Barely ten days remain for political campaigning in Mumbai before we vote on April 29. The last few days before the mandatory 48-hour silence period will see the campaign momentum pick up. Most candidates, certainly those of major parties, have reached out to voters in their constituencies by now. This is a good mid-way point to see what they have offered, more importantly, what they have left out.

There have been the usual jibes against the BJP’s “achhe din” promises, lack of employment, demonetisation et cetera by the Congress-Nationalist Congress Party. In turn, the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance has gone all out to convince voters of their “brilliant track record” including the air strike in Balakot in response to the terror attack in Pulwama. Between these predictable claims and criticisms, some issues that concern Mumbai’s voters have not got the play they deserved. Here’s my list of five.

There is a school of thought that Pakistan, Kashmir, and martyred soldiers do not carry as much resonance in Mumbai as they do in the north and the cow belt. National security and internal safety do matter to Mumbaiites. No city in India has seen as many or as devastating terror attacks as this city has in the last 26 years. Yet, reflective articles in November last year, on the tenth anniversary of the 26/11 attack, showed that Mumbai is not a great deal more secure than it used to be. The response time of agencies might be less than it was, they may be better coordinated than in the past, but Mumbaiites cannot be sure that there will not be another attack. None of the candidates in the fray have spoken with passion, precision, and foresight on this issue.

Mumbai is India’s commuter city in ways that other metros are not. The last few years have seen a slew of new projects start and gather pace.

At some point in the next decade, the city will hopefully have a reliable and affordable metro network. But this is a mere slice of the transport conundrum. Why aren’t candidates speaking of actively relocating control over Mumbai’s railway network in the city itself? Why should it be managed and controlled from Delhi? Why are candidates not speaking louder about ideas for making road transport safer, cleaner and faster right away? Do any of them have a comprehensive plan beyond the confines of their own constituencies?

Third is Mumbai’s pollution. The quality of city’s air, water and noise have been the worst it has ever been; pollution levels are rising. There’s a haze hanging in the air early mornings, the city’s PM10 levels – fine, hazardous dust particles – have increased by a staggering 64 per cent over ten years, and noise pollution is still annoyingly rampant. There has been little to nothing from Mumbai’s candidates on this vital life issue.

Then, there is the physical city itself. The grand coastal road will forever change the city’s western coastline and alter its marine environment. Which candidate has discussed this and taken questions? Mumbai’s eastern waterfront is being slowly but surely opened up; the first claimants and planners are those who see a financial and leisure hub or vast swathes of private construction. Except for the occasional reference by Milind Deora, candidates have been mum though this is a central government issue. Mumbai’s green lung, the Aarey Colony, is facing its gravest assault by way of the metro car shed which might pave the way for more commercial development. This does not seem to be on any candidate’s agenda.

Lastly, Mumbai’s future as an inclusive city lies in its approach to housing, especially to affordable housing. Given the state of housing and that policies are made in Delhi, affordable housing should have been a poll-maker or breaker for Mumbai’s voters. I have to yet to hear a word in any campaign.

If only issues, not poll arithmetic and sentiments, matter in an election we might be better off.

First Published: Apr 18, 2019 00:36 IST