Vol. 2 · pages 46–50
In the Bombay Legislature, with the Simon Commission and at the Round Table Conferences
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 46 (printed page 27)
27ON BUDGET
out a deficit arising from what they call their Prohibition Policy and therefore,
the question that arises for consideration is a simple question. The issue
is absolutely narrowed down and that issue is this : is drink a problem
and if drink is a problem, is it an urgent problem ? Unless this House is
prepared to give an affirmative answer to both these questions, there will be
no justification for voting taxation which has been proposed by the Finance
Minister. Sir, let us make no mistake in analysing the position. There is no
question that drinking is an evil and it does have very bad consequences,
but to admit that drink is an evil is not to admit that drink is a problem ;
much less is it an admission that it is an urgent problem.
Now, Sir, let us look at the position in a comparative way. What is the
position in the Bombay Presidency? We need not bother ourselves with the
rest of India at all for the moment because we are dealing with the budget
of the Bombay Ministry. What is the position in the Bombay Presidency
and what is the position in other countries so far as the drink question is
concerned ? First of all, let me give some figures with regard to the total
excise revenue that is derived in various countries because the revenue of a
country from excise is some indication as to the magnitude of the problem
which a country has to face. Now, I have taken these figures from the
Blue Book issued by the League of Nations and the figures refer to 1931.
Beginning with Great Britain the population is 44,937,444 and the excise
revenue is 1,504,895,000. In Austria—which is now no more but still it was
in 1937—the population is 6,760,233 and the total revenue derived from
excise was 15.96 lacks and odd. In Canada the population is 1 crore while
the excise revenue derived is 57.19 lakhs. The Irish Free State has a total
population of 2,965,854 while the total revenue derived from excise is 665
lakhs. Then take Denmark. Its total population is 37 lakhs while the excise
revenue derived is 5,34,80,000. France has a total population of 419 lakhs
and odd while the total revenue derived from excise is 207,079,650. Take
now the figures for Norway. Norway has a total population of 2,814,194
and its total revenue derived from excise is—it is a country where there is
local option 1,66,72,600. Now, Sir, in the light of this compare the figures
of our presidency. The Bombay Presidency has a population of 180 lakhs.
The total revenue from excise is 325 lakhs. Can any one say that this
consumption of liquor in the Bombay Presidency can be said to create a
problem which the State must undertake immediately to meet ? A man
who said “Yes” and gave an affirmative answer would certainly be a man
who has lost all his bearings. (Laughter) Take another test. Take the
consumption of liquor and I take these figures from the report submitted
by the Government of Bombay itself. What is the total amount of liquor
that the people consume ? Now, the Blue Book or the Administration Report
issued by the Government of Bombay say that the average consumption for
the whole presidency works out at the rate of 3 drams per head. I am told
that it is less than an ounce, in fact ¼ of an ounce, and my honourable
PDF page 47 (printed page 28)
28 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
friends opposite call this a problem. In rural area consumption is 1.8 of a
dram, and taking towns together, it is 8.2 drams not even an ounce. Take
again the revenue basis of the Bombay Presidency, and I am taking here now
the largest item of consumption, namely, the country spirit, which of course
figures the largest in our excise. What is the revenue that this Presidency
derives from country spirit? The report says that the total amount derived from
country spirit is Rs. 1,54,43,750. That is the total for the whole Presidency.
Now let us distribute this between the urban area and the rural area.
According to the Administration Report, there are 33 towns in the Bombay
Presidency. These 33 towns together total up in point of population about
29,00,000 of people. How much revenue is derived from these 33 towns from
country liquor ? The revenue that is derived is fully a crore of rupees from
these 33 towns. That means that the balance of the population, which does
not live in the towns but lives in the villages and that is according to my
calculation 1,52,00,000—consumes not more than 54 lakhs worth of country
spirit. Working that out per head, it means that every individual consumes
no more liquor than worth 5 annas (31 Nps.) in a year. Let me analyse the
total figures in the towns a little further. In the towns as I said, 29,00,000
of people consume liquor worth one crore of rupees. Is that correct ? We all
know that women in this country do not drink, and even the most habitual
drunkard would not tolerate his wife sipping even a dram. Also children do
not drink. Therefore, making an allowance for women and children, I think
we would be justified in deducting about 75 per cent. of the population of
the towns as a non-drinking population. If you deduct that, then it comes
to this, that about 10,00,000 of people are the people who are affected by
what is called the drink evil. Sir, with these figures before me I claim to
say that with these figures before him nobody who is a fair minded person
would be able to say that drink is such a problem in this country that it
ought to be tackled forthwith.
Now, Sir, I know there are people who have the United States of
America as their model, and who think that because the United States
has carried out the policy of prohibition by amending the constitution of
the United States in 1919, this country ought to follow that lead. But, Sir,
it is necessary for us, before we run amok, if I may say so, to consider
what the position was in the United States. I have here some figures
of the problem as it existed, the magnitude on which it existed in the
United States before the constitution was amended in 1919. What was the
total consumption of liquor in the United States ? According to the Book
“Prohibition” by Feldman, the position was this. Between 1910 and 1914 the
total per capita consumption of distilled spirits, wines and beer in gallons
was 22.43 per. individual ; between 1905 and 1910 it was 21; between 1900
and 1904 it was 18.77. It will be seen that the consumption per capita
was rapidly growing. Between 1900 and 1901 it was 18, between 1905
and 1909 it was 19.46 and between 1910 and 1914 it was 22.43. Surely,
PDF page 48 (printed page 29)
29ON BUDGET
our conditions cannot be said to be in any way comparable with the position
in the United States.
Take again another indication. Can we say that there is in this country
such a thing as alcoholism ? Can we say that there are people here who have
died of sheer alcoholism, people who have died of liver trouble on account of
the fact that they have been taking alcohol excessively ? I have gone through
the figures published in Public Health Reports of this Province and I have
also searched the figures published by the Commissioner of Health appointed
by the Government of India, and I want to say that neither have thought
it necessary even to notice such a thing. The reason why they do not notice
deaths from alcoholism or from liver trouble is because such a thing does
not exist in India at all. On the other hand, see what has happened in the
United States. In the United States, in 1917, 5 people out of 1,000 died of
sheer alcoholism ; in 1916, 5.8 ; in 1915, 5.2 ; in 1914, 4.9 ; in 1913, 5.10.
Take again another indication namely, deaths due to what is called cirrhosis
of the liver. In 1917, 11 persons out of 1,000 ; in 1916, 12; in 1915, 12.6;
in 1914, 13 ; in 1913, 13.4. Such a phenomenon, I submit, does not exist in
our part of the country at all. Therefore, my contention is that it is wrong
on the part of the Ministry to say that this is a problem which we ought to
deal with. My contention is that this really cannot be a problem in our part
of the country, and for two very good reasons. One good reason is that all
religions in India agree in imposing an injunction upon the people, that drink
is a sin. Religion may have done many mischievous things, but certainly
there can be no doubt that the one good thing that the Indian religions
have done, both Hindu and Mahomedan and the Zoroastrian religion, is
that they do impose such an injunction which has been so strictly obeyed
by a large part of our people.
The second distinguishing feature which marks out our country from other
countries, and which cannot create a problem so far as drink is concerned is
just this, that the drink traffic is in the hands of the Government. It is not
in the hands of private profiteers as it is in the case of America or as it is
in the case of other European countries. The Government is a responsible
body, is subject to public opinion, is subject to the opinion of this House,
and therefore can never do the mischief which a private profiteer can do.
As I said, looking at it from every point of view, I refuse to admit that it
is a problem which needs to be tackled.
Then, Sir, the next question that I want to ask is this. Is this such an
urgent problem that we must keep aside everything and deal with it first ?
In order to answer that question, it is necessary to bear in mind what the
different needs are of the people of this Province. Are the other needs fully
satisfied ? Are they tolerably satisfied, so that because they are tolerably
satisfied we ought to keep them aside for the moment and tackle this
one and only question ? Let me take a few illustrations. First of all take
the question of education. With regard to adult education, the position in
this Province is this. So far as males are concerned, only 14.3 per cent. of
PDF page 49 (printed page 30)
30 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
the male population is literate. So far as the female population is concerned,
only 2.4 per cent. of the female population is literate. That means that
practically 86 per cent. of the male population and 98 per cent. of the female
population needs still to be taught the rudiments of education, so that
they may carry on the activities of their life without falling a prey to the
machinations of other classes. We have had a committee appointed by the
Government to report upon this matter. That committee has made its report.
But I do not find any provision made in the present budget to carry out the
proposals made by that committee. Take children’s education. What is the
position in this Province ? In this Province, one thing which is absolutely
undeniable is this, that this Government have repudiated their responsibility
in regard to college education. I think there can be no doubt on the point.
This Government do not regard giving higher education to the boys of this
Province any business of theirs. That has been left by Government to private
agencies. With regard to secondary education, the matter is more or less on
the same footing. Government do not take responsibility on their shoulders
but they supplement the monies collected by private agencies by small grants
from public treasury. Therefore, we are really under a very limited field of
activity so far as education is concerned. Then, primary education. What
have Government done with regard to primary education ? From the figures
that I have been able to collect yesterday, I find the present position is this.
The Primary Education Act applies to children who are between 6 and 11
years of age. The total number of children between 6 and 11 is 2,479,000.
Of these children, I think 754,000 are in schools; and the rest of them are
not in schools. This proportion works out in this way. Out of every three
children, one is in school and two are still outside school. Examine the question
from another point of view, from the point of view of facilities provided by
Government for primary education. According to Government figures, there
are in the towns of this Province, 184 primary schools. This is with regard
to towns. What is the position with regard to villages? The total number
of villages in this Province is 21,484. Out of these only 8,599 villages have
got schools ; and 12,885 villages have no schools at all. That is the position.
Government do not even care to provide facilities for them, apart from the
question of carrying out the provisions of the Primary Education Act. Now,
Sir, one curious thing which strikes me at any rate, and I do not know
whether it strikes the Honourable Finance Minister, is what would be the
cost of making primary education compulsory. According to the figures worked
out by the Primary Education Committee, what Bombay Government need
to make primary education compulsory is 1.30 lakhs. Now, Sir, that is just
the amount the Honourable the Finance Minister is raising by his taxation
proposals. Apart from the question whether the taxation proposals are good
or not, confining my attention to the question as to the best method, the
proper purpose for which this money ought to be spent, the question that I
should like to ask of the Honourable the Finance Minister is this. You are
PDF page 50 (printed page 31)
31ON BUDGET
raising practically 1,30 lakhs of rupees ; is it necessary that you should
spend this money on improving the lot of a drunkard or should you spend
this money on educating children who do not get education ? What is the
choice that you make ? That is really the whole question. Is the education
of children more important ? Is the education practically of 17 to 18 lakhs
of children less important than the lot of 10 lakhs of city people who choose
to drink ? Sir, I do not believe in it. I am a teetotaller and I wish everybody
was. But the problem is really this. If you give me an educated man who is
also a sober man. I welcome him. But, if you tell me to take sober man who
is a fool, who is a dud, who does not understand anything, I for myself would
prefer a man who drinks but who knows something. That is my position, I
think that is the position which ought to be considered by the Honourable
the Finance Minister when distributing this colossal taxation which he is
levying on the Province.
Take another alternative thing. I refer to public health. The total
expenditure this Province incurs on public health is a paltry sum of Rs.
31,48,000. It works out at the rate of 2½ per cent. on our total expenditure.
Now, Sir, village water supply is a crying need; there are hundreds of villages
which have no water supply at all. Any one who goes to the villages will
mark that every village in this Province is nothing else but a dung heap.
It is a misnomer to call it a village, it is a misnomer to call it a place fit
for human habitation. The improvement of the insanitary condition and
the abomination that exist in villages is certainly the crying need of our
Province. Hundreds of people are dying from malaria, are dying from all
sorts of diseases. There are hardly any dispensaries. There is hardly any
provision made for distribution of medicine or medical treatment. There is
no water supply, as I said. Last year, a provision of 10 lakhs was made.
We do not know how that money has been spent. This year, I find there
is some provision made, about Rs. 8,55,000. What is all this having regard
to the enormity of the want ? Hundreds of people are dying by reason of
the fact that there is no medical aid, no clear water to drink. The Finance
Minister has chosen to spend this money in saving the souls to use a
biblical expression—in curing the souls or in being the curate of 10 lakhs
of drunkards in Bombay and Ahmedabad.
Then, Sir, take another point. The same point has been made, that we are
taxing the city dwellers, we are taxing the urban population. Why are we
taxing the urban population ? The reason why we are taxing the urban
population is because we want to improve the amenities of the village
folk. Is there anything of the kind done in this budget ? If the Honourable
Minister was really doing the thing for which some friends of mine have
given so much care and attention, I shall be very glad. On whom is it
spent, this tax of 1.69 lakhs ? He spends on the drunkard who lives in the
town. The poor man in the village does not get any benefit out of it. Take
for instance, one single item, namely, the land tax. The total of the land
tax in this province is Rs. 3,38,63,000. Ten lakhs were remitted last year.