Last Updated:
Economist Surjit Bhalla strongly backed the ONOE framework, calling staggered state polls a costly ‘luxury’ that India could no longer afford
Veteran policymaker Montek Singh Ahluwalia warned that simultaneous elections could push state-level issues to the background. (PTI)
Veteran policymaker Montek Singh Ahluwalia, addressing the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on One Nation, One Election (ONOE), has cautioned against viewing cost savings as the central reason for adopting simultaneous elections.
As the debate on the 129th Constitutional Amendment Bill gathers steam, Ahluwalia argued that staggered polls serve a crucial democratic purpose by offering governments regular feedback on the aspirations of citizens. “This feedback loop is an important part of India’s democratic character,” he said, adding that reforms should not undermine the distinction between state and national concerns.
Recommended Stories
He also warned that simultaneous elections could push state-level issues to the background, with national themes dominating the discourse. To safeguard federal priorities, he proposed shifting several items from the concurrent list exclusively to the state list. At the same time, he suggested refining the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) to provide clearer definitions of violations, rather than overhauling the entire electoral system.
While Ahluwalia praised economist NK Singh’s research on the economic impact of simultaneous elections, he called for more rigorous evidence before implementing such a major shift. He further floated an alternative model: extending the Lok Sabha’s term to six years, with two assembly election cycles in between, thereby preserving accountability while separating national and state mandates.
In contrast, economist Surjit Bhalla strongly backed the ONOE framework, calling staggered state polls a costly “luxury” that India could no longer afford. He argued that while Lok Sabha elections have been held every five years without disruption, the repeated cycle of state polls leads to frequent MCC enforcement, governance paralysis, and even spikes in electoral violence. Bhalla proposed that state elections be held mid-way through the Lok Sabha’s tenure to balance accountability with reduced frequency.
Arvind Panagariya, chairman of the Sixteenth Finance Commission, also made a forceful case for ONOE, stressing that India currently undergoes 13 election rounds in a five-year cycle—effectively one election every four-and-a-half months. This, he said, delays policymaking, disrupts project execution, and narrows the reform window for governments.
He added that repeated elections encourage fiscal populism, with governments ramping up subsidies and revenue expenditure before polls, often at the cost of long-term capital investment. Simultaneous elections, he argued, would provide a stable policy horizon and enhance Centre-state coordination, making structural reforms easier to implement.
The three perspectives highlight the crux of the ONOE debate: while Bhalla and Panagariya emphasise cost efficiency, stability, and reduced electoral disruption, Ahluwalia insists that the health of democracy must remain the guiding principle.
Wednesday’s meeting saw the presence of Supriya Sule from NCP (SP), P Wilson from DMK, and Saket Gokhle from TMC. The BJP MPs present included Bansuri Swaraj, K Laxman, Bhartruhari Mahtab, Ghanshyam Tiwari and Kavita Patidar. From the LJP, Shambhavi Chaudhry was present, while Harish Balayogi of TDP also attended the meeting today. Congress leaders could not attend the meeting due to a CWC event in Patna.
September 25, 2025, 16:10 IST
Loading comments…
Read More
