New Delhi: How many children should a couple have and does the State get to decide the number? This is a compelling but a historic question that begs an answer every now and then. There’s no denying that the debate needs a quick fix, but what warrants more urgent redressal is the reason why certain people are advocating for more children per couple. Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu’s claim that why shouldn’t the southern states advocate and incentivise families with 16 children, has made it to the prime time news yet again. Only this time, the voice is firmer, the tone is serious and the intent is severe.
That DMK’s supremo MK Stalin has come out in support of the “idea” which was first purported by his ‘garu’ Chandrababu Naidu is a positive sign that the duo will bury any hatchet if and when it comes to guard railing the rights of the Southern states of India. They have done it in the past, and will continue to champion the cause if the need arises, especially if it comes on the back of an unfair advantage given to the North states.
So, is bearing more children, giving a boost to young population to beat the declining Lok Sabha constituency numbers the best strategy that the two leaders can think of? Will it prove to be a detriment or will it go down as a well crafted political strategy. And is fertility rate going to play a big role here?
More kids for more seats and more money?
There are two broad reasons for such a demand from south leaders – more funds to trickle down from the Center’s kitty and more seats.
Although Naidu on his part had announced that the Andhra Pradesh government is planning to incentivise families with more children due to the ageing population, Stalin is very clear and upfront about his main objective. “But today, as there is a scenario of decreasing Lok Sabha constituencies, it raises the question: why should we restrict ourselves to having fewer children? Why shouldn’t we aim for 16 children?” the chief minister said at a function in Chennai.
This is not the first time that such states have spoken about being punished for having a smaller population as compared to other states in the country. Many politicians, including MP Shashi Tharoor, have been vocal about the dangers of political disenfranchisement down south when the delimitation freeze ends in 2026.
Leaders from this part of the country have been fighting for more funds from the Central kitty. The way it is divided among states could prove to be detrimental for their growth, some south Indian leaders believe. The Finance Commission which decides how much money should be distributed from the Centre to the States. It also has a say on the overall distribution of these proceeds among States. But the problem is that all of this is based on two factors:
- First, the State’s share in the total population
- Second, the income-distance ratio. In simple parlance it means how far the State’s per capita income is higher or lower than the scale that measures national average.
It so appears that the south Indian states lose out on both these counts.
The limits of delimitation
There has been considerable hullabaloo over the next delimitation of Parliamentary (Lok Sabha) Constituencies to be brought into effect from 2026 onward which many believe could further create a North-South rift.
The projected impact of delimitation is that it is likely to reduce the following
- Number of Lok Sabha seats by 26 in Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Karnataka.
- Total seats in the region is projected to come down to 103 from the existing 129.
The two-pronged problem deserves a proper strategy. But is having more kids the right approach? While political pundits say there is only one way out if the Centre doesn’t cooperate and punish the southern states for their success in maintaining a healthy population ratio. “We are all proud Indians and representatives of the best-performing States. We will not remain mute spectators, if the voices and representation of our people in the country’s highest democratic forum are suppressed. Hope wisdom prevails and Delhi is listening”, T Rama Rao had launched an attack on the Union government in 2023, tagging a chart of the seats projects after 2026 delimitation.
If seriously considered, the population advise could boomerang for the entire country. “This is a foolhardy proposition to reproduce more in order to get more funds or seats. Equity in representation has been maintained and the Finance Commission is working on a proposal that will not leave the states in a lurch. As for seats, there is a geographical reason why such a distribution is also considered. How will the southern states manoeuvre that problem,” asks political analyst Karan Dua, adding that the more reasonable solution to this would be that democratic and federal principles are harmoniously aligned and equal importance is given to both.
“The way our Constitution is written, the work of an MP is solely to legislate on matters in the ‘Union List’. Most of the schemes of the Union is implemented only by the State governments. It can be made possible that the number of MPs in Lok Sabha may be capped at 543 while the number of MLAs in each State can be increased in line with current population (without changing the number of Rajya Sabha seats) to address the democratic representational requirement,” explains Dua.
The fertility question in south India
This brings us to another debate on the sidelines. One that concerns fertility of southern States over ones in the North. A IndiaSpend report in 2018 which takes into account government data highlights the problem that the south states have reduced fertility rates below replacement level, while the rate for states such as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh remains above the level.
Here are some numbers for you to consider:
- In 2016, Tamil Nadu’s total fertility rate (TFR)–the number of children a woman will have in a lifetime–was the lowest among India’s large states at 1.6.
- Andhra Pradesh and Telangana had 1.7
- Kerala and Karnataka reported a rate of 1.8
- Bihar reported the worst TFR at 3.3
- Uttar Pradesh at 3.1
- Madhya Pradesh was pegged at 2.8 and
- Rajasthan had a TFR of 2.7.
- Is it to be noted that the national average TFR was pegged at 2.3
The population comparison between states also paint a dismal figure for the South. In 1971, the four south Indian states comprised 25 per cent which was 135 million of India’s population. By 2011, this figure went down to a dismal 21 per cent which translated to 251 million. In comparison, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, population rose from 33 per cent or 182 million in 1971 to 37 per cent – 445 million in 2011.
!function(e,n,i,s){var d=”InfogramEmbeds”;var o=e.getElementsByTagName(n)[0];if(window[d]&&window[d].initialized)window[d].process&&window[d].process();else if(!e.getElementById(i)){var r=e.createElement(n);r.async=1,r.id=i,r.src=s,o.parentNode.insertBefore(r,o)}}(document,”script”,”infogram-async”,”https://e.infogram.com/js/dist/embed-loader-min.js”);
This clearly shows that the population for southern states have declined steadily while the North has grown in a robust manner. But does that mean they have to better the ratio so as to receive benefits from the government? Sociologists say it’s a bad idea demographically as well as politically to reproduce for meeting an agenda but when there is a political race and the question of equal distribution of funds, then everything is fair in love and war!
