After observing the behaviour of political parties during the last few months, I have reached the sad conclusion that political support for economic reforms — real reforms — is shrinking. Every political party has taken a step backward on key issues. Reformers in every party seem to have taken a vow of silence. It is, therefore, not surprising at all that news about reforms have been pushed to the inside pages, and attract less attention than the antics of page-three fixtures. The Playmaker The focal point of reforms is the Ministry of Finance. The Finance Minister is — to borrow the language of football or hockey — the playmaker. It was so during the first phase, when Dr Manmohan Singh occupied that office (1991-96). He would call the Commerce Minister, the Law Minister or the Power Minister and urge them to take steps in tandem with the agenda that he had drawn up for implementation. Sometimes he would force their hands by making a policy announcement on behalf of the Government. That tradition was continued during the United Front government’s rule in 1996-98. For example, the policy statements on disinvestment, the Navaratna-PSUs, the dismantling of the Administered Price Mechanism in the petroleum sector, the Accelerated Irrigation Benefit Programme etc were made, not by the Minister concerned, but as part of the budget speech. Yashwant Sinha tried his best to steer economic policy, but he suffered from two drawbacks. The first was his stature within the BJP and within the coalition government. Since other ministers enjoyed greater clout, many initiatives of Sinha turned out to be damp squibs. Secondly, it seemed that he did not command the total confidence of the Prime Minister. From Day One, he was seen as Vajpayee’s second choice for the job. Speculation about Sinha’s transfer sapped his confidence. Since moving to the Ministry of External Affairs, Sinha has maintained a distance from all economic issues. Jaswant Singh is in a class of his own. In 1996, he was happy to be appointed Finance Minister. In 1998, he was devastated when the RSS intervened to deny him the job. But, by 2002, things had changed. He had, for four years, enjoyed his job — some think too much — as Foreign Minister. He was happy to be seen in the company of Presidents and Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministers, happy to be away from India as often as possible and happy to speak in diplomatese on issues of little concern to the average citizen. Thus, when he was appointed Finance Minister, it was a reluctant Jaswant Singh who took up the responsibility. After six months on the job, he is, in my view, still the reluctant Finance Minister. How else does one explain his refusal to meet any officer below the rank of Secretary? I gather that Singh does not meet the Chief Economic Adviser every day. It is of a piece with another bit of information that I have gathered that the Prime Minister is not briefed everyday by the Director of the Intelligence Bureau. Singh also travels little and does not, as a rule, grant interviews to the media. Nor can the media catch him on the ‘‘sidelines’’ of an event because he gives a wide berth to events. Recently, Singh set a precedent of sorts by declining to address the CII-WEF annual meeting. It was reported that Singh had cited ‘‘parliamentary commitments’’ as the reason, but we also saw a cute photograph of the Minister at a polo match on the same day. New Controversies With every passing day, there is a new controversy. First, it was about disinvestment. Now it is about direct and indirect taxes. A few days ago, the Minister for Labour made some incomprehensible remarks about reform of labour laws. The Food Minister has not been able to quell the rebellion on sugarcane prices — or spell out a policy. The textile industry is in the doldrums, but no one has seen or heard the Minister of Textiles in many months. Government has no policy on using the billwing foreign exchange reserves. Crucial questions have arisen as a result of Sebi’s investigations into Gujarat Ambuja’s purchase of shares in ACC and Grasim’s open offer to the shareholders of L&T. Nobody seems to have thought through the consequences of the ill-drafted Securitisation of Assets law. While UTI seems to have been bailed out temporarily, the fate of IFCI and IDBI hang in the balance. No one is sure if VAT will come into effect on 1 April, 2003. The NDA government is like a football team that kicks and passes the ball aimlessly while waiting for the referee’s final whistle. No attempt is made to score a goal, the object being to prevent a self-goal or a goal against the NDA side. Opposition Ambivalence The Congress does not fare better in its approach to economic reforms. The party is suddenly discovering new virtues in the old order that, one had thought, the Congress had abandoned when it authored the story of economic reforms. The Congress now says that it does not support the privatisation of profit-making PSUs. Weeks into the debates, the Congress has not taken an official position on the Kelkar reports, on sugarcane prices, on APL and BPL prices that have put PDS foodgrain beyond the reach of the poor, on the bailout of UTI, IFCI and IDBI and on a host of other current issues. On the Securitisation of Assets Bill, there were two opinions within the party, as a result of which the 100 or more amendments (some helpful) notified by the party were quietly withdrawn, and the Bill was passed into law. It is only the Left parties that make a lot of noise about reforms, but their voices, despite the compelling example of China, are raised against reforms. Unless there are broader, deeper and quicker reforms, the goal of eight per cent growth will remain a dream. We need a playmaker and we need a team that is willing to go out and score goals. Write to pc@expressindia.com
