Diplomatist Magazine Diplomatist Oct-Nov 2018 | Page 37

LEAD STORY G andhiji's 149th birth anniversary was celebrated this year on 2nd October. Among the many facets of his life that will be highlighted in the coming months, as India prepares to celebrate his 150th birth anniversary in style, one thing stands out for me. His decades’ long, sustained promotion of khadi, leather, and other village enterprises to improve the livelihoods of millions of poor Indians living in villages. A century later, this is still critical to India's progress. Gandhiji believed in free markets as a way to transform India. He did not expect the government to provide a "dole" to all. He advocated that the poorest could spin on their charkhas, and sell the yarn. This yarn would then be converted into clothes and garments. He believed that all could, hence earn something to supplement their meager earnings on the farm. In this, he especially exhorted women and the youth to spin every day. He backed this by creating Khadi bhandars to sell handspun clothes and an All-India Spinners Association to support spinning and charkha. For the poorest, charkhas were not that cheap. Spinners also needed working capital to buy cotton and slivers. Weavers of cloth would also need money to buy yarn and to then stock the cloth or garments before they were sold. He would have only insisted that perhaps one women in each group should have been from what he described as Harijans- -or Dalits. His belief in a strong organization would have let him accept that a group of women borrowers would be a good fi rst step in organizing individuals to work collectively, leading to future capabilities for bigger struggles like swaraj. Gandhiji would have required some convincing about the interest rates that microfi nance comes with. But I believe he would have accepted it; not because of the lack of an alternative such as bank fi nance, or because moneylenders charged more (against which he often railed). But because Gandhiji was rational and commercial in his outlook. He understood fi nance - bills, hundis, banks accounts, insurance - all were part of his daily job as a commercial lawyer. He would have understood that microfi nance companies have higher costs of funds - and he would certainly have lobbied with banks to lower their refi nance rates to microfi nance companies. Gandhiji created large nationwide institutions that employed many people - the Congress Party, AISA, etc. In many of these, he used to argue that those who worked for them deserved a reasonable salary and not just be volunteers. Gandhiji would have welcomed one part of the microfi nance model that was not common during his time - the concept of joint liability by a group of women borrowers. He would have only insisted that perhaps one women in each group should have been from what he described as Harijans – or Dalits. Gandhiji never answered where exactly would all this money come from to fi nance tens of millions of charkhas, spinners, weavers, and sellers of clothes. For there was no answer during his time. Banks would never have lent against the collateral of a charkha, because they never had branches in rural India--they still don't have too many, and are still unwilling to fi nance, such small loans. Gandhiji believed that individual savings would pay for the cost of the charkha and the working capital. Here is where microfi nance comes in. If it had been invented in 1918, rather than in 1978, it would have been the ideal method to convenient fi nance and thus dramatically expand the reach of the khadi movement. Lending to poor people. Check. Lending for small investments. Check. Lending against collateral. Check. Lending to women. Check. Lending in rural areas. Check. Gandhiji would have welcomed one part of the microfi nance model that was not common during his time - the concept of joint liability by a group of women borrowers. This logic of "feet on street" would have convinced him that microfi nance operating costs had to be reimbursed; and that can only come through borrowers' interest, since there is no other income. Of course Gandhiji would have asked for donations to subsidize some of these costs. Once convinced that the availability of convenient and aff ordable microfi nance was an essential ingredient to faster use of charkhas and the entire handloom business, Gandhiji would surely have brushed aside objections. Rather he would have found ways to integrate fi nance, production, and sales in more and more villages to benefi t many more poor Indians and thus advance his objective of economic independence for all. *Harsh Shrivastava is the CEO, Microfi nance Institutions Network (MFIN). He has also been nominated by the Government of India to be an Independent Director on the Board of MUDRA (Micro Units Development & Refi nance Agency Limited). Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Diplomatist • Vol 6 • Issue 10 • Oct-Nov 2018, Noida • 37