By T N Ninan
If his govt is paralysed by inaction, and tarred with the corruption brush, it is because Dr Singh has not been true to his instincts, and too timid

New Delhi: Twenty years ago, Manmohan Singh was a man with a mission. After his first Budget as finance minister, he barged into a post-Budget press conference called by his officials, to personally explain what he was doing.
He gave lengthy interviews; he spoke from virtually every available platform, to get across the need for change. Later, when Narasimha Rao announced a series of Independence Day handouts, Dr Singh gave an interview to say that the country could not spend its way to prosperity (Sonia Gandhi, please note).
And towards the end of the Rao government's tenure, when the atmosphere became thick with deal-making, he spoke out courageously against crony capitalism.
The contrast with today could not be more striking, as the country seems to have a prime minister-in-hiding. You see him seated at meetings, looking a trifle lost, or mouthing homilies at government functions (the MAFA syndrome -- mistaking articulation for action). Other than that, he is both invisible and silent. This is no way to lead.
If his government is paralysed by inaction, and tarred comprehensively with the corruption brush, it is because Dr Singh has not been true to his instincts, and too timid as the head of the government. Dayanidhi Maran as a stripling minister wrote to him in 2006, complaining that spectrum pricing should be left to him, not handed over to a group of ministers. Dr Singh meekly acquiesced.
Mani Shankar Aiyar wrote to him two years before the Commonwealth Games, ie before the bloated and wasteful spending began, to complain about Mr Kalmadi's budget-inflating habits. Yet Mr Kalmadi was allowed to go his merry way till the damage was done.

When A Raja cocked a snook at him, what was the response? Dr Singh's private secretary made the telltale request that the prime minister's office be kept at arm's length. In other words, he knew that skullduggery was going on, but wanted to turn a blind eye. On the spectrum scandal, he himself has explained that once two of his ministerial colleagues were in agreement, he did not think he could intervene!
And now it transpires that a former secretary in the finance ministry (E A S Sarma) wrote repeatedly to the prime minister, over two years, warning him of undue favours being done to private gas concessionaires like Reliance and Cairn, at the cost of the exchequer. He never got even a routine acknowledgement. Was Dr Singh too scared to ask Murli Deora?
So the prime minister cannot say that he did not know. In every case, he was informed, and he chose to do nothing. This is not because he was corrupt; even his worst critics will not say that. Perhaps he felt there was no choice in a coalition other than to turn a blind eye to some goings-on (he once said something like "I am not in the business of losing my government's majority").
But if an honest and public-spirited man allows scamsters around him to flourish, the stage comes when personal honesty is no longer a valid defence. And belated action under public and court pressure provides no absolution.
What about the government's policy paralysis? Speaking at a Business Standard awards function three months ago, Dr Singh said: "I sense a mood for renewal, as I did 20 years ago. We did not disappoint India in the summer of 1991. We will grasp the nettle once again, in the summer of 2011."
Well, the summer is ending, the rainy season has come, and this now looks like yet another case of MAFA. If this does not change very quickly, the question will be asked: is the useful life of this government over?
Source: Business Standard

The CPM has been doing a lot of soul-searching post its decisive defeat in the West Bengal elections, besides its loss in Kerala. So much so, party politburo member Sitaram Yechury, 58, admits that serious mistakes were made in West Bengal that need to be corrected to win back the people's confidence. And yet, he sees a bright future for the left globally. Yechury talks Singur, the Palghat syndrome and the new left with Akshaya Mukul. Excerpts:

What is the CPM's analysis of its defeat in West Bengal?
There will be more in-depth analysis. Clearly, mistakes were made at three levels: political-tactical, administrative and organizational. At the central committee meeting in Hyderabad, preliminary analysis was done. The primary thing for the party is to overcome these weaknesses and, on that basis, strengthen its links with the people. The party in West Bengal has said they will undertake more in-depth analysis during the state committee meeting in July.

There has been a slew of analysis after the party's defeat in West Bengal. Many critics point out that the principle of democratic centralism is another word for tyrannical control of the leadership that often is the reason why the party fails to do course correction.

Yes, there would be certain areas that need to be strengthened. But this problem has been there since Lenin. He coined the term "tyranny of majority". In CPM, we are conscious of inner-party democracy. We practice it more vibrantly. In no other political party is political resolution submitted two months in advance and everyone is free to give comments. I think the election results should not be reduced to analyzing the fundamental aspects of a communist organization. If that was so, we would not have lost narrowly in Kerala. In Bengal, we still got 41% votes, more than many parties in power in many states.

Don't you think drawing solace like this is an act of self-deception?
Yes, there is no point in fooling ourselves and seeking to draw solace from these figures. It's good these things are there but it does not change the reality. Our vote share has fallen. We also cannot take solace that we were in Bengal for seven terms. While this might be true, it is no solace. We have to work hard to regain the confidence of the people. It is not the question of Bengal alone. We had presence in Assam, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka that we do not have any longer.

In Bengal the biggest grouse of the common man, apart from poor administration, has been the oppressive party control of all aspects of local life — from acquiring a ration card to land acquisition. Do you agree?
Many of these factors are functional aspects of our leaders. That is not the way a party should function and this is not the way the party won confidence of the people.

In Singur, it was neither the first time nor the last time that land was acquired. It came soon after the victory in the 2006 election. The election was fought on the slogan of rapid industrialization. It was presumed the people had endorsed this plank. Therefore, the homework that the party used to do – sitting with villagers and hearing their problems – was not done. In Rajarhat, 1000 acres of land was acquired after months of homework. Jyoti Basu himself used to visit villages. But in Singur, not doing our homework backfired. That gave the opposition its opportunity.

Apart from discontent due to land acquisition, many have also pointed out that after land reform, small and middle farmers captured the party leadership that weakened the cause of landless farmers. Do you think this contributed to the anger of the peasants?
This was the experience in Kerala. We call it the Palghat syndrome. In Bengal the problem was different. For less than 1000 acres, 12,000 cheques were collected in Singur which means 12 families were living off one acre. Land reform led to fragmentation. It became unviable to sustain them. Their future improvement was only through future employment generation through industrialization. While many undertook this, others did not. If proper homework had been done, this would not have happened.

Apart from local mistakes in West Bengal, do you think the Left needs to rethink its ideological opposition to marketing its principles. At one point, the Left opposed bourgeoisie democracy and later had a rethink.
It is a complete misnomer to say the market has no place in the economy. As long as there is commodity production, there will be a market. But the market is not the most rational regulator that will protect the interests of the people. If you leave it to the caprices of the market, it would lead to an irrational situation. Just see how a slight mention of a relook into the Indo-Mauritius free trade agreement led to tanking of the market. At the Delhi party congress in 2005, we had said foreign capital is inevitable but it should be mutually beneficial, not a one-way loot.

Coming to the Left's future, many old comrades have demanded merger of the CPM and CPI. Is that a good idea?
There is no doubt greater unity among Left parties – it's a good thing. But a merger will become an agenda only if the reasons that led to the separation of the two parties are resolved.

But over the years, the differences between the two have narrowed down?
Yes, over the years the differences have narrowed down on political-tactical lines. More importantly, in mass movements we have been together. But the important issue is, do we get bogged down by ideological issues or forge unity.

The left is under threat internationally. How do you see the future?
This is a challenging time for the left but I see a good future. Wherever the communist party has come to power, it has delivered. Look at Greece. There have been 11 strikes in eight months. Left and liberals are making good advance. Look at Portugal. You see the left reasserting itself. I am not talking of Latin America where the left is doing very well. On the other hand, what is capitalism doing? It is turning corporate insolvency into sovereign insolvency by bailing out the same corporates. The burden of solvency is a government debt that is to be borne by people whose rights are being curtailed. In this situation, the left has a very good opportunity.

Has the time for the new left come?
We keep hearing about the new left but it is yet to crystallize into any body of theory. Unless you have an alternative body of structure, this left would only remain fashionable. Without a political structure, it cannot become an alternative to traditional left.

Lucknow: The Mayawati government is having a tough time defending its position on the law and order front, with the string of rapes reported frequently from various parts of the state. It's grim when coupled with the murder of two chief medical officers within a span of six months, and the killing of four persons over land in western UP.
Close on the heels of the alleged rape and murder of a minor by cops in a police station in Lakhimpur Kheri district, two more rape cases have been reported over the weekend. In one of these cases, a 14-year-old Dalit girl was blinded when she resisted rape by two youths in Gursahaiganj area in Kannauj.
In another incident, an 18-year-old Dalit girl was allegedly raped by a youth at gunpoint in Ranipur Beladi village in Basti district of eastern UP. The two incidents took place within days of an alleged rape and murder of a minor in a police station in the state. In another incident, an 18-year-old Dalit girl was allegedly raped by a youth in Ranipur Beladi village in Basti district of eastern UP. One Satti Singh allegedly raped the girl at gunpoint on Saturday night, police sources here said.
In the Kannauj incident, Dilip and Niranjan Yadav attempted to rape the girl when she stepped out of her house early morning on Saturday in Gadwa Buzurg village. Superintendent of Police Rajendra Singh told reporters: "When the girl raised an alarm, the duo attacked her with knives, piercing her left eye and injuring the other. Both the accused are from the girl's village," the SP said.
Doctors at a Kanpur hospital later said the girl's left eye had been completely damaged while the right one had suffered around 80 per cent damage and it might not be normal again as the cornea was affected.
While one accused Niranjan has been arrested, Dilip was still at large. A sub-inspector and a constable have been suspended for negligence in the case, an official spokesman said.
The horrific incident in Kannauj was likely to add to the troubles of chief minister Mayawati who was already facing severe criticism from opposition parties over the Lakhimpur Incident.
Congress General Secretary Digvijay Singh has slammed the police force in the state saying UP officers are corrupt and incompetent. "There is no hope of justice for the poor and deprived section in this regime," he said. UP Congress Chief Rita Bahuguna Joshi too lashed out at the Maya government saying criminals are going scot-free. "What else can one expect when ministers and ruling party leaders are openly protecting criminals," she said.
Samajwadi Party (SP) state president Akhilesh Yadav said there was complete lawlessness in the state. "The government is too busy indulging in corruption to take care of law and order," he remarked.
Meanwhile, a BSP spokesman said opposition parties were playing petty politics to discredit the state government. "The Congress should first look at its record in Delhi, Haryana and Rajasthan before raising a finger at the UP government," he said. "One of the accused has already been arrested (in Kannauj) and two policemen suspended for reacting late in taking up the case. The opposition should appreciate the prompt action instead of criticising the government," he said.

HRD Minister Kapil Sibal - Agencies
Terming the meeting between the government and civil society representatives on the proposed Lokpal bill a 'major breakthrough, Human Resource Development Minister Kapil Sibal Monday said there has been a 'broad consensus' between the two sides.
"We had a meeting of three hours, between 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. and had full-fledged discussions on a range of issues. There was a frank exchange of views and there has been a broad consensus," Sibal told reporters after the seventh meeting between the two sides.
"This has been a major breakthrough," he added.
Saying that the atmosphere of the meeting was "non-acrimonious", Sibal added: "We were clear about the diversions and disagreements. Almost on 80-85 percent clauses of the bill, there is agreement."
Another meeting is scheduled Tuesday. There are five representatives each from the government and the civil society in the committee that was set up in April to frame a comprehensive Lokpal bill to fight corruption in high places.

New Delhi: The gulf between Team Anna and the government is widening with every passing day. Thursday saw both sides trading charges and blaming each other for the stalemate in separate press conferences.
"The government has gone back on its word," Anna Hazare said. "It does not have the political will to bring a strong Lokpal. We will have to go back to our fast unto death from August 16, as announced earlier." The 74-year-old Gandhian said his team was not scared of lathis or bullets since they had vowed to fight till the last breath.
The government hit back with Union ministers P Chidambaram, Kapil Sibal and Salman Khurshid trying to punch holes in the charges of Team Anna, saying that the government could not allow the creation of a "parallel" structure.
"I doubt that there is any place in the world where fasting is a way to draft a bill," Chidambaram said. He added that many of the demands of the Hazare team could not be accepted because a structure parallel to the government cannot be allowed. "We are committed to finalising the draft by June 30. We are confident that at the end people will say it is a good anti-corruption law," he said.
Taking on Hazare's threat to go on fast again, Sibal said: You cannot threaten and negotiate at the same time... This is not the way forward."
Arvind Kejriwal, RTI activist, who was present at the Team Anna press meet, said the government had wasted a huge opportunity to frame a strong bill and take credit for it, he said. "What they are now bringing is not a Lokpal Bill, it is Jokepal Bill."
Chidambaram questioned the presumption of the members of Team Anna that they alone represent civil society. "The bill is complex, reducing it to binary choices is not right," he said. He also explained there were complexities involved. "No party commands a majority. What is desirable is different from what is feasible. Political processes need to be respected."
Kejriwal blasted ministers saying they do not want a strong bill because "half of them would go to jail if such a law is passed". "Who wants to write his suicide note?" he asked. On the issue of elected representatives, he said, "Is the prime minister elected? Is Planning Commission deputy chairman Montek Singh Alhuwalia elected? Who appointed him? Was there an advertisement for the post?"
But Salman Khursheed said, "We are not going to be diverted by slander and abuse." His colleague Sibal clarified that there would not be two versions of the bill's draft. "There are several areas of agreement. Where there is disagreement, we will provide the alternative in the same draft."

Ashish Sinha | New Delhi, June 13

Pranab Mukherjee has a task at hand as many states haven't replied to the Lokpal questionnaire.
The Centre's strategy to push its line on contentious issues relating to the Lokpal Bill has suffered a jolt. Different state governments and political parties have responded to a questionnaire sent to them on the Bill in a predicted manner - the Congress-ruled states have, by and large, replied they they would abide by whatever line the party high command or the Union government takes on every aspect of the Bill, while the non-Congress ruled states have withheld opinion on the matter.
Arguably then, the five minister-members of the joint drafting panel, headed by finance minister Pranab Mukherjee, will not have much to show off, although the government had pinned high hopes on the responses to the missive to counter Team Anna's arguments. The panel is slated to meet on Wednesday. The questionnaire dealt with controversial issues such as bringing the PM and higher judiciary within the ambit of the Lokpal. The government also wanted to know whether the states and parties favoured that the conduct of MPs inside Parliament should be covered by the proposed anti-corruption ombudsman.
The Congress-ruled states' progovernment view is in stark contrast to the Centre's assertion that the states would take an "independent" view on the legislation. Arunachal Pradesh CM Jarbom Gamlin wrote back to Mukherjee: "The Congress government of Arunachal Pradesh, being an extension of the Congress-led government at the Centre, holds the same view on the matter and extends its unequivocal support to any decision that the party high command will take."
Goa CM Digambar Kamat responded in a similar manner, reposing faith in the "approach adopted and decision taken by the central leadership of the Congress". His Delhi counterpart Sheila Dikshit, while pledging to abide by the outcome of the Centre's views, categorically ruled against including the PM, higher judiciary and the MPs under the purview of the Lokpal. Haryana, Kerala, Maharashtra, Manipur, Rajasthan and Mizoram - states ruled by the Congress - had the same things to say. The reply of Mizoram CM Lal Thanhawla, however, makes for an interesting case of unflinching loyalty to the party high command.
"I would like to inform you that, as the government of Mizoram is a Congress government, having its headquarters in Delhi, the unit of the party in the state cannot have a view or policy different from that of its national-level party…. I fully support the stand taken by the party high command on the issue," Thanhawla wrote.
On the other hand, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Orissa and Tripura - states ruled by non-Congress parties - argued that sending a selective questionnaire on a crucial issue such as the Lokpal was premature.
These states said the right time to respond would be when the Centre was ready with its draft of the Bill. "In my view, without looking into the contents of the final draft Bill, it will be inappropriate to express any opinion. The stage to seek views of the states would arrive only when the draft Bill is made available to the states. I think any comment from my end at this stage would be premature and not in consonance with the spirit of the Constitution," Bihar CM Nitish Kumar said.
Parties such as the BJP, CPI, CPM, BSP, SP and BJD also described the Centre's step as premature. UP CM and BSP chief Mayawati, while pressing for the need for a Lokpal legislation, hit out at the Centre. "Since no representative from my party participated in the process to formulate the Bill, it'll be difficult for me to provide meaningful opinion on the points raised by you," she said.

For better governance:Sudhir Krishna, Special Secretary, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, addressing a workshop on ‘Capacity Building and Training of Elected Representatives and Functionaries of the Panchayati Raj Institutions' at the Kerala Institute of Local Administration, Mulankunnathukavu, near Thrissur, on Wednesday.
Thrissur: Sudhir Krishna, Special Secretary, Ministry of Panchayati Raj, has called upon the States to optimise the governing skills of the elected members through training for effective implementation of the Panchayati Raj system.
He was addressing a two-day regional workshop on ‘Capacity Building and Training of Elected Representatives and Functionaries of the Panchayati Raj Institutions,' at the Kerala Institute of Local Administration (KILA), Mulankunnathukavu, near here, on Wednesday.
The workshop was organised by the Ministry of Panchayati Raj (MoPR) in association with the KILA to formulate strategies to strengthen the functioning capacity of the elected members of the Panchayati Raj institutions.
Upgrading of skills
The training would enable the local body representatives to upgrade their knowledge and skills to better perform their responsibilities, Mr. Krishna said. It would help them comprehend their own situations and find solutions through collective process.
The training would also equip them with operational skills required for day-today performance of executive duties of the panchayat. Apart from classroom teaching and field trips, more innovative strategies should be formulated for training, he said.
Additional Chief Secretary S.M. Vijayanand stressed the need for involving MLAs, political leaders and media persons in the training programme. He observed that women and newly elected representatives were more adoptive towards capacity-building programmes than seasoned leaders. With rotation of reservation seats, 90 per cent of the elected representatives were freshers, Mr. Vijayanand noted.
P.K. Bhatnagar, Under Secretary of the MoPR; and A.K. Pandey, Section Officer of the MoPR, explained the salient features of the Rashtreeya Gram Swaraj Yojana and the Backward Regions Grant Fund.
Review of programmes
The workshop would review the progress of implementation of Capacity Building and Training programmes for Panchayati Raj Institutions in various States.
Directors of training institutes from 11 States – Arunachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Jharkhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Orissa, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Manipur, Punjab, and Tamil Nadu and Union Territories of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu are participating in the workshop.