IN
and Out
But Fundamentals
are same
By
Manohar Manoj
It was the end of UPA era and it was the start of Namo led NDA
era. Several analyses are being done for both the outgoing and incoming events
of the present Indian politics. But, the most significant question is that in
this 'in' and 'out' process of democracy, the fundamentals of the system would
remain same or it may have some injections of big change also? This question is
very relevant because in the context of present mandate, it is very necessary
to work over the big fundamentals of the system.
In the conventional terms party sitting in power always keep
trying to allure voters through several populist or appeasing and emotive
measures and party sitting in opposition try to pinpoint the every failure of
the ruling government in terms of their performances or the circumstances as
well as galvanizing the dissatisfaction of public from the ruling Government .
In 2009 UPA 1 won elections through some populist measures
and then it understood that it had taken right steps by starting farm loan
waiver schemes, job guarantee MNREGA scheme and implementing award of sixth pay
commission. These all steps brought congress party in power, but it damaged our
economy a lot.
Before going to analyze the expected change in the system, it
is very necessary to know, what were the fundamental reasons behind the defeat
of congress party in 2014. Factors are very obvious, price-rise and corruption.
Ironically, the outgoing UPA-2 government always blamed external factor for the
both price rise and low growth. But reasons were different. We must not forget
this fact that despite the process of globalization, our economy is very much
governed by domestic circumstances. Reason of inflation and lower growth rate
were the actually outcome of the derailment of UPA Govt. from the track of new
economic policy. When NDA got defeat in 2004, Sonia led UPA highlighted the
highly reform oriented approach of NDA , to them their Reform had lost the
human face . So when UPA came in power, they tried to give new economic policy
a human face, they went out of track of new economic policy and in the name of
social inclusive policy, they brought such kind of schemes which actually were
against the spirit of new economic policy. The new economic policy which was in
fact bunch of policies, which gave economy an efficient economic regime laden
with high growth rate, high investment and also lower rate of inflation. But
UPA govt. in spite of fundamentally addressing
the farmers' problem, they waived
loan of 70000 crore, in spite of giving gainful and productive employment, they
started non productive MNREGA scheme at the annual cost of 40,000 crore, these
all activities limited the growth potential of economy and it further
aggravated inflation pressure over the economy. I think If UPA govt. should
have brought a long term remunerative price polices for the farmers provided
with efficient crop insurance schemes, there was no need of farm loan waiver
scheme at the cost of economy and second if UPA would have brought a massive
rural infrastructure plan in place of MNREGA, it would have created
circumstances of more gainful employment scenario in the country and we have had no after affect of high inflation
or high food inflation regime and second our growth potential would have no
shrinkage affect also. But UPA thought in other way, it considered until unless
it is able to allure its voter, there was no need of worrying point to her.
The going of UPA beyond to the track of new economic policy
track became so costly to country's economy, it not only ruined the prospect of
country's economy, rather it also ruined the political prospect of congress
party.
In the second term congress party brought more populist
measures in order to allure voters in terms of cheaper food grains schemes(food
security act), announcement for the 7th pay commission and more pronounced
MNREGA scheme and new land acquisition bill, but ultimately it could not allure
the public because the earlier populist measure brought such a huge disaster to
the economy in terms of high inflation and price rise that which cost a lot to
the public, so in place of gains through populist measure, they suffered more
loss. So the net gain to the public was negative. B Because of price rise
congress party faced it biggest defeat in the independent history of the
country.
Second reason of defeat is said to be, corruption. I do not
think the problem of corruption emerged all of sudden in UPA 2 regime. It was
already there in the country, rather it entered in our system, in very 1960s
and it got continued rather it flourished in every walks of country's life,, but
congress party who was in power in most of the time, never felt it a big danger
to the country, so it never tried to counter it. Even some opposition party who
came in power, for them corruption was not a priority. They never brought a
path-breaking or fundamental legal, institutional or policy reform to eliminate
corruption from the system. But when Anna's agitation brought this issue in the
mainstream political domain of the country, then politigentia of the country
started to think corruption in big way. When AAP party formed government in
Delhi, then this congress party became serious and in the 2013 winter session
of parliament it passed lokpal bill. Then it not only passed lokpal bill,
rather its leader Rahul Gandhi started to say he wants to pass all pending 6
anti graft bills in the remaining days of parliamentary session. It showed
corruption has now become cause of concern for the political parties.
The negligence of issue of corruption very from 1960s and in
the same way the negligence of NEP since 2009 created high inflation rate and
these both factors made congress party to bear heavy cost of defeat
But the point is as of now there is no bounding over any
political party to raise populist issues or emotive issues in the elections. So
our political parties never think of the fundamentals of the system.
Now Narendra Modi has grabbed power from the congress party,
if he runs the government in a conventional way, if he brings solution to
problem through ad hoc manner, it will not solve the basic cause of the
problem. Though,during his election campaign NAMO never talked about giving
freebies to the public or starting any kind of populist measures. He attacked
congress party more for its dynasty tag and second he grabbed circumstantial
truth of price rise and corruption in the country.
Now NAMO has grabbed power, the question is will he work for
changing fundamentals of the system. Though Modi's speech never say that this
system is bad, he says that system is not bad, it only lacks decisiveness, it
means he endorses present bureaucracy, present institutions, present set of
laws & regulations and present existing
method of governance. I do not think this is a fair thinking on the part
of NAMO.
The most strong point of NAMO is his commitment for new economic
policy and his wayward and autocratic governance style. Through this style he
can deliver more on economic front, on corporate front which is looking for
more investment, more growth, more income and more employment, may be NAMO
could achieve it also by fastening the process of decision making, but
fundamentally if he wants to go all out against corruption and price rise, it
require more than two dozen fundamental constitutional and legal reform. He
will have to restructure the institutional functioning of the whole governance.
I think the first and
foremost thing he should do, that is to start and introduce a new national
personnel policy. The country urgently requires a new and efficient work
culture. Working hours, holidays, shift of work, the disposal and deliverance
of work and introduction of new technology. The simplification of rule, the
complete overhauling of bureaucracy (from top to bottom) is key to the
governance.
Our country is ill famous for the holidays. I think this
govt. should introduce only one weekly holiday and shifting of duties in all
government offices. In most of the government departments, somewhere there is
glut of staff, somewhere there is shortage of staff, these things must be
balanced.
Second thing this government should go for greater police
reform, though this reform is very much part of administrative reform. But it
is interesting to watch whether NAMO govt. ready to start this reform.
Transparency in the governance is very much attributed to
technology. If govt. endorsed the process of e-governance through mass uses of
information technology. It has been seen on the upper level the work culture is
fine and there is application of technology also, but on the lower level, there
is circumstances of extreme disappointment. The governance at the lower level
is a subject which is related to our federal structure as well as with second
and third tier of democracy but ultimately it is the first tier which has to
give a greater policy guideline in order to address these issues. Apart from
administrative and economic front, there are many issue which are related to
political reform of the country which will shape the future shape of Indian
politics.
