[Reader-list] Minutes of A Conversation on the Yamuna Pushta

[Diya Mehra]

A Conversation about the Yamuna Pushta.
July 30th, Sarai.

 We started with a short introduction by Lalit Batra and Diya Mehra, who
spoke about the sense of being overwhelmed in the course of the Yamuna
Pushta eviction by governmental action that had almost total control over
slum housing, but which was increasingly completely unresponsive to the
representations of slum dwellers. Interventions by civil society in this
scenario can only be limited in their scope. Given the slanted power
relations of the political field, how can we consider an idea of equity
in the city today?

The first part of the meeting was devoted to understanding the strong
political consensus on a no-slum city. Different speakers gave examples
from the Pushta and other areas in the city to detail this, and to
describe the attitude and role of neo-liberal government and bureaucracy
which is steadily pushing people out of the city. The question arose of
whether this toughness of policy required a great deal of pragmatism in
response. Are there limits to this pragmatism? What is the relation
between pragmatics and strategy? Lalit Batra argued that search for a
pragmatic approach requires a great deal of caution otherwise one could
easily end up supporting the process of downgrading of norms and standards
for the poor.

Political Society/Civil Society: One frame for the discussion that
followed was the distinction made by Partha Chatterjee on the major
cleavage in urban society today. Increasingly we see a civil society of
citizens who have actual rights to the city and a political society of
slum dwellers, who lack rights, but are dealt with by the state on an
'ad-hoc' basis.

What could be the role of civil society in a situation where the links
between it and slum dwellers were particularly tenuous.  Shreerekha
thought we had to take into account how civil society - which is in large
part middle class - is positioned in relation to squatter settlements. How
does limit the possibilities of what civil society actors manage or
attempt to do? Aditya Nigam said that as long as social and activist links
cannot be forged through co-residence, civil society actors should
consider what they could do to bring the issue into the public domain, to
think about how more sensitive common sense ideas about slums could be
elicited.

Relations between political society and the city, Rakesh Singh added, were
complicated. In the case of the Pushta, for example, slum dwellers had
already made housing arrangements in light of the demolition. There are
alternative housing markets that they could tap into, and they did. He
asked how this figured into ideas of equity? Jeebesh Bagchi suggested that
perhaps a single and stable idea of justice was an imposed category and
did not relate to the realities of political society. Ranjana Padhi argued
that in either case, individuals had the right to object to events like
the Pushta in the city. It should not be presumed that support for certain
political values was implicit either in slums or civil society, rather the
question is how can these be supported. Diya Mehra asked whether working
within and allowing for the presence of 'informal mechanisms' actually
ever creates the space for political society to become civil society.

Hopelessness and Communication: Halfway through the conversation, Rohini
Patkar suggested that the conversation was displaying a high degree of
frustration and hopelessness with the response of civil society to such
situations. In way, it appeared to be cathartic. This could be because
although a number of NGOs, political actors, slum dwellers had tried to
negotiate with the government, there had not been a strong enough reaction
and response to warrant any change in policy. Diya Mehra suggested that
one problem could be that those interested in intervening are unable to
determine what the pressure points are?  Perhaps the complexity of the
governmental system and the vastness of the city are barriers to achieving
this perspective. Sanjeev suggested that there was a need to federate into
a larger alliance. Jeebesh Bagchi commented that a language that
communicated the indignity of the Pushta residents had not been
significantly developed. Instead, appeals reduced the working class to a
series of bare necessities. Ranjana Padhi and Naveen said that we should
not discount the efforts that are made by individuals, groups or the left.
Ranjana added that one question is what the response of the slum dwellers
had been. Organized opposition was quickly squashed, however the slum
dwellers had also been cautious and late in reacting to the proposed
eviction. This was also something to think about. Neeti Bhardwaj said that
when NGOs do make representations to different communities to try and get
them to think about the issues of housing and demolitions, it was to small
numbers of people. How does one build a city wide understanding through
this ?

She added that what was required was a systematic and pragmatic approach.
Conversations should be centered around specific situation and there was a
need for people from different organizations to sit down and work out
things on a long term basis. One can only oppose actual demolitions, if
the strength existed on the ground. x

Aditya Nigam said was that a poor civil society response was also due to
the divisions between organizations, in the form of different kinds of
turf battles. Jeebesh Bagchi suggested that the conversation had lead him
to think that individuals interested in responding were largely isolated
from each other. Was there no forum for public communication? Lalit Batra
said conversations between people working with the urban poor tended to be
in an institutional context and limited to organizational affairs. Perhaps
a long standing conversation is required to prevent a 'crises-only'
situation - where people come together when the situation is dire. Naveen
concluded by saying that a lot of time is spent conversing on these
issues. Perhaps an outside or comparative perspective could be useful to
thinking about the local Delhi questions. Examples from other places may
reflect on problems and possibilities. Otherwise, in the continuing circle
of talk, workshops, meetings and seminars, we are still left with the
question of how to actually act and what would prompt concerted
engagement.



-- 
Diya Mehra
Sarai: The New Media Initiative
Centre for the Study of Developing Societies
29 Rajpur Road, New Delhi 54
(011) 23960040, www.sarai.net