What is new
Ambedkar-Nehru frosty ties that Parliament won’t recollect
- Published on 29 November 2015
(Edited Image Courtesy: PIB)
Have you ever come across any instance of a Prime Minister describing a departed national icon as “very controversial figure” in obituary?
Jawaharlal Nehru did so on 6th December 1956 while sharing his grief over demise of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. And in this hangs a tale of uneasy relationship between these two leaders – a relationship in which Dr. Ambedkar missed no opportunity to unmask and jab at Mr. Nehru.
This narrative is relevant as Parliamentarians are currently vying with one another in eulogizing Dr. Ambedkar as chief architect of Indian Constitution and as a prime mover of socio-political reforms.
He had premonition of his death. He had also cautioned the Government against taking the country to dogs!
Before recounting certain punches thrown by Dr. Ambedkar at Nehru, hear what Mr. Nehru stated: “Dr. Ambedkar for many, many years had been a very controversial figure in Indian public affairs, but there can be no doubt about his outstanding quality, his scholarship, and the intensity with which he pursued his convictions, sometimes rather with greater intensity than perhaps required by the particular subject, which sometimes reacted in a contrary way. But he was the symbol of that intense feeling which we must always remember, the intense feeling of the suppressed classes in India who have suffered for ages past under our previous social systems, and it is as well that we recognise this burden that all of us should carry and should always remember.”
Pay Commission Articulates Govt Dharma: Charity Begins at home
- Published on 28 November 2015
“There are various grounds, Sir. One such ground is that the financial implication is enormous. Then there is the question of weighing the different points of view and considering whether it would not be better to spend the resources for development purposes under the second -Five Year Plan rather than to raise the salaries now.”
That was Deputy Minister for Finance, B.R. Bhagat, in Nehru Government spurning the demand to set up second Central Pay Commission (CPC) in Parliament on 29nd February 1956.
He continued: “In fact, as a result of the implementation of the recommendations of the last (1st) Pay Commission regarding salaries, bonus, medical facilities, housing etc. the financial implication was to the tune of Rs. 30 crores. And there is nothing new that has happened. Even on the basis of the consumer price index or other economic indicators, there is no reason for the appointment of such a Commission.”
Pressured further by a belligerent member from the Opposition Benches, Mr Bhagat articulated the Government’s reluctance: “There are various reasons—price index and other indicators. But taking a long-term view, once the Commission is appointed and the recommendations are made, it will be difficult for the Government to resist such recommendations.”
Nehru Government ultimately buckled under the pressure from trade unions: It constituted the 2nd CPC in August 1957.
Over the next 60 years, successive Governments failed to resist pressure from trade unions, which have transformed governments and its appendages into heavens of prosperity and job security.
The ruling political alliances turned deaf ears to the advice from Finance Commissions and other entities against setting up of pay commissions to upgrade pay scales after every 10 years.
It is no wonder then that the annual burden resulting from implementation of respective CPC award on national exchequer has risen from Rs 30 crore in 1947-48 (Ist CPC) to Rs 1,02,100 crore in 2016-17 (7th CPC). Modi Government’s approval in the latest case is certain if the initial response of Finance Minister Arun Jaitley is taken as a valuable cue.
Modi’s shift from Proactive to Reactive PM shatters billion dreams
- Published on 12 November 2015
(Sunset for Modi?)
The prime mover advantage in political narrative is shifting from Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the opposition parties.
The shift is set to gather momentum following the BJP’s debacle in Bihar polls that was preceded by drubbing in Delhi from rookie politician Arvind Kejriwal. The election results have delivered a decisive blow to Modi’s waning charisma and credibility.
Many a citizen would henceforth view with suspicion whatever good initiative that Mr. Modi takes in future. They would suspect it as a part of larger Hindutva agenda.
Similarly, the Opposition would take credit for anything good that Mr. Modi does in any socio-economic domain. They would say something like this: Modi is doing this because we created public pressure for him to act. He is backtracking because… and so on and so forth. As this process gains momentum in the coming months, Mr. Modi would be seen as a reactive leader and not as a proactive leader.
Barring sound and fury, he failed to act as a proactive leader on all fronts except his hobbyhorse, Swachh Bharat. And action in this domain has been more theatrical and not holistic. It has hardly changed the ground actuality. India thus continues to stink.
When electorate gave BJP the Lok Sabha mandate to govern well, then it was swayed by Mr. Modi’s perceived passion for growth and reforms. The public saw him as a proactive leader who would cut Gordian knot of hurdles to herald Acche Din for all.
He failed to rise to the occasion perhaps because he trusts only very few colleagues, who in turn have created their own cliques of trusted advisors. The bane of Modi regime is the distrust for established institutional framework and outside professional talent.
Mr. Modi is also indifferent towards well-meaning advice that flows from institutions, analysts and small fries at large.
( )
Be it the attacks on churches, be it arrogance-inspired land ordinance, be it ghar wapsi (conversion of Christians and Muslims back to Hinduism), be it cow slaughter, be it beef tamasha, be it abusive tongue-lashing by certain BJP leaders, Mr. Modi’s initial response has always be stoic silence.
Take any case and make a Google search. Pop comes the headline that runs on these lines: Modi finally breaks his silence.
In each case, the Opposition and other opinion leaders goaded PM to break his silence. And he always spoke too late and too little, thereby consolidating his image as reactive leader, who drew comfort from great escape from domestic grind by flying abroad ostensibly to build India’s image.
With this background, consider reactive PM scenario with five hypothetical situations.
Civil Aviation Becomes Alice in the Wonderland of Policy Drafts
- Published on 11 November 2015
(Image Courtesy: IATA)
It was amusing to hear other day Civil Aviation Minister Ashok Gajapathi Raju describing consultations on draft civil aviation policy (CAP) as “never done before”.
Mr. Raju should know that consultations on draft CAP with all stakeholders have been held at least twice earlier – in Q1 2000 when National Democratic Alliance (NDA) was in its 2nd tenure and in Q1 2012 when United Progressive Alliance (UPA) was in power.
Mr. Raju made his self-gratification comment while unveiling revised draft CAP on 30th October 2015. He had released draft CAP on 10th November 2014. This column contains a few ‘never done before’ innovations in governance, which he should pursue.
At the event, Civil Aviation Secretary (CAS) R.N. Choubey reportedly stated: “The draft policy is in line with the Prime Minister’s directive that the policy should promote aviation in a big way and take flying to the masses.”
Ex-PM, late Inder Kumar Gujral, might be chuckling (if not ridiculing) in the heaven at this Big Bang CAP Show.
It was Mr. Gujral, who had set the CAP ball rolling about 20 years back from the Himalayan foothills. And the policy-makers are still having a ball with his initiative!
According to a UNI report dated-lined 7 June 1997, Mr. Gujral expressed extreme displeasure at India’s CAP at a meeting with businessmen while on visit to Nepal.