A STRIKING characteristic of the last general elections was the subversive debate among vast sections of the electorate on policy issues relating to the economy, development, social amity and political leadership. The ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA), led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was convinced of a political wave in favour of the leadership of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the track record of his government. The NDAs India Shining slogan was supposed to encapsulate both Vajpayees leadership and the impression his government had left on the country. The election results, however, did not match the NDAs expectations of a wave and the projections it had made on that basis.
The NDAs defeat marked the collapse of a dream to recreate a political wave similar to the one that swept Rajiv Gandhi to power in 1984 after the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The Congress won a phenomenal 404 out of 514 seats in that election. Many issues, ranging from corruption in high places to Hindutva communalism to social justice to development, have dominated elections since then starting with the 1989 polls but no single issue had an overwhelming emotive appeal.
The run-up to the current general elections presents a similar picture. A number of questions relating to the economy, development, internal security, foreign policy, communalism, corruption in government and the corporate sector and the empowerment of Dalits and other oppressed sections are discussed by the electorate, particularly in the context of the performance of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. The Congress and the BJP, the leading parties respectively of the ruling UPA and the opposition NDA, and the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the largest force in the emerging non-Congress, non-BJP political grouping, are addressing these policy issues in their respective ways. The positions they adopt on various issues will, by and large, dictate the line followed by each of the three political formations. In fact, the slogans evolved by these parties provide a broad indication of their policy thrust.
The slogan of the Congress is Stability and inclusive growth through inclusive governance and the party has sought to present it rather dramatically by obtaining the rights of the A.R. Rahman-Gulzar teams song Jai Ho (Towards Victory) in the Oscar-winning film Slumdog Millionaire.
The BJPs platform is Good governance, development and security. The partys attempt is to project this slogan on to the personality of its leader and Prime Minister-candidate Lal Krishna Advani. A special slogan on Advani proclaims thus: Mazboot neta, nirnayak sarkar (Strong leader, decisive government).
The CPI(M) has summed up its campaign thrust as Towards a secular pro-people alternative, and explained it as an attempt to form a non-Congress, non-BJP government that would guarantee pro-people economic policies, social justice, consistent secularism, genuine federalism and an independent foreign policy. Of the three parties, the CPI(M) was the first to come up with an election manifesto. The Congress and the BJP are expected to release their manifestos formally in the last week of March.
Significantly, the emphasis in the policy perspectives of the three parties is on the economy. A variety of factors, ranging from rising prices, widespread job losses and the overall economic slowdown, have contributed to this focus. A survey conducted by the government shows that half a million jobs have been lost between September and December 2008. Many economists and labour activists have contested this estimate as unrealistically low.
The alternating inflationary and deflationary tendencies over the past one year have had a crippling effect on the common people, as retail prices have been steadily on the rise. As these economic policy-related issues take centre stage, some of the perceived hot election topics have been reduced to supplementary status. These include matters relating to internal security and the India-United States nuclear deal.
When the November 26-29, 2008, terror attack on Mumbai happened, the BJP was convinced that internal security would be the main theme of the 2009 elections. But the party had to change its view after the issue failed to evoke much response in the November-December 2008 round of Assembly elections, especially in Delhi.
In July 2008, when the UPA government was forced to face a confidence motion in the Lok Sabha, the dominant view was that the India-U.S. nuclear deal, over which the Left parties withdrew support to the government, would be the main election issue. The thinking was that the Congress would highlight the nuclear deal as an initiative to enhance Indian infrastructure and the Left would castigate it as a clear instance of abandonment of an independent foreign policy.
While all these issues and related interpretations remain in the campaign spectrum of the three parties, there is little doubt that the central theme is the economy. Obviously, their perspectives on the economy are bound to be different. Still, there seems to be a notable shift in the approach of both the Congress and the BJP on the question of pursuing policies of economic liberalisation.
Congress policy managers readily come on record that policy changes are required to ensure the continuance of a stable economy. Advani has gone to the extent of saying that the bubble of Sensex-generated prosperity has burst and that such undependable devices of the free-market economy cannot be the basis for building a truly prosperous nation. He also admitted that the BJPs India Shining campaign in 2004 was a mistake.
Clearly, there is a realisation in the ruling dispensation and the principal opposition party that the policy of blind and unrestrained liberalisation would not be beneficial in the long run and that there is a need for alternative economic policies. Whether the BJP and the Congress will stick to these perspectives and actually implement them if they come to power is a moot question.
A number of Congress leaders involved in formulating the partys manifesto told Frontline that the party would focus naturally on the positives in the UPAs five-year term. The positives include the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS), the Right to Information Act (RTI), the farmers loan waiver programme, the National Rural Health Mission (NRHM) and Bharat Nirman. They claim that these programmes have brought about far-reaching improvement in the economy and in health care, particularly in rural areas. The RTI will be highlighted as an instrument that has strengthened transparency in government.
According to Mani Shankar Aiyar, Union Minister for Panchayati Raj and a member of the Congress manifesto committee, one of the highlights of the partys campaign will be the increase in social sector expenditure. He pointed out that during the tenure of the UPA government, poverty alleviation programmes and schemes such as the NREGS and Bharat Nirman have cumulatively recorded an outlay of Rs.1,20,000 crore. This, he added, was a fourfold increase on the spending in these segments by the previous NDA government.
M. Veerappa Moily, Chairman of the Administrative Reforms Commission, said these programmes signified the commitment to the Common Minimum Programme (CMP) for Governance evolved at the start of the UPAs term.
However, the Congress and the UPA do not stand on such sure ground when it comes to many other segments of the CMP. As evaluated by the Delhi-based Centre for Budget Governance and Accountability (CBGA) in its study How did the UPA spend our money , the government has failed to live up to the promises made in the CMP about increased expenditure in vital areas such as health and education.
The CMP had promised to spend 9 per cent of the gross domestic product (GDP) on health (3 per cent) and education (6 per cent). But the proportion spent on education by the Union government, the study notes, increased only to 0.69 per cent of the GDP in 2008-09 from 0.42 per cent in 2004-05. Similarly, the Union governments expenditure on health increased only to 0.34 per cent of the GDP in 2008-09 from 0.26 per cent in 2004-05. The study also notes that for large parts of the UPAs term, barring the last couple of years, the allocations for agriculture and rural development were low.
Many Congress leaders admit that the basic direction of the economic policy, guided by the principles of free-market liberalisation, has contributed to such shortfalls on the promises made in the CMP. Veerappa Moily emphasised that the Congress would have to take into consideration the fact that superior economic performance would not be easy in the years ahead.
Talking to Frontline, he said: The global economic climate is cloudier than it has been for a long time. When 2008-09 began, there was a perception of a cyclical downturn in the industrialised world, but it has quickly snowballed into a global financial crisis. Domestic policy action cannot completely negate the effect of a global downturn as severe as this. We can at best minimise its negative impact. So the manifesto would take into consideration these aspects and try to strengthen the middle-path economic philosophy of mixed economy crafted by Jawaharlal Nehru.
The party is seeking to put a new spin on its policy and campaign thrust by projecting the idea of inclusive governance. According to Mani Shankar Aiyar, the programmes the party places before the electorate are expected to be based on the idea that inclusive growth can be achieved only through inclusive governance. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had also commented earlier that inclusive growth, which is the motto of the 11th Five-Year Plan, can be achieved only through inclusive governance.
Mani Shankar Aiyar explained this idea further, pointing out that in the social sector the expenditure for poverty alleviation programmes had increased 15-fold in the past 15 years from Rs.7,600 crore in 1994 to Rs.1,20,000 crore in 2008 but poverty had not reduced in the same proportion. Obviously, deficiencies in the administrative system and the bureaucracy are responsible for that. It is here that implementing the concept of inclusive governance using local elected bodies becomes relevant, he said.
The concept of inclusive governance has been written into the first draft of the Congress manifesto. However, Mani Shankar Aiyar was not sure what shape the manifesto would finally take, as it was being discussed and redrafted at a broader level. The leadership, including Congress president Sonia Gandhi, was exchanging ideas with specialists in various fields and social activists involved in rural development, health and education as part of this process.
Interacting with the media in the second week of March, Congress manifesto committee chairman Pranab Mukherjee suggested that the Congress had started moving in the direction of inclusive governance, though a lot more had to be done. According to him, the party is seeking a renewed mandate, on the strength of having fulfilled the pledges it made in the 2004 manifesto. We will go to the people reaffirming our commitment to provide security, dignity, prosperity and the resolve to combat divisive and communal forces. Only the Congress can provide a government with an all-India perspective as it is the only truly national party, he said.
The BJPs campaign thrust is on countering the UPAs claims and projections. One instance of this is as follows: The NDA government started with 5 per cent growth in 1998 and left an economy with 8.5 per cent growth in 2004. The UPA started with 8.5 per cent and will leave it at 6.5 per cent or even lower. The Vajpayee government ushered in confidence and hope about future. Today there is only uncertainty and despair.
Talking to Frontline, Sudheendra Kulkarni, a prominent member of the BJPs think tank, said the party would highlight not only this but also the fact that the UPA government was in denial mode.
Once upon a time the Congress ascribed all problems to the foreign hand. Now, that has been replaced by the phrase external factors. Everything from price rise to economic slowdown is being attributed to external factors, he said.
The BJP would come up with an ideological theme paper addressing the issues that confront the party and that would be followed by an NDA manifesto, which would delineate the framework for governance, Kulkarni said.
Over the past three months Advani has been interacting with a variety of personalities and opinionmakers from different sections of society as part of an exercise to evolve a clear policy framework.
The interactions have been with the captains of industry and business, leaders of farmers, representatives of the security and strategic affairs community, economists, foreign policy specialists and experts on social sector development.
Kulkarni said the consensus in all these meetings was that the UPA government had failed. The NDAs framework for governance would provide guidelines to undo this failure by focussing broadly on the following issues:
1. Replacing the current directionless leadership with constructive and efficient leadership.
2. Evolving a robust, self-confident nationally oriented model of development, which is rooted in the ideals of democracy, equality, justice and integral human progress.
3. Addressing the agrarian crisis on a priority basis.
4. Course-correction of the impaired infrastructure development by removing bottlenecks.
5. Strengthening the mechanisms for internal security and imparting the right political leadership to the internal security machinery.
Kulkarni quoted Advani to point out that just as the centre of gravity of the world economy had shifted from the West to Asia, the centre of gravity of our national economy must shift from India to Bharat to agriculture, revitalisation of villages, small and medium enterprises, and the unorganised and informal sectors of the economy. The BJP would pursue a policy that did not generate conflict between the public sector and the private sector, he said.
On foreign policy, the BJPs position is that Indias autonomy in the conduct of foreign policy has been seriously undermined. The partys leaders pointed out that although India should continue to have a close and multi-dimensional friendship with the U.S., the UPA government ignored the fundamental truth that U.S. foreign policy was guided primarily by its own national interest and that India must do what was in Indias national interest.
The abandonment of autonomy, according the BJP leadership, was most evident in two issues: the handling of the menace of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and the India-U.S. nuclear deal. Hindutva, the centrepiece of the BJPs campaign in many earlier elections, is being pushed forward rather surreptitiously on account of the pressure from NDA partners such as the Janata Dal (United).
This stealthy campaign is being done using organisations such as the Sant Samaj (a grouping of Hindu religious activists and leaders) and through meetings in small towns and villages. One such campaign initiative, by Varun Gandhi, the candidate-designate in Pilibhit in Uttar Pradesh, was exposed in the media, forcing the BJP leadership to make public retractions on its Hindutva agenda.
The CPI(M)s manifesto questioned the claims of both the Congress and the BJP. It said the Congress-led coalition government pursued policies that were nakedly pro-rich and intensified the divide between the rich and the common masses, while the BJP confined itself to raising various issues, including that of terrorism, from the standpoint of Hindutva communalism. The manifesto holds the Manmohan Singh governments economic policies primarily responsible for inflation and price rise.
It said the UPA government squandered the mandate of the 2004 Lok Sabha elections by pursuing the policies of liberalisation and privatisation, which stood discredited in the backdrop of the global economic crisis.
In a reference to foreign policy, the manifesto criticised the Congress thus: A party which sees the future of India tied to the coat-tails of the United States does not deserve to run the government of our sovereign democratic republic. It pointed out that the earlier regime of the BJP was no different as it also had promoted the same policies. The manifesto described the BJP as the most reactionary force in the country , which is marked by pro-rich and communal policies.
The analysis of the governments track record holds that wavering policies intensified the agrarian crisis, curtailed the rights of workers, failed to check the rise of communal violence and favoured big corporates by granting them tax benefits and allowing them to grab large tracts of land in the name of industrial promotion.
The role played by the Left vis-a-vis the Congress-led government is described as that of a sentinel in the interests of the people. The manifesto points out that two major pieces of legislation the NREGA and the Tribal Forest Rights Act would not have come about in the present form without the CPI(M)s intervention.
The manifesto highlights the Lefts interventions that led to the protection of many public sector industries and the shielding of the banking sector from the impact of the global economic collapse. The proposed CPI(M) platform is presented as one that would promote alternative policies and a non-Congress, non-BJP political formation on these lines. On the whole, the political climate in the run-up to the polls is marked by an unmistakable emphasis on the need for alternative social and economic polices.
The projected alternative polices are broadly based on the positions advocated by Left parties over the past decade and a half, but what is most significant is that even the Congress and the BJP, the two prominent votaries of neoliberal policies during this period, have been compelled to acknowledge and accept them. This general acceptance and acknowledgement at the policy level has manifested itself in the shifting of the BJPs erstwhile allies such as the Telugu Desam Party, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the Biju Janata Dal to the Left-led platform.
The big question, however, is how far these shifts will concretise in terms of realpolitik in the days to come. The answer lies in the realm of conjecture because most of the smaller parties in the three formations, including the relatively larger Bahujan Samaj Party, normally fight elections without a manifesto or well-defined policies, essentially in order to enhance their political manoeuvrability.
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE