Last November, the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly passed bills to amend the state's panchayat raj and municipal acts that had previously banned anyone with more than two children from contesting local body elections for posts such as sarpanch or mayor. Notably, Naidu was the one who had prescribed that rule in 1994.
Published Jan 20, 2025 | 9:00 AM ⚊ Updated Jan 20, 2025 | 9:39 AM
Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu.
What is Nara Chandrababu Naidu up to? That is the thought that comes to my mind after the Andhra Pradesh chief minister’s cryptic proposal that the state’s local body elections should be fought only by those with more than two children.
I don’t think that is workable except perhaps as a ticket distribution strategy within his TDP. However, it should be seen as some kind of moral appeal to increase the size of families to arrest or reverse the problem of dealing with an ageing population.
Even so, there may be more to this than that in the broader context of developing India and its politics, especially keeping in mind the fact that the South is surging ahead in economic growth but lagging in population growth. I think I have seen it all – and so has Mr. Naidu, it seems.
I grew up watching wall posters asking Indians to have only two or three children and for a while, even just one (Hum Dono Ek, Hamara Ek – We are one, we will have one!).
Things have come a full circle, at least for Andhra Pradesh and its southern neighbours.
I recently watched the popular chat show in Tamil, Neeya Naana (You or Me?) on Vijay TV devoted entirely to the new DINK or DINKY (Double Income No Kids or No Kids Yet) phenomenon symbolic of higher incomes and greater focus on lifestyles and careers. With many educated, well-earning couples choosing not to have children, the economy starts doing better in incomes and lifestyles but over a longer period, this also makes for twisted demographics.
Last November, the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly passed bills to amend the state’s panchayat raj and municipal acts that had previously banned anyone with more than two children from contesting local body elections for posts such as sarpanch or mayor. Notably, Naidu was the one who had prescribed that rule in 1994. He is effectively reversing his old stance to face a changed reality.
Andhra has shifted from a problem of plenty to one of scarcity, in effect joining the league of advanced European economies like Germany and Italy.
It is a tribute to economic growth, family planning policies, growing literacy and education, especially among women, and the desire to increase the standard of living.
Last but not least, Andhra Pradesh is a state with a significant section of the populace obsessed with overseas employment, especially in the United States. Migration out of Andhra Pradesh may not be statistically significant but the economic prosperity and the psychological aspirations it has brought in must have had its impact on demographics.
Last October, Naidu urged his state’s people to have more children when he flagged off stalled construction at Andhra’s new capital, Amaravati. What he has said this month only amplifies that point with an eyebrow-raising suggestion that is a 180-degree turn. If he said that with an eye on elder care – a critical issue in places with ageing population – that is a welcome concern.
What worries me is that localised discussions on demographics may give rise to anti-migrant sentiments. There are hints of it already in Tamil Nadu. Do we want people of one Indian state looking down on another?
Migrants from the so-called Poorvanchal region comprising eastern Uttar Pradesh and western Bihar are now a significant lot in Delhi’s electorate as the state goes to polls next month. Controversies surrounding them are part of the state’s politics.
A prominent Delhi BJP leader once spoke of domicile-based restrictions in Delhi, much like Telangana politicians who used to consider those from the coastal part of undivided Andhra Pradesh as outsiders. Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal faced an attack from the BJP this month for alleging that “fake voters” were being brought in from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
In Tamil Nadu, the nativist Naam Tamilar Katchi (NTK) led by rabble-rousing Seeman often uses the word “vandheri” (upstart migrant) to describe those from other states seeking jobs and business prospects in Tamil Nadu. Northern migrant workers being mocked as “pani puri walas” is another.
All this should be a matter of concern for national leaders: It is one thing for leaders to take care of an ageing population. It is another to fall for nativist sentiments that discourage progressive migration.
Article 19 of the Constitution guarantees a fundamental right for any citizen to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India and also “to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.”
It would thus be undesirable to encourage nativism that goes against the spirit of the Constitution.
Nonetheless, there is another side to the debate on the slowing of population growth in the southern states: Political representation in the national Parliament.
A national census is expected in 2025 after a four-year delay triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic. A delimitation of the Lok Sabha, under which constituencies would be reorganised, is expected after that by 2028. Leaders in states like Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh are already worried that their provinces may be punished for the good work they did in controlling population growth by having to do with less representation in the national parliament.
That is a legitimate concern but what the southern states perhaps need to do is to encourage positive migration that enhances productivity and not play ethnocentric politics that create undesirable social divides.
Some social tensions do occur from migration, but movement within India should not be confused with illegal migration from outside the country. Rabble-rousing politicians often play on negative local sentiments that need to be nipped in the bud.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Naidu recently unveiled infrastructure projects involving ₹2,00,000 crore in Andhra Pradesh. It is difficult to imagine projects of that scale without help from migrant labourers from other states.
Migrants play a positive role in both reducing project costs and carrying ideas of development from better-administered states to poorer ones.
Migration of ideas is something that fascinates me. For instance, it is migration by educated Indian engineers to Silicon Valley that ushered in a craze for technology-based startups and entrepreneurship in India. The less educated also carry the seeds of development when they travel places by exchanging ideas within their extended social networks.
A 2021 report on innovation and global migration of skilled workers by strategy consulting firm Boston Consulting Group said that “networks are powerful conduits of capital, knowledge, ideas, and ideals.”
This applies as much to migration within a country, especially one like India that is a subcontinent.
All southern states are now ahead in economic growth while lagging in population growth. In the last measured instance of decadal growth, they all were well behind the national average.
Projected population growth for the 2011-2026 period shows Uttar Pradesh is expected to grow by more than 19 percent while Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Kerala and Tamil Nadu are all expected to grow by less than two percent. Excluding Kerala but including Karnataka, all the southern states figure in the top 10 contributors to India’s GDP.
All this means that Naidu’s four-kids call may only be a thought balloon but should be taken as a wake-up call for the entire nation to debate the issue of population growth and demographic balance. Naidu has bowled a political googly in which northern states, the Union government, and the national parties must constructively weigh in on the way forward.
(The writer is a senior journalist and commentator who has worked for Reuters, The Economic Times, Business Standard, and Hindustan Times. He tweets on X as @madversity. Views are personal. Edited by Muhammed Fazil.)
