Need to shun the politics of patronage and clientelism

Need to shun the politics of patronage and clientelism

Need to shun the politics of patronage and clientelism ByRekha Saxena, Ashutosh Kumar Feb 24, 2025 08:32 PM IST Share Via Copy Link The politics of competitive populism, which Delhi witnessed, was not exceptional, as the recent assembly elections held in Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Jharkhand, and Maharashtra showed

With the elections in the national capital territory done and dusted and the new government was sworn in, it is time to reflect on the role of freebies that played a role in shaping the people’s voting choices and the unprecedented rise of patronage in electoral politics. Besides reducing a large section of the electorate to mere clients, freebies do not provide a structural solution to poverty.

**EDS: THIRD PARTY** New Delhi: In this image via @BJP4Delhi, Prime Minister Narendra Modi being welcomed on his arrival at the BJP HQ to celebrate the party's win in the Delhi Assembly election, in New Delhi, Saturday, Feb. 8, 2025. (@BJP4Delhi via PTI Photo)(PTI02_08_2025_000487B) (@BJP4Delhi)

It is argued that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)’s electoral success in the previous two assembly polls was primarily due to subsidised utilities, free public transportation for women, and free access to public health services for the marginalised sections of society. The party promised freebies this time too; in fact, at a much larger scale. However, the other parties in contention, especially the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), surpassed the AAP in the bouquet of freebies it offered. The AAP promised to implement the Mahila Samman Yojana giving women ₹2,100 per month. In response, the BJP promised ₹2,500 monthly to women under its Mahila Samridhi Yojana. Similarly, the Congress announced the Pyari Didi Yojana, offering ₹2,500 per month to women. While the AAP promised ₹18,000 every month to temple priests and gurdwara granthis, the BJP said it would give a free gas cylinder to the poor during Holi and Diwali. The BJP promised ₹21,000 for nutritional support to pregnant women, and the Congress health cover of ₹25 lakh for Delhi residents.

As for the failure of the AAP to win for the third time, the argument is that the Delhi electorate, acting like rational voters, preferred the BJP to the AAP; it was argued that the former, being in power at the Centre, was viewed as relatively better poised to fulfil promises, which, in any case, were more lucrative. The voters also doubted the AAP’s ability to deliver on the sops, as its top leaders are caught in legal wrangles and are facing the possibility of being imprisoned again. They, of course, also might have factored in the AAP government’s failure in Punjab to fulfil its poll promises, especially the cash transfer to women, given they were constantly reminded of this by both the BJP and Congress; both parties, otherwise adversaries, were intent on decimating the incumbent.

The politics of competitive populism, which Delhi witnessed, was not exceptional, as the recent assembly elections held in Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Jharkhand, and Maharashtra showed.In all these elections, freebies offered by the contending parties were said to have an electoral impact. Such tall promises are being made knowingly in a routine manner, even when the economy of the concerned state is in a precarious condition, which is more often the norm than the exception. There is no doubt that direct cash transfer or free/subsidised access to public goods and services creates immediate voter appeal, especially among underprivileged voters, living in unauthorised colonies and slums, who are in large numbers in any urban space of India. As the CSDS-Lokniti surveys show, they also vote in large percentages, though unfortunately not as poor.

Let us think about the larger implications of the entrenched political culture of freebies, which has taken patronage and clientelism that was always present to an ominous level. While transient populist schemes, if implemented on the ground, do provide quick relief to the poor and mitigate hardships of poverty, there is always a question mark about their long-term impact in eradicating poverty by providing enabling opportunity structures. Parties in power hand out incremental doses of freebies and, consequently, tend to neglect the underlying long-term structural issues that are responsible for widespread poverty and inequality. These freebies risk becoming superficial remedies and fail to improve the long-term social and economic conditions of the poor.

The largesse, which passes on as welfare measures, needs to be integrated with planned development, which would require long-term investment of public resources in the primary sector like education, health, sanitation, infrastructure, affordable housing, and employment generation. Over-reliance on short-term incentives by vote-seeking parties obscures the urgency of structural reforms and makes the parties complacent as they look forward to using State resources recklessly for handing out doles when elections are imminent. This is also much easier for governments. To make it worse, these populist schemes are often personalised, in the form of “guarantees” in the name of the party leader, promoting person-centred leadership to the detriment of intra-party democracy.

Welfare economics suggests that policy effectiveness is dependent on context. In urban spaces like Delhi, with chronic deprivation and large-scale inequality, short-term incentives may serve as necessary stopgap measures. However, without parallel investments in infrastructure and human capital, these measures are unlikely to produce lasting improvements. Electoral strategies must, therefore, prioritise both immediate welfare and long-term development to address the multifaceted challenges faced by the urban poor. The parties need to realise that the electorate’s behaviour, particularly among the marginalised communities, would reflect a demand for accountability and lasting welfare over transient benefits.

Rekha Saxena is professor of Political Science, University of Delhi, and Ashutosh Kumar is professor of political science, Panjab University. The views expressed are personal