balance between development needs and preservation of natural resources.”

  UK

Labour Party, Policies – Environment “Winning the fight for Britain's future: We have set a target of making all new homes zero-carbon by 2015. Our new £100 billion blueprint for renewable energy will deliver a step change in low carbon energy supply.

Over the next 3 years, our policies will mean that a further 5 million households will be helped with insulation, that 100 million low energy light bulbs will be given out; and other energy saving products will be provided to 4 million homes.

By 2011 we will have phased out old highenergy light bulbs in favour of energy efficient ones, and are working with industry to phase out single-use carrier bags. Our waste strategy for England will deliver reductions in greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to at least 9.3 million tonnes of CO2 per year by 2020.”

The Conservative Party, Policy – Environment “Environment: A Conservative Government will make Britain greener by tackling climate change and enhancing our environment. We believe quality of life and environmental issues must be at the heart of politics – which is why we campaigned for a UK Climate Change Bill and why we are calling for a post-Kyoto international agreement…

working towards zero waste, providing incentives to recycle, improving urban green spaces and reversing the decline in our biodiversity… development of renewable and low carbon energy sources…

introduction of feed-in tariffs to encourage every hospital, school and home in the country to generate their own electricity… increasing Britain’s ability to cope with extreme weather conditions, for example by improving our flood prevention measures.”
 

   US

The Democratic Party, Agenda – Environment and climate change “Environment and Climate Change: We must end the tyranny of oil in our time. This immediate danger is eclipsed only by the longer-term threat from climate change, which will lead to devastating weather patterns, terrible storms, drought, conflict, and famine.

That means people competing for food and water in the next fifty years in the very places that have known horrific violence in the last fifty: Africa, the Middle East,
and South Asia. That could also mean destructive storms on our shores, and the disappearance of our coastline.

We understand that climate change is not just an economic issue or an environmental concern– this is a national security crisis.”

The Republican Party, Republican Platform 2008, Issues – Environment “Environmental Protection: By increasing our American energy supply and decreasing the long term demand for oil, we will be well positioned to
address the challenge of climate change and continue our longstanding responsibility for stewardship over the environment… the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment.

Those steps, if consistent with our global competitiveness will also be good for our national security, our energy independence, and our economy.

Any policies should be global in nature, based on sound science and technology, and should not harm the economy.”

It is clear that environment is a key election issue world over. But even if it is not spelt out, environment has always been and will be an important agenda at the hustings. Why? Because all crucial poll planks – water, fuel, and electricity – are traced back to resource management and governance. Even unemployment is indirectly related to environmental degradation, and every candidate promises better management of natural resources to solve the problem. They all declare that the key to employment lies in building productive and sustainable livelihoods based on natural resources.

But, ideas like ‘environment’, ‘development’ (and sustainable development), and ‘climate change’ are more often used as rhetoric, which have a “market value”. Politicians generally sell these ideas to people to get votes. Climate change is the latest buzzword that all political parties seem to be really concerned about. We are yet to see if the party manifestos in the coming elections will use it as a jargon or not. Till now, however, environment has remained limited to the realm of trees and animals.

The only way this environment-development agenda can work is through change in the ways that a country is run – may it be through policies, laws and enforcements, building local interests, efficient management. And there are neither any shortcuts to these, nor are there any quick-fixes.

   Green way   
So, the main questions are – if politicians are subverting environment, how do we make them unlearn? And if elections have the potential to harm the environment, do the promises of sustainable development hold ground?

Elections are mandatory. But, green elections are not. Yet, environmental NGOs and activists are trying to convince the Election Commission to make sure that the political parties adopt eco-friendly ways during elections. They want the parties to refrain from using plastic; keep loudspeaker noise to a minimum; and clean up the mess left behind after the campaign is over. And some attempts are already yielding results.

   Path finder   
For instance, in Karnataka, Chief Election Commissioner N. Gopalaswami requested all political parties not to use plastic in campaign materials. They were allowed to use posters, banners and buntings just before public meetings, only if they made sure that these were dismantled immediately after the function. He is trying to follow the same practice in Madhya Pradesh as well.

The focus is on clean environment during elections – literally and metaphorically. Will political parties follow it? Well, if the Election Commission makes it mandatory, the parties will have to. Even the voters have to include the ‘how green?’ criterion in their decision-making. Now, this would leave only one way out for the candidates – the green way!