Why India should be growing dal and not sugarcane

Toor_Dal_Tur_dal

Dal prices, in particular tur dal (also known as arhar dal or pigeon pea) prices, have been on fire. The price of tur dal even crossed Rs 200 per kg sometime back. As I write this, the price of tur dal is still hovering around Rs 200 per kg.

This trend has prevailed over the last few years where dal prices have reached astonishingly high levels at various points of time. Why is that the case? The reasons are both from the demand as well as supply side.

As rural incomes have gone up over the last few years, the demand for dal as a source of protein has gone up. The supply hasn’t been able to keep pace. Over and above this, short term weather trends have led to massive spikes in dal prices.

In 2007-2008, India produced 3.08 million tonnes of tur dal. In 2014-2015, the total production was down to around 2.78 million tonnes, which was lower than the production in 2007-2008. The total production in 2013-2014 had stood at 3.34 million tonnes.

Hence, between 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, there was a significant fall in production of tur dal. Economists Ashok Gulati and Shweta Saini in a column in The Indian Express estimate that the “the consumption of tur hovers between 3.3 to four million tonnes.” Hence, there is a clear gap between the demand for and the supply of tur dal.

What has not helped is the fact that the yield has more or less remained flat. In 2007-2008, 826 kg of tur dal was produced per hectare. By 2013-2014, this number had risen to only 859 kg per hectare, at a rate of less than 1% per year (around 0.7% to be precise).

As Dharmakirti Joshi and Dipti Deshpande economists at Crisil Research point out in a recent research note titled Every third year, pulses catch price-fire: “Pulses account for about 20% of area under foodgrain production, but less than 10% of foodgrain output. Also, over time, production of pulses has failed to catch up with demand. Output has grown less than 2% average in the last 20 years, while acreage has grown even lesser at 0.8%. Not surprisingly, yield rose only 0.9%.”

There are fundamental reasons behind why tur dal prices in particular and dal prices in general have been on fire. Over and above this there is a more recent reason as well. The monsoon this year was at 86% of its long period average. And this did not help either. As Joshi and Deshpande point out: “Pulses are highly risk-prone crops because most of the production is rain-dependent. Barely 16% of total pulses area is covered by irrigation and hence the crop is highly vulnerable to monsoon shocks.”

Also, the current incentive structure of the government is in favour of growing rice, wheat and sugarcane. As Gulati and Saini point out: “The government needs to create a crop-neutral incentive structure for farmers, which is at present skewed in favour of rice, wheat and sugarcane. Much of the subsidies on fertilisers, power, and irrigation go to these crops. These subsidies amount to more than Rs 10,000/ hectare. If the same amount were given to pulse growers, they would be incentivised to produce more.”

The government declares a minimum support price for rice and wheat and actively procures grains through the Food Corporation of India and other agencies.

It declares a minimum support prices for dal as well, but doesn’t actively procure it. Given this, while the farmer is sure of the government buying the rice and wheat that he produces at a certain time, the same certainty doesn’t exist in case of dal. As Joshi and Deshpande point out: “Production is also risky because of inadequate post-harvest storage facilities, absence of assured marketing outlets (unlike wheat and rice) and lack of government assurance for purchase under public distribution.”

The irony is that with economic incentives like assured procurement by the government lead to the farmers producing water intensive crops in water-scarce areas. As TN Ninan writes in The Turn of the Tortoise—The Challenge and Promise of India’s Future: “Punjab and Haryana need to change their choice of crops and reduce growing water-hungry rice…Growing sugar cane, even more water hungry than paddy, in water-scarce Maharashtra is equally contraindicated—especially since the country happens to be surplus in sugar most of the time, and exporting sugar amounts to exporting water.”

As Ninan further points out: “The high cane prices make the crop attractive to farmers who otherwise might have grown less water-intensive crops, especially in stretches where water is not abundant. But one price distortion leads to another, and then another.”

With this entire structure in place enough dal doesn’t get grown. As Gulati and Saini point out in another column in The Financial Express: “Pulses need much less water, are nitrogen-fixing, and therefore do not need much chemical fertilisers either. They can thus save on large input subsidies (power, irrigation and fertilisers), much of which are normally cornered by rice, wheat and sugarcane as these crops have high irrigation cover and higher fertiliser consumption.”

So even though growing dal needs lesser water not enough dal is grown because the prevailing economic incentives go against it. And this anomaly is not going to go away anytime soon.

The column originally appeared on The Daily Reckoning on Nov 30, 2015

Will the 7th Pay Commission recommendations lead to higher inflation?

rupee
The advantage of writing regularly is that one can dwell into great detail on issues of national economic importance. Hence, this is the fourth column on the recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission this week.

When I started writing regularly in the media nearly 12 years back, the communication with the readers was largely one way. One wrote a piece and then forgot about it. There was no feedback coming in from the readers. There was no way of figuring out whether something one had written had actually been read. If it had been read then what had the readers thought about it?

Some feedback came from the colleagues, if they did read, what one had written (normally they didn’t). The bosses did give feedback once in a while, especially if they didn’t like something one had written.

But now with the advent of the social media, feedback (both good and bad) keeps coming in all the time, and questions keep getting asked. Also, if readers like something they share it. This gives some idea of what the readers are actually interested in. There is constant communication with the readers these days and that’s a good thing.

One of the questions that I recently got asked on Twitter was: “Will the 7th Pay Commission recommendations lead to higher inflation?” As I have mentioned multiple times this week, the Pay Commission recommendations will lead to an increased spending of Rs 1,02,100 crore by the government, to pay higher salaries of central government employees and higher pensions of retired central government employees.

How will this lead to inflation? A part of this increase in salary and pensions will be spent to buy goods and services. As this money chases the same amount of goods and services, prices will go up. This logic seems very straightforward—as straightforward as saying, a cut in interest rates leads to people and companies borrowing more, which is something one hears all the time.

In fact, that is how things played out in the aftermath of the Fifth as well as Sixth Pay Commissions, once their recommendations had been accepted. The higher salaries and pensions led to a higher consumption which led to higher inflation.

As Crisil Research points out in a recent research note 7th Pay Commission: A non-inflationary boost to consumption and investment: “During the Fifth Central Pay Commission(CPC) payout, overall inflation rose by 657 basis points[one basis point is one hundredth of a percentage] on-year in fiscal 1999, while non-food inflation in the same year rose only 141 boints. During the Sixth CPC payout years, however, overall inflation rate rose by 611 basis points on-year between fiscals 2009 and 2010. But this time the increase in non-food inflation was higher and lagged – up 492 bps during fiscals 2010 and 2011.”

So will this phenomenon play out this time around as well? A major reason for inflation the last two times was the fact that the Pay Commission increases came much after they were due. The Sixth Pay Commission increase was due from January 2006. But the report was submitted only in March 2008 and accepted by the government in August 2008. Hence, arrears had to be paid and they were paid only in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010.

This meant that people suddenly ended up with a lot of money in their hands, as payments were made. As Crisil Research points out with regard to the Sixth Pay Commission: “Large arrear payments coincided with the rapid rise in rural wages adding to core inflationary pressures then. These two factors are expected to be absent, this time.”

This time the salary increases are due from January 2016. Unlike the last time, the Pay Commission recommendations have come in before the due date. Also, chances are that the government will implement these recommendations starting from April 2016, the next financial year. Given this, only a limited amount of arrears will have to paid, meaning that people will not suddenly end up with a lot of money in their hands, as they had last time around.

Another factor that needs to be kept in mind is that most factories are not running full steam at this point of time. As Reserve Bank of India governor, Raghuram Rajan, recently pointed out, most factories are running 30% below capacity as of now.

This means that factories can easily ramp up supply if the demand goes up due to higher consumer spending, without leading to higher prices. Typically, if factories are running full steam, a rise in demand cannot be matched immediately with a rise in supply and that leads to prices going up. But that sort of scenario is unlikely to playout as of now.

Over and above this, as and when the recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission are accepted by the central government, pressure will mount on state governments to increase the salaries and pensions they pay as well. The state government increases won’t happen overnight and will take some time to happen.

And this will allow the inflation due to increased demand, if any, to spread out over a period of time.

As Crisil Research points out: “State governments – which have more employees than the Central government – tend to implement these with a lag. Therefore, while there is a push to consumption demand, it takes place over time allowing supply-side factors to adjust wherever possible.”

The column originally appeared on The Daily Reckoning on Nov 26, 2015

Will damages of the 7th Pay Commission be as bad as the Sixth?

rupee-foradian.png.scaled1000
This is the third time this week I am writing a column around the Seventh Pay Commission recommendations. In this column I would like to address the total financial impact of the recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission.

As I have mentioned in the earlier columns, the Commission has recommended an overall increase of 23.6% in the salary of the central government employees and the pensions of those who have retired from central government jobs. This is likely to cost the government Rs 1,02,100 crore in 2016-2017, the Commission has estimated.

The report estimates that this increase will work out to 0.65% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2016-2017.  In comparison, the awards of the Sixth Pay Commission had worked out to 0.77% of the GDP.

The question is how much will it impact the finances of the central government, if the recommendations where to be accepted. First and foremost Pay Commission recommendations are usually accepted. And there is no reason that they won’t be accepted this time around as well.

Further, it is very difficult to estimate by exactly how much the government finances will be affected , given that there is no way of figuring out what the budget makers of the government are thinking. Nevertheless, it is safe to say that the government will have to figure out a way of either increasing its earnings or cutting down on its expenditure, in order to be able to finance this expenditure (as we saw in yesterday’s edition of The Daily Reckoning).

If we look at the budget numbers between 2005-2006 and 2015-2016, the government expenditure has gone up at the rate of 13.4% per year. The government receipts (i.e. the tax and the non-tax revenue of the government less its borrowings) have gone up at the rate of 13% per year. The government expenditure has been going up on a larger base at a faster rate.

Of the extra Rs 1,02,100 crore the government will have to spend, Rs 73,650 crore will have to be borne on the general budget and the remaining on the railway budget. Assuming that the trend of the last ten years will continue in 2016-2017, with an extra expenditure of Rs 73,650 crore, the fiscal deficit of the government is likely to jump to 4.5% of the gross domestic product (GDP) (I will spare you the Maths here).

In 2015-2016, the government has targeted a fiscal deficit of 3.9% of the GDP. Fiscal deficit is the difference between what a government earns and what it spends. And this isn’t a good thing, given that the government is trying to achieve a fiscal deficit of 3.5% of the GDP by 2016-2017 and 3% of the GDP by 2017-2018.

Long story short—the government cannot continue operating the way it currently is. It will have to find out ways to cut its expenditure on other fronts as well increase its revenues. If it does not do that there is no way it will be able to finance the extra spending on salaries and pensions without managing to increase its expenditure as well as the fiscal deficit in the process. And that won’t be a good thing for the Indian economy.

A higher fiscal deficit will have to be financed out of higher borrowing by the government. This will leave lesser amount of money for the private sector to borrow and in effect push up interest rates. And that is something the government won’t want to do.

In fact, the impact of the recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission don’t end at the central government level. As soon as the central government accepts the recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission, demands will start for the state governments to increase their salary and pension payouts as well.

That is how things had played out after Sixth Pay Commission recommendations were accepted. The Sixth Pay Commission was due from 2006 onwards, but the Pay Commission report was submitted only in March 2008. The recommendations were accepted in August 2008. Given this, the government had to pay arrears to the employees.

These arrears were paid in 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, with a split of 40:60. This pushed up the fiscal deficit of the central government big time. The fiscal deficit in the year 2007-2008 had stood at 2.54% of the GDP. In 2008-2009, it hit 5.99% and then climbed to 6.46% of the GDP in 2009-2010 (as can be seen from the accompanying table).

There were other reasons as well for this massive jump in the fiscal deficit, from debt of farmers being waived off, to the United Progressive Alliance government getting into the pump priming mode in the aftermath of the financial crisis which started in mid-September 2008, to the expansion of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) to all districts of the country from the original 200 districts.

YearFiscal deficit of the central govt(% of GDP)Combined fiscal deficit of the state govts (% of GDP)Total
2007-20082.541.514.05
2008-20095.992.398.38
2009-20106.462.919.37
Source: http://planningcommission.nic.in/data/datatable/1203/table_27.pdf

 

After the central government, the state governments also had to start raising salaries as well as pensions. The Seventh Pay Commission had commissioned a study by IIM Calcutta to “ascertain the fiscal impact of the previous Commissions’ awards on the states”.

The study found that: “that a significant number of States follow the recommendations of the Central Pay Commission. Equally, there is significant plurality of States that design their own pay awards based on the recommendations of their own State Pay Commissions, which of course do consider the recommendations the Central Pay Commission.”

Hence, the salaries of the employees of the state government employees also went up after the Sixth Finance Commission recommendations were accepted by the central government. This led to the combined fiscal deficit of the states jumping from 1.51% of the GDP in 2007-2008 to 2.91% of the GDP in 2009-2010.

The combined fiscal deficit of the centre as well as the states jumped from 4.05% of the GDP to 9.37% of the GDP. Things started to improve from 2010-2011 onwards. As the Seventh Finance Commission report points out: “The empirical analysis conducted indicates that the macroeconomic impact on States’ finances tends to taper off in two years in most cases.” So, government finances were impacted for two years.

Will a similar scenario play out this time around as well? While the fiscal deficits of the centre as well as the states are likely to jump up, the quantum of the jump may not be as much, because this time the chances of arrears having to be paid are low (at least in case of the central government).

As the Seventh Pay Commission report points out: “The awards of the previous Pay Commissions, both V as well as the VI, involved payment of arrears…However, Seventh Central Pay Commission recommendations entail, at best, payments of marginal arrears.”

This time around the chances are that the recommendations of the Commission will be implemented from April 1, 2016, onwards, and hence will involve payment of marginal arrears. In case of state governments, the arrears will depend on how soon the state governments agree to salary increases.

So can we safely say that the damages of the Seventh Pay Commission will not be as bad as the damages of the Sixth Pay Commission, which screwed government finances for two years? The fact is that the Seventh Pay Commission has recommended one rank one pension for central government employees as well. And that remains the joker in the pack.

The column originally appeared on The Daily Reckoning on Nov 26, 2015

Who is a Babu?

rupee-foradian.png.scaled1000
This is a slightly different piece from the ones that I usually write for The Daily Reckoning newsletter. In this piece I will try and define a babu.

So who is a babu? More than coming up with an exact definition, it is easier to just visualise him, in a cynical sort of way. He is the quintessential government employee, not reaching office before 11PM, sitting on a chair all day and not working, taking regular breaks for having cups of tea under the banyan tree outside his office, with a constant eye on the watch, so that he can leave office the moment it strikes 5PM (or may be even 4PM in some cases). Oh and of course, to do any work the babu needs to be paid a bribe (how could have I missed out on that).

The Bangla singer Nachiketa has a fantastic song defining a babu, it’s called aami sorkari karamchari (I am a government employee). Those who do not understand Bangla can listen to the Hindi version of the song by the same singer here. I guess a better song has not been written stereotyping the government in India, since this song came out sometime in the 1990s.

Now to get back to the topic at hand. So we have some sort of a definition of who is a babu, in place. But why am I talking about babus today? The Seventh Pay Commission has recommended a 23.6% overall increase in the salaries of central government employees and the pensions of retired central government employees, who are typically referred to as babus.

This has led to a lot of outrage on the social media in particular and the media in general. People have raised a lot of rhetoric around whether lazy government employees need to be paid so much when they cannot seem to get any work done. Some people have asked why do salaries of corrupt babus need to be increased. Still others have asked, why can’t the government decrease its size and not need to pay so much to so many babus.

In fact, the Seventh Pay Commission report has some data which will surprise you on this front. At least, it did surprise me. As on January 1, 2014, the central government employed a total of 33.02 lakh people against a sanctioned strength of 40.49 lakh.

Of the 33.02 lakh employees, 9.80 lakh were employed by the ministry of home affairs. These primarily include individuals working for the central paramilitary forces like central reserve police force (CRPF), Border Security Force (BSF) etc. The Railways employed another 13.16 lakh. The Defence employed another 3.98 lakh in civilian positions. And the Postal department employed 1.98 lakh. Though there is some controversy here.

The data obtained by the Seventh Pay Commission puts the number of employees working for India Post at 1.98 lakh. The expenditure budget of 2014 puts the number at 4.6 lakh. And data from Directorate General of Employment and Training suggests that the number of postal employees is at 2.09 lakh.

In fact, the same variation is seen when it comes to the number of people employed in defence in the civilian position. The expenditure budget of 2014 suggests 34,813, the DGET 3.75 lakh and the data obtained by the Seventh Pay Commission puts it at 3.98 lakh. I wonder how can there be such a huge difference between different estimates.(Regular readers of The Daily Reckoning readers will also appreciate here, how difficult it is to write anything that is data oriented in India). Anyway, getting back to the matter at hand, for the sake of this analysis we will stick to the numbers that the Seventh Pay Commission has obtained.

If we were to leave out those employed by railways, post and ministry of home affairs, and those working in defence in civilian positions, the central government employs just 4.18 lakh people and that is clearly not huge in a country of more than 120 crore people.

Also, people working for the central paramilitary forces and even defence in civilian positions, clearly cannot be considered to be as babus, in the strictest sense of the term.

The India Post employees can possibly be considered as babus. If we add their numbers, then we get a 6.08 lakh central government employees who can be labelled as babus. While, the railway employees are not exactly known for their efficient way of working, but railways is an essential service and you need people to run it.

As the Seventh Pay Commission report points out: “In fact the number of personnel working in the Secretariat of ministries/departments, after excluding independent/statutory entities, attached and subordinate offices will add up to less than thirty thousand6. The ‘core’ of the government, so to say, is actually very small for the Government of India, taken as a whole.”

While it is not easy to compare one government with another, the Seventh Pay Commission does make an attempt to do that. As the report points out: “Available literature indicates that the size of the non-postal civilian workforce for the US Federal Government in the year 2012 was 21.30 lakh. This includes civilians working in US defence establishments. The corresponding persons in position in India for the Central Government in 2014 was 17.96 lakh8. The total number of federal/Central Government personnel per lakh of population in India and the US works out to 139 and 668 respectively.”

What these data points clearly tell us is that the Indian government is not big at the central government level, at least. There is a “concentration of personnel in a handful of departments” like home ministry and railways ministry. The department of revenue is other big employer, the report points out.

So what can we learn from this? First and foremost that the central government may have babus who are not efficient at work, but it doesn’t have too many of them. A major part of the increase in salaries recommended by the Seventh Pay Commission will go to the paramilitary forces, railways and defence personnel.

So a smaller government in terms of number of people at least at the central government may not be possible. Now this realisation has important repercussions.

The Seventh Pay Commission’s recommendations will cost the government Rs 1,02,100 crore. Hence, even though the number of people is not huge, the salary plus pensions bill is huge, given the earning capacity of the government. And if the government continues to work in the way it currently is, there is a very good chance that this increased expenditure will end up screwing up the finances of the government like it had after the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission had been accepted in August 2008.

Given this, the government needs to work in a very efficient way. It needs to get rid of loss making public sector enterprises like MTNL and Air India. It also needs to raise more money by strategically selling its stake in other profit making public sector enterprises. It needs to make an inventory of all the land held by public sector enterprises and look at various ways of monetising it.

Further, steps need to be taken to increase the tax base, instead of taxing the same set of people over and over again. Domestic black money needs to be concentrated on. Right now the government clearly does not earn enough to finance the increase in salaries and pensions recommended by the Central Pay Commission.

Also, with people living longer and other developments like one rank one pension (which the seventh pay commission has recommended for all central government employees), the pension bill of the government is set to shoot up. In this scenario it is important that the government move the sections of the government still on the defined-benefit pension to defined-contribution pension.

The Seventh Pay Commission has also recommended a minimum pay of Rs 18,000 with effect from January 1, 2016. The allowances and other facilities will be over and above this pay. At lower levels the government pays much more than the private sector. And this explains to a large extent why you hear engineers, PhDs and doctors applying for jobs at lower levels of the government. This is an anomaly that needs to be set right. But I am not sure how determined this government (or for that matter any other government would have been) is to challenge the existing way of doing things.

The column originally appeared on The Daily Reckoning on Nov 24, 2015

7th Pay Commission Report: What does govt ‘really’ spend its money on?

rupee
Late last week, the Seventh Pay Commission recommended a 23.6% overall increase in the salaries of central government employees and the pensions of retired central government employees. This increase is likely to cost the government Rs 1,02,100 crore in 2016-2017, the Pay Commission report estimates. This increase will work out to 0.65% of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2016-2017. In comparison, the awards of the Sixth Pay Commission had worked out to 0.77% of the GDP.

Since the recommendations of the report came out in the public domain, there has been a lot of noise around whether the inefficient government employees need to be paid so much. Or does the government need to employ the number of people that it does? What seems like an obvious answer is not so obvious when you look at the actual numbers. But that is a question I will leave for tomorrow’s edition of The Daily Reckoning. Today I wanted to discuss something else. Something that will set the pretext for tomorrow’s edition of The Daily Reckoning.

The question I want to ask today is how much money does the central government spend on paying salaries and pensions. The accompanying table provides the answer.

YearPensionSalary(Pay,Allowances,
Travel Expenses)
Total
2013-201474,896121,188196,084
2014-201581,705137,807219,512
2015-2016
(estimated)
88,521149,524238,045

Source: www.indiabudget.nic.in; In Rs Crore

Looking at these numbers in isolation doesn’t tell us much, other than the fact that the latest salary plus pensions bill of the central government comes to Rs 2,38,045 crore. Let’s look at them as a proportion of the total expenditure as well as the total receipts of the government, to give us a much better idea how big the spending on salaries and pensions is.

YearSalary + PensionTotal govt expenditureSalary + Pension as a
% of govt expenditure
2005-200658,490506,12311.56%
2013-2014196,0841,559,44712.57%
2014-2015219,5121,681,15813.06%
2015-2016
(estimated)
238,0451,777,47713.39%

Source: www.indiabudget.nic.in ; In Rs Crore

As can be seen from the above table, the salary plus pensions bill of the central government as a proportion of the total expenditure has gone up over the years. From making up around 11.56% of the total government expenditure, ten years back, it has jumped to around 13.39% in 2015-2016.

A possible explanation for this might lie in the fact that the number of central government employees has gone up during the last ten years. In 2005-2006, the central government employed around 32.3 lakh people. In 2015-2016, it employs around 35.5 employees.

Further, the number of pensioners has also jumped from around 38.41 lakhs to 51.96 lakh (as on January 2014, I couldn’t find the latest number of pensioners). Given this, it is not surprising that the salary plus pensions bill of the government has gone up.

But that is just one way of looking at it. The other way of looking at is that more than 13% of government’s expenditure is on basically on around 88 lakh individuals (the salaried lot plus the pensioners of the central government). Consider the fact that India’s population is more than 120 crore, you realise that this spending is concentrated on a certain section of the population and their families. But does that mean that the government should be smaller than it currently is? The answer is not so straightforward. As I said, I will answer that question in tomorrow’s column.

It needs to be mentioned here that the total expenditure of the government is met through borrowing because the government doesn’t earn enough to meet all its expenditure. Given this, how do things look when we compare the salary plus pension bill to the total receipts of the government (i.e. tax and non-tax revenue less the borrowings).

YearSalary + PensionTotal receiptsSalary + Pensions as a
proportion of total receipts
2005-200658,490359,68816.26%
2013-2014196,0841,056,58918.56%
2014-2015219,5121,168,53018.79%
2015-2016
(estimated)
238,0451,221,82819.48%

Source: www.indiabudget.nic.in ; In Rs Crore

So what does the above table tell us? The government spends around one out of the every five rupees that it earns on paying pensions and salaries. And that is a pretty high portion of what it earns.

So how much money is left with the government to spend on important things like infrastructure, health, education, etc. Before I answer this question, I need to get some more data points in.

The government spends a lot of money in paying interest on the debt that it has taken on to finance its expenditure. And it also spends a lot of money repaying the debt as it falls due.

YearSalary +
Pension
Interest on
Debt
Repayment
of Debt
TotalTotal
receipts
Ratio
2005-200658,490130,032222,658411,180359,688114.32%
2013-2014196,084374,254162,976733,3141,056,58969.40%
2014-2015219,512411,354200,955831,8211,168,53071.19%
2015-2016
(estimated)
238,045456,145225,574919,7641,221,82875.28%

Source: www.indiabudget.nic.in ; In Rs Crore

The above table makes for a very interesting reading. In 2013-2014, the government spent nearly 69.4% of its receipts on paying salaries, pensions and interest on its accumulated debt, and repaying the debt that fell due. In 2015-2016, this had gone up to nearly 75.3%. How does the scene look when we compare this to the total expenditure of the government?

YearSalary +
Pension
Interest on
Debt
Repayment
of Debt
TotalTotal govt
expenditure
Ratio
2005-200658,490130,032222,658411,180506,12381.24%
2013-2014196,084374,254162,976733,3141,559,44747.02%
2014-2015219,512411,354200,955831,8211,681,15849.48%
2015-2016
(estimated)
238,045456,145225,574919,7641,777,47751.75%

Source: www.indiabudget.nic.in ; In Rs Crore

The first thing that the table tells us is that the situation is not as bad as it was in 2005-2006, when more than80% of the expenditure of the government was on salaries, pensions, paying interest on debt and repaying debt. Things have improved since then. Nevertheless, the government still incurs more than half of its expenditure on salaries, pensions, paying interest on debt and repaying debt. What this tells us very clearly is that the government doesn’t have much money left to be spending on the important areas of physical infrastructure, education, health etc.

With a further increase in pensions and salaries on the way, this is only going to get worse. The government will have even lesser money left to be spending on important things like education, health, infrastructure etc.

So what is the way out? For that you will have to wait for tomorrow’s column.

This column originally appeared on The Daily Reckoning on Nov 23, 2015