Table Of Content
The debate has moved from Twitter threads to the Rajya Sabha floor. On Friday, AAP MP Raghav Chadha stood up and demanded a ban on 10-minute delivery services. He termed the model “cruelty,” painting a dystopian picture of riders risking their lives to deliver a packet of chips just to satisfy the whims of an impatient consumer.
His speech went viral. It was emotional. It was compassionate. It was also economically dangerous.
While the intent to protect the “invisible wheels” of our economy is noble, the proposed solution—a blanket ban—is a classic case of elite policymaking that ignores the ground reality of Bharat.
In this contrarian edition of Webverbal Pulse, we argue that banning quick commerce isn’t a victory for human rights; it’s a death sentence for livelihoods. Here is the uncomfortable truth about the 10-minute debate that no one in Parliament is saying.
1. The “Privilege” of Patience
It is easy to stand in an air-conditioned Parliament and ask, “Why can’t you wait for your groceries?” It is easy to say, “This service is unnecessary.”
But for the 22-year-old rider from a Tier 3 town who migrated to Delhi, this “unnecessary” service is the difference between sending money home and going hungry.
- The Contrarian Reality: When you ban an industry because it has “bad conditions,” you don’t magically improve the worker’s life. You simply remove their option.
- The Alternative: Raghav Chadha compares gig work to slavery. But ask the rider. Is it better to stand at a labor chowk waiting for a daily wage that might never come, or to log into an app and start earning instantly?
- The Verdict: The “exploitation” is often voluntary because the alternative—unemployment—is worse. Banning 10-minute delivery doesn’t save the rider from risk; it saves the elite from seeing the risk, while the rider goes back to invisible poverty.
2. Speed Doesn’t Kill. Incentives Do.
The core argument for the ban is that the “10-minute promise” forces riders to drive rashly. This is a half-truth. The app doesn’t steer the bike; the incentive structure does.
Riders don’t speed because they love the thrill. They speed because:
- They are paid per order, not per hour.
- They are penalized for being late.
The Fix is Simple (And it’s not a Ban): Instead of shutting down Zepto and Blinkit, Parliament should pass a “Guaranteed Hourly Wage” law for quick commerce. If a rider is paid for their time regardless of how many deliveries they make, the incentive to jump a red light vanishes instantly.
- Regulation > Prohibition. Change the algorithm, don’t kill the industry.
3. Blaming the Startup for the State’s Failure
Why is a 10-minute delivery dangerous in Delhi but safe in Tokyo or New York? Is it the app? No. It is the potholes. The stray cattle. The unlit roads. The wrong-side drivers.
- The Hard Truth: It is politically convenient to blame a startup for road safety issues. It diverts attention from the fact that the government has failed to provide safe infrastructure.
- The Reality: If we had dedicated bike lanes and pothole-free roads, a 2-kilometer delivery in 10 minutes would be boringly safe. By banning the app, the government is essentially saying: “We cannot fix the roads, so you are not allowed to drive fast.”
4. The “Nanny State” vs. Innovation
The argument that “consumers don’t need things in 10 minutes” is a slippery slope. Who decides what is “needed”?
- 2010: “Why do you need a cab at your door? Walk to the stand.” (Uber/Ola)
- 2015: “Why do you need food delivery? Cook at home.” (Zomato/Swiggy)
- 2025: “Why do you need medicine in 10 minutes? Go to the chemist.”
The Economic Impact: Quick Commerce has created a massive efficiency layer in Indian logistics. It is not just about chips and coke. It is a lifeline for:
- The Elderly: Who can’t walk to the shop.
- Working Mothers: Who need urgent supplies.
- The Sick: Who need medicines instantly.
To ban it is to turn the clock back on efficiency.
5. The Real Solution: A “Gig Worker Bill of Rights”
We don’t need a ban. We need a spine. If Parliament truly cares about the rider, here is the Webverbal Proposal they should table tomorrow:
- The “Rush Hour” Surcharge: Mandate a ₹20 surcharge for every 10-minute order that goes 100% directly to the rider as risk pay.
- Mandatory Insurance: Every platform must provide ₹20 Lakh accident cover. No questions asked.
- Customer Accountability: If a customer harasses a rider for being late, ban the customer, not the rider.
- Decouple Speed from Pay: Make it illegal to link a rider’s earnings to delivery speed.
Conclusion: Don’t Kill the Engine of Bharat
Raghav Chadha’s speech came from a place of empathy. We respect that. But empathy without economics is just charity. And Indian youth don’t want charity; they want jobs.
The 10-minute delivery sector is one of the few engines creating mass employment for the non-coders, the non-engineers, and the youth of Tier 2/3 towns. Let’s make it safer. Let’s make it fairer. But for the sake of the millions who rely on it—don’t ban it.
Next Step: Do you believe the government should regulate the “Per Order” pay structure? Share your view in the comments below.
