The market is on fire — the fire of inflation. Onion prices have doubled in just one week, rising from ₹25 to ₹50 per kilogram. Within a month, the price of sugar has surged from ₹48 to ₹70 per kilogram — an increase of 46 percent. Jaggery prices have also risen from ₹50 to over ₹65 per kilogram, marking a 30 percent hike. Prices of rice and maize flour have increased by 16 percent and 11 percent, respectively. Animal feed prices have also seen an 11 percent rise. Petrol prices have effectively been raised as well ; despite a drop in international rates and the blending of 20 percent ethanol into the fuel, there has been no reduction in the retail price. This has resulted in reduced vehicle mileage and a massive spike in transportation costs. All these items are daily essentials for the common people, and this is happening right during the festive season.

Every festive season brings inflation in its wake. But is that the sole reason behind the current price rise? The Modi government seems to believe so, which is why it has imposed stock limits on sugar traders. Tomorrow, it will likely consider its duty fulfilled by taking similar measures regarding onions and other food grains. Yet, inflation will continue to rise unabated ; this is not merely a case of price hikes driven by hoarding and black marketing — it stems from the government's pro-corporate policies, and the government is unwilling to review these policies.

Let us begin with petrol, which has indirectly become more expensive. Rising petrol prices drive up the cost of everything ; as the price of one item increases, others inevitably become costlier, creating a continuing cycle. The government's ethanol policy also contributes to this inflation, as the fuel is produced using food crops like sugarcane and maize. Is it justifiable to produce ethanol from food crops in a country where half the population suffers from hunger and malnutrition? The argument that blending ethanol with petrol saves foreign exchange is entirely puerile ; increased ethanol production will inevitably trigger a food crisis in the country. Addressing a food shortage would require imports, necessitating an expenditure of foreign exchange that would ultimately exceed the amount spent on importing crude oil.

A second reason is that, thanks to the Modi government, the food grain market no longer operates on the principles of supply and demand ; instead, it has transformed entirely into a speculative market. Currently, there is no shortage of sugar in the market, yet prices are rising because commodity speculators know that the Modi government's ethanol policy will lead to a severe sugar shortage in the near future. Acting on this precise forecast, hoarders and black marketeers have begun creating an artificial crisis so that they can reap even greater profits when the actual shortage hits.

A third reason is the Modi government's policy of pushing consumers into the open market. Under the Food Security Act, each family previously received 35 kg of grain per month. This is now being reduced to 7 kg per person — with a maximum cap of 35 kg per family —whereas a single individual requires a minimum of 15 kg of nutritional food. Speculators are aware that weakening the Food Security Act means an increased reliance on the open grain market for approximately 250 million families. This will drive up market demand and open up avenues to exploit the public.

The current inflation is the result of these very policies of the government. Twelve years ago, the BJP promised to curb inflation and double farmers' income. However, the exact opposite has happened. There has been a sharp decline in the real income of the common people, and inflation has risen steeply compared to 2014.

Consider the example of tea to understand this steep rise in the cost of living. It is not just the price of sugar that has gone up ; the cost of tea leaves has surged from ₹150 to ₹400 per kilogram. The price of ginger — which enhances the flavor and health benefits of tea— has skyrocketed from ₹50 to ₹320 per kilogram, while the price of cardamom has jumped from ₹900 to ₹4,800 per kilogram. Milk is not cheap either, selling at ₹80 per liter. Naturally, the price of the tea that the poor used to buy for ₹5 at roadside stalls has now reached up to ₹20 per cup in the market. For the working class, even having a cup of tea has become a luxury they can barely afford.

Yet, despite this, the BJP is rubbing salt into the wounds it has inflicted on the general public. Consider the statement made by Madhya Pradesh’s illustrious Parliamentary Affairs Minister, Kailash Vijayvargiya : "90 percent of people do not like eating sweets. I don't eat them either. In fact, I say sugar should become very expensive." The 'Godi media' has portrayed this statement of his merely as lighthearted banter or a quip.

However, this statement is just like the one Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman once made regarding rising onion prices — that she does not even eat onions. That statement of hers drew criticism from across the country. The question remains : if a minister does not eat onions or sweets, does that mean one should give up eating altogether? Who gave the 'Sanghi gang' the authority to decide what people in the country should or should not eat?

This statement by Vijayvargiya is also drawing criticism. Instead of heeding the criticism, the 'Sanghi' camp counters with a question : "Does a minister not have the right to engage in banter?" We would simply ask : does a minister possess such a right even when faced with a grave crisis affecting the general public? In any case, Kailash Vijayvargiya is known for being an ill-mannered minister. He had previously made similarly insensitive remarks regarding deaths caused by contaminated drinking water in Indore and had even verbally abused a journalist who questioned him about the matter.

The public is reeling under the burden of inflation, with soaring sugar prices during the festive season bringing them to tears ; yet, what kind of politics is it to dismiss the issue with levity instead of taking steps to control prices? Kailash Vijayvargiya’s statement certainly hurts public sentiment and rubs salt into their wounds. His remarks also make it clear that the BJP government sides with black marketeers and speculators rather than the common people.

The Minister ought to realize that regardless of whether people enjoy sweets, sugar is an essential daily commodity for the general public, and keeping its prices in check is a primary responsibility of any government. However, this becomes impossible if the food market is transformed into a speculative market. This is precisely what has happened during the BJP's twelve-year rule under Modi. BJP leaders are now busy mocking the very public that has fallen victim to their own policies.

As the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, Kailash Vijayvargiya also serves as a government spokesperson. In this capacity, his statement should be viewed not as a personal remark, but as the official stance of the BJP's Dr. Mohan Yadav government. Moreover, neither the Chief Minister nor any other BJP leader has contradicted Kailash Vijayvargiya's statement so far.

This statement has exposed the true face of the BJP, which has always sought political mileage by inciting communal polarization under the guise of religion and the sentiments of the majority community. But should a government whose actions are fueling inflation be allowed to remain in power even for a minute?


The author is an independent writer on  politics, social and agrarian issues. The views are personal.