I usually avoid reading Indian Express; for simple reason that it is now more or less a Congress Mouth Piece. I would rather read Spindian Express (:)) )
This column that appeared in Indian Express makes a very upfront attack on present day UPA government.More importantly it tears down vertically the claim of Indian media of how the UPA is working so well for the nation
http://iecolumnists.expressindia.com/full_column.php?content_id=70663
Indian Express : 20th May 2005
Ashok Malik
Revenge of the State
One year on, the UPA has a single danger: unaffordable statism
There are two broad ways in which to observe the first anniversary of the United Progressive Alliance government. The first is to focus on personalities and proper nouns. Depending on your politics, either praise Manmohan Singh as “gentle”, “decent”, “quiet”, a “good doctor” — or have a dig, as a civil servant friend did recently, at the “Common Minimum Prime Minister”.
Next sigh at Sonia’s Gandhi’s “Amazing Grace”, to recall a fawning newspaper headline almost exactly a year ago, and add a gushing tribute to her remarkable command of Hindi. Alternatively, deride her as “super prime minister”, India’s first governess general.
Send your comments to the columnist
Name
Your E-Mail
Your Comments
If there is unanimity, it is perhaps only in the case of the leading opposition party. The BJP, friends and foes both acknowledge, has scored self-goal after self-goal. Its president seems bereft of his instincts; these days, his stock response to every problem is: “It reminds me of the Emergency.”
The satisfaction of smart phrases and quick assessments notwithstanding, there must be another method by which to judge the past year. Have the opening 12 months of the UPA government thrown up any big idea? In terms of labels or ideologies, the answer has to be “no”. Even so, there is an underlying philosophy to UPA raj — the return of the state.
The state brings with it statism, big government, a sense of progress defined not by individual initiative but noblesse oblige, a top-down approach, a nanny state, a nasty overdose of socialist nostalgia.
Statism is not new to India. Even Chanakya referred to dandaniti (literally: the punishment principle) while describing the coercive capacity of the state in his Arthasashtra. In post-Independence India, statism became less an article of belief, more a Congress patronage-dispensing contrivance, complete with public sector units that ran hotels, parcelled out telephone connections and, of course, employed many more than they needed to. The government became the ultimate arbiter of goods and services, of the social contract.
All this is, really, well-known. Why is it relevant to UPA rule? Simply because there is a disconcerting feeling that some mindsets have not moved on. India has changed enormously in the 1990s; are senior Congressmen alive to that change?
If yes, then why this creeping 1980s-style response to governance? Why the underlying suggestion that “government knows best — give us your money, and let us spend it for you”? If you go by the Law Ministry’s argument before the Supreme Court (September 2004), this government even believes a bureaucrat should select the Indian cricket team!
Perhaps this sounds alarmist. Perhaps it is too influenced by the killing of privatisation. It is not merely a case of accusing Arun Shourie of being a crook — so ridiculous that, privately, even Congress MPs shy away from discussing it — if only for selling loss-making hotels. At work is a world view that condones profligacy.
Pushed by the National Advisory Council, the Congress-led government is opening the doors to huge social sector spending. Two days ago, a Rs 174,000 crore, four-year plan was unveiled for rural infrastructure. An education cess has been imposed. Big plans for rural disbursements through a chosen network of NGOs have been proposed.
This sounds very nice. What does it translate to on the ground? It probably means the Congress is going to use much of the money to fund its next election campaign. Leakage, diversion, systemic cost — take your pick of useful euphemisms.
Look to the standard Indian village for empirical evidence. There are numerous schemes at work, for farmers, for schoolchildren, for women. Government grants routinely go out to these bodies, run usually by politically-networked locals. These are the grassroots of political patronage.
Where will this money come from? Simply, from guilt-tripping the tax-payer or squeezing his limb. It begins with a homily about how economic reform has benefited some Indians and now they must pay their dues to their countrymen, by giving more by way of a tax or a cess to the government.
If you point out any contradiction or make noises about “delivery systems”, you are socially ostracised. The government, of course, couldn’t be bothered with cutting its own expenses.
Next come coercive tax regimes. A Supreme Court ruling is nullified by an ordinance, and ITC is asked to pay Rs 800 crore in excise dues. It is told to pay Rs 350 crore immediately. After that, a “settlement” is reached, and the rest of the money is forgotten. Does this sound regular, transparent? Does it smell of a regime that wants to smash and grab, and then “come to an arrangement”? If the Centaur Hotel merits a CBI inquiry, what does this call for? The FBI?
Attuned to the welfare state and a variety of socialisms, a certain type of European mind is instinctually distrustful of private initiative. To rework an old proverb, it would rather redistribute fish than teach people to fish. The Nehru-Gandhi Congress has historically believed in such thought. Under Sonia, regrettably, it has not upgraded its motherboard.
In the end, this government may just spend its way into trouble. Huge public outlays, irrespective of whether the money is well-spent or wasted, are dependent on a surplus generated by high growth. This is not rocket science. The Chinese have done it for a decade and more, spending Guangdong’s profits in the east in subsidising Manchuria in the north.
In the case of the Congress-led government, the engines of growth have been clogged, reform has been put on the slow track, and yet ambitious plans are drawn up for social sector spending.
Shadow boxing in the ruling coalition hides the real issue. The carping of the left parties (CPI and CPM one day, RSP and Forward Bloc the next) is illusion politics— Attack of the Clones as Phantom Menace. The real fear is in the Revenge of the State.
No comments:
Post a Comment