No free lunch when it comes to amenities

BB Mahajan 

Chandigarh is among cities with the best living conditions in the country. It has wide roads and though with the growth in traffic, there is congestion on some roads during the peak hours, the roads are still by and large adequate for the existing level of traffic. 

The city has wide open spaces and there are a large number of parks spread all over. The quality of air is generally good, except for a few days during the year. Power cuts are sporadic, only occasional breakdowns. The city has good educational facilities, including a university, the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, medical college, engineering college, law school and reputed coaching institutes, reflected in the large number of admissions to the IITs, medical colleges, National Law Schools and the civil services, relative to its population. It also has good healthcare facilities, with good hospitals, both in the government and private sector, in the city and its periphery. The quality of life here is reflected in a steady growth in its population and high land value.

The residents desire, quite rightly, still even better living conditions in the form of better public transport, better bus shelters, congestion-free roads, cycle tracks, walkways, uninterrupted electric supply, 24x7 water supply, better waste collection and its disposal, and so on. 

There is, however, strong resistance, as in most democracies, to any increase in taxes or user charges. 

It required persistent efforts by the Chandigarh Administration over a long period to force the Municipal Corporation to start the paid parking system at the ridiculously low rate of Rs 5 for cars or to impose property tax which again was imposed only at nominal rates. 

The assumption in the minds of the residents is that since Chandigarh is a UT, the Government of India should bear all expenditure for providing ideal public facilities, which means tax payers in the whole country, even from poorer states like UP, Bihar or Orissa should pay for facilities in a city whose population has among the highest per capita income among the states and UTs. 

This is obviously an unrealistic expectation. The politicians who have to seek votes for their election are understandably reluctant to support the measures for raising resources through taxation or increase in user charges. If the residents want the desired improvements in public facilities, they have to assure the politicians through their voting pattern that they would support a realistic increase in taxes or user charges for enjoying better facilities. 

They are, of course, entitled to insist that public funds are judiciously spent in the interest of the public, particularly weaker sections, but a deficiency in it should not become an excuse for opposing all measures for resource mobilisation or evasion of tax. Tax evasion does not reduce corruption or misuse of public funds, it only reduces funds available for maintaining and improving public services.

(The writer is a retired IAS officer and served Punjab in several capacities. He retired as Secretary, Food, Government of India)