Kerala civic polls: How a corporate group won a panchayat election

The success of a social service outfit floated by a corporate entity in the recent panchayat elections in Kerala is an interesting development in the evolving socio-political context. Twenty20, the corporate social responsibility wing of the Kitex group, a leading garment manufacturer in Kerala, has overcome the state’s entrenched bipolar politics to win 17 of the 19 wards in a village panchayat. With election campaigns becoming expensive affairs and forcing most political parties to queue up at the doorsteps of industrialists, it is hardly surprising that corporate entities are attracted to electoral politics. Billionaires like Rajiv Chandrasekhar, Vijay Mallya and Anil Ambani entered politics by securing Rajya Sabha nominations, while others like Nandan Nilekani and Navin Jindal have fought Lok Sabha elections. Many in the middle classes believe that corporate professionalism and technocratic culture would eliminate the ills distorting India’s governance structures. Consider in this context how fashionable it has become today for chief ministers to style themselves as CEOs, seemingly to signal their adoption of corporate work culture, which generally tends to be regarded as more efficient than government work culture.

The Kitex group has chosen the grass-roots social service route to win over the hearts of the electorate and destabilise established political equations. Media reports suggest that the erstwhile Congress-led panchayat’s refusal to renew the company’s licence, on unsubstantiated grounds of effluent discharge from its dyeing units contaminating water bodies, prompted the company’s entry into the political arena. But rather than jump headlong into the fray, the company spent the past few years building homes for the poor, constructing toilets, running an ambulance service and supporting other welfare activities. Ironically, there were government schemes available for many of these welfare activities as well. But, political parties running the panchayat, confessed their inability to arrange adequate funds in a time-bound manner. They also conceded that the well-heeled corporate entity had indeed outperformed and outfunded them. The citizens of the panchayat, evidently, voted in favour of the better performer.

But at a broader level, the negative implications of a corporate group entering formal structures of governance, cannot be dismissed lightly. It is welcome that the issue of conflict of interest has come to be seriously debated in conversations around public administration. Increasingly, those holding public office are required to give up management positions in private entities and recuse themselves from decision-making in matters where the charge of bias could be levelled against them. Twenty20 is organically linked to the Kitex group and the new panchayat’s decisions could come under a cloud because of the influence wielded by the company. The participation of corporate entities in politics does turn established political wisdom on the head. It is true that like political parties corporations too are an association of individuals, but their goals differ. For instance, corporates are guided by profit motive while governments serve the people. It is also true that governments, saddled by large bureaucracies, are slow to act. Despite having huge financial resources, they end up spreading the benefits thin at the grass roots. But that is only to be expected given that it is only governments that reach maximum numbers of people. Being smaller entities, corporations are in a position to take swift decisions, besides execute projects more efficiently. Ultimately, corporates like Kitex find politics an attractive option because of their frustrations with the political processes and their business-driven need to control decision-making. While corporate social responsibility is a noble concept, corporates bring with them their baggage of business interest, which tends to run counter to public welfare. Corporatisation of politics — particularly of electoral politics — may end up further advancing the power of wealth and influence.