<p>Amidst all the scams tainting the UPA-II government, two developments stood out in the last one month or so, making it a telling commentary on the lack of governance that has come to be the hallmark of the Manmohan Singh-led administration. Speaking from Davos, where he was participating in the World Economic Summit in January last, industrialist Azim Premji lashed out at the performance of the Central Government saying he was extremely disappointed at the “complete breakdown in public governance across the board”. He went on to remark: “I think it is a national calamity and is personally very devastating because one had so much confidence when they (UPA-II) came in,” and wondered whether the present government was “unable to deliver”. This was followed by a group of prominent personalities, including Premji, HDFC Chairman Deepak Parekh and others, expressing concern over a series of scams that pointed toward a “governance deficit”. They wrote a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh bringing to his notice ‘widespread governance deficit in almost every sphere of national activity covering government, business and institutions’. “The biggest issue corroding the fabric of our nation is corruption”, they stressed. <br /><br />The second development came in the form of 83 former senior bureaucrats taking a rare course of moving the Supreme Court on March 4 over decline in administrative services. The petitioners, who included former cabinet secretary TSR Subramanian, said: “There is an urgent need to depoliticise management of transfers, postings, inquiries, promotions, reward, punishment and disciplinary matters relating to civil servants.”<br /><br />These concerns were only to be expected with a government unable to contain a drift that has led to questions about the very decision making – apparently the lack of it – in the second UPA dispensation. It is the deficiency in governance from the top most executive post of the prime minister that is being blamed as the reason for scams such as the 2G spectrum allocation, Commonwealth Games, carelessness in handling the ISRO S-band deal and not being able to see the writing on the wall or sheer arrogance in sticking to the appointment of P J Thomas as the Central Vigilance Commissioner leading to a mouthful from the Supreme Court. <br /><br />Many senior Congress MPs no longer have any qualms in blaming the economist prime minister for the ills. One such MP, declining to be quoted, said: “There is a huge gulf of difference between UPA I and II. Many ministries are lying dormant for long. Bureaucrats are ruling the roost. Reshuffle that was effected recently was a farce. Rot has set in and governance is going from bad to worse. We wonder whether the PM, from being an asset, has become a liability”. Serious remarks these, coming from a fellow senior Congressman. However, veteran MP Kishore Chandra Deo, speaking to Deccan Herald, defends the government: “There is nothing wrong with governance. Some incidents did create problems and that way democratic process was under strain. Governance continued in a normal way”. A seasoned Parliamentarian, Deo knows it is a weak defence.<br /><br />Prof PM in focus<br /><br />All these have brought a beleaguered prime minister into sharp focus. A man who valued his integrity more than anything else, Manmohan Singh has now been forced to say he will not resign just because of scams. The man who scripted India’s growth story in the 1990s has now been asked to explain how the targeted growth can be achieved if the rot is not stemmed; fingers are pointed that an economist PM is not able to contain inflation over the last one year. It makes a pathetic case that a man whom Time magazine brought on to its power list only last year, was losing his aura. A man who was hailed as the main reason in bringing Congress back to power was groping for answers to all these uncomfortable questions. <br /><br />The televised press meet that he addressed, rather than helping, failed to put him in proper light. Vidhu Verma, professor at Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, told this newspaper: “ It showed the PM in a different light. He linked corruption with coalition politics and his argument looked weak. I would have liked a convincing answer. I want to know why 2G should lead to a major loss to our economy. The PM knows where things have gone wrong but could not articulate”. <br /><br />In 2004, when UPA 1 came to power, PM as the CEO and Sonia Gandhi as the political head seemed a perfect combination. Scam-free, the five years were smooth sailing except for pinpricks by the Left, which was in reality a blessing in disguise for the Congress. Now, there is a question mark whether the two posts should stay separate. <br />Congress managers must be ruing the day the Left withdrew support to the UPA amidst the nuclear agreement debate. Be its politicians or officials, those in UPA 1 were always alert, thanks to a vigilant Left playing the watchdog role. With the Left gone, the UPA 2 had a field day and scamsters a free run. The result is for all to see. Says M R Madhavan of PRS Legislative Research, New Delhi, “In our system, most of the time, Parliament takes up the issue after a scam breaks out. Why don’t we have a system where systemic checks are built-in so that scams do not take place. For example, if Parliamentary standing committee had taken up the 2G issue in the beginning, we would not have this humongous scandal”.<br /><br />There are those who defend PM outside his party. An analyst says a ruler should be judged by his actions. According to him, all possible steps in the 2G case were taken, including sending a minister to jail and raiding a TV office belonging to a strong ally. But then, points out another, if proper steps had been taken when they were wanted, the scam would not have broken out!<br /><br />If the UPA government is involved in so many scams and taken several questionable decisions which virtually shamed it, then the top bureaucrats too have to take the blame. What happened over the last one year was not just mishandling by the political masters, the officialdom at the top should take an equal responsibility, more so because the Singh administration is seen as depending heavily on the bureaucracy. Says Vidhu Verma: “There were announcements of good polices and programmes in the social sector but we don’t see their implementation for the Aam Aadmi. We want to know how inclusive growth is taking place. Within the economy, there is growth in the corporate sector but not in the medium and informal sectors where most people are employed”.</p>.<p>Of drift and rift<br /><br />It was not any Opposition leader but Union home minister P Chidambaram, one of the key men in the decision-making process in the UPA 2 government, who admitted recently about governance deficit. In an interview to Wall Street Journal on January 18, Chidambaram said, "There is indeed a governance deficit in some areas and, perhaps, there is also an ethical deficit." Apparently under pressure from the top, Chidambaram clarified that he was referring to a period before the UPA.<br /><br />A question was asked of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his recent press meet and he defended Chidambaram saying, "Events have taken place that do bring out weakness in the process of governance. It is not a subject which divides me and other members of the Cabinet." <br /><br />Finance minister Pranab Mukherjee made a reference to governance deficit in his budget speech on February 28: “Certain events in the past few months may have created an impression of drift in governance and a gap in public accountability. Such an impression is misplaced." Hours later, when he was asked whether he agreed with Chidambaram’s comment on the governance deficit, Mukherjee said: “I am afraid I am an old hat and I do not believe in making comments. When I am in government, I shall have to maintain certain norms. If I find that there is a deficit in governance, then the basic question comes, why I am there?" Needless to say, Mukherjee virtually questioned his colleague Chidambaram’s continuance in the cabinet, triggering speculation over the home minister’s future in the government. Well, the last word is yet to be heard on governance deficit…..<br /><br /><em>BSA<br /><br /></em><a href="../content/143460/rising-country-risk-perception-upsets.html">Rising country risk perception upsets corp India</a></p>.<p><a href="../content/143463/more-do-mr-prime-minister.html">More to do, Mr Prime Minister</a></p>.<p><a href="../content/143466/judicial-activism-returns.html">Judicial activism returns</a> </p>
<p>Amidst all the scams tainting the UPA-II government, two developments stood out in the last one month or so, making it a telling commentary on the lack of governance that has come to be the hallmark of the Manmohan Singh-led administration. Speaking from Davos, where he was participating in the World Economic Summit in January last, industrialist Azim Premji lashed out at the performance of the Central Government saying he was extremely disappointed at the “complete breakdown in public governance across the board”. He went on to remark: “I think it is a national calamity and is personally very devastating because one had so much confidence when they (UPA-II) came in,” and wondered whether the present government was “unable to deliver”. This was followed by a group of prominent personalities, including Premji, HDFC Chairman Deepak Parekh and others, expressing concern over a series of scams that pointed toward a “governance deficit”. They wrote a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh bringing to his notice ‘widespread governance deficit in almost every sphere of national activity covering government, business and institutions’. “The biggest issue corroding the fabric of our nation is corruption”, they stressed. <br /><br />The second development came in the form of 83 former senior bureaucrats taking a rare course of moving the Supreme Court on March 4 over decline in administrative services. The petitioners, who included former cabinet secretary TSR Subramanian, said: “There is an urgent need to depoliticise management of transfers, postings, inquiries, promotions, reward, punishment and disciplinary matters relating to civil servants.”<br /><br />These concerns were only to be expected with a government unable to contain a drift that has led to questions about the very decision making – apparently the lack of it – in the second UPA dispensation. It is the deficiency in governance from the top most executive post of the prime minister that is being blamed as the reason for scams such as the 2G spectrum allocation, Commonwealth Games, carelessness in handling the ISRO S-band deal and not being able to see the writing on the wall or sheer arrogance in sticking to the appointment of P J Thomas as the Central Vigilance Commissioner leading to a mouthful from the Supreme Court. <br /><br />Many senior Congress MPs no longer have any qualms in blaming the economist prime minister for the ills. One such MP, declining to be quoted, said: “There is a huge gulf of difference between UPA I and II. Many ministries are lying dormant for long. Bureaucrats are ruling the roost. Reshuffle that was effected recently was a farce. Rot has set in and governance is going from bad to worse. We wonder whether the PM, from being an asset, has become a liability”. Serious remarks these, coming from a fellow senior Congressman. However, veteran MP Kishore Chandra Deo, speaking to Deccan Herald, defends the government: “There is nothing wrong with governance. Some incidents did create problems and that way democratic process was under strain. Governance continued in a normal way”. A seasoned Parliamentarian, Deo knows it is a weak defence.<br /><br />Prof PM in focus<br /><br />All these have brought a beleaguered prime minister into sharp focus. A man who valued his integrity more than anything else, Manmohan Singh has now been forced to say he will not resign just because of scams. The man who scripted India’s growth story in the 1990s has now been asked to explain how the targeted growth can be achieved if the rot is not stemmed; fingers are pointed that an economist PM is not able to contain inflation over the last one year. It makes a pathetic case that a man whom Time magazine brought on to its power list only last year, was losing his aura. A man who was hailed as the main reason in bringing Congress back to power was groping for answers to all these uncomfortable questions. <br /><br />The televised press meet that he addressed, rather than helping, failed to put him in proper light. Vidhu Verma, professor at Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, told this newspaper: “ It showed the PM in a different light. He linked corruption with coalition politics and his argument looked weak. I would have liked a convincing answer. I want to know why 2G should lead to a major loss to our economy. The PM knows where things have gone wrong but could not articulate”. <br /><br />In 2004, when UPA 1 came to power, PM as the CEO and Sonia Gandhi as the political head seemed a perfect combination. Scam-free, the five years were smooth sailing except for pinpricks by the Left, which was in reality a blessing in disguise for the Congress. Now, there is a question mark whether the two posts should stay separate. <br />Congress managers must be ruing the day the Left withdrew support to the UPA amidst the nuclear agreement debate. Be its politicians or officials, those in UPA 1 were always alert, thanks to a vigilant Left playing the watchdog role. With the Left gone, the UPA 2 had a field day and scamsters a free run. The result is for all to see. Says M R Madhavan of PRS Legislative Research, New Delhi, “In our system, most of the time, Parliament takes up the issue after a scam breaks out. Why don’t we have a system where systemic checks are built-in so that scams do not take place. For example, if Parliamentary standing committee had taken up the 2G issue in the beginning, we would not have this humongous scandal”.<br /><br />There are those who defend PM outside his party. An analyst says a ruler should be judged by his actions. According to him, all possible steps in the 2G case were taken, including sending a minister to jail and raiding a TV office belonging to a strong ally. But then, points out another, if proper steps had been taken when they were wanted, the scam would not have broken out!<br /><br />If the UPA government is involved in so many scams and taken several questionable decisions which virtually shamed it, then the top bureaucrats too have to take the blame. What happened over the last one year was not just mishandling by the political masters, the officialdom at the top should take an equal responsibility, more so because the Singh administration is seen as depending heavily on the bureaucracy. Says Vidhu Verma: “There were announcements of good polices and programmes in the social sector but we don’t see their implementation for the Aam Aadmi. We want to know how inclusive growth is taking place. Within the economy, there is growth in the corporate sector but not in the medium and informal sectors where most people are employed”.</p>.<p>Of drift and rift<br /><br />It was not any Opposition leader but Union home minister P Chidambaram, one of the key men in the decision-making process in the UPA 2 government, who admitted recently about governance deficit. In an interview to Wall Street Journal on January 18, Chidambaram said, "There is indeed a governance deficit in some areas and, perhaps, there is also an ethical deficit." Apparently under pressure from the top, Chidambaram clarified that he was referring to a period before the UPA.<br /><br />A question was asked of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his recent press meet and he defended Chidambaram saying, "Events have taken place that do bring out weakness in the process of governance. It is not a subject which divides me and other members of the Cabinet." <br /><br />Finance minister Pranab Mukherjee made a reference to governance deficit in his budget speech on February 28: “Certain events in the past few months may have created an impression of drift in governance and a gap in public accountability. Such an impression is misplaced." Hours later, when he was asked whether he agreed with Chidambaram’s comment on the governance deficit, Mukherjee said: “I am afraid I am an old hat and I do not believe in making comments. When I am in government, I shall have to maintain certain norms. If I find that there is a deficit in governance, then the basic question comes, why I am there?" Needless to say, Mukherjee virtually questioned his colleague Chidambaram’s continuance in the cabinet, triggering speculation over the home minister’s future in the government. Well, the last word is yet to be heard on governance deficit…..<br /><br /><em>BSA<br /><br /></em><a href="../content/143460/rising-country-risk-perception-upsets.html">Rising country risk perception upsets corp India</a></p>.<p><a href="../content/143463/more-do-mr-prime-minister.html">More to do, Mr Prime Minister</a></p>.<p><a href="../content/143466/judicial-activism-returns.html">Judicial activism returns</a> </p>
