In Mr Modi's view, the prime minister of the country should function in collaboration with the chief ministers of the states. Perhaps equally important, the task of achieving development goals cannot be entrusted to the government alone and instead should be spearheaded through a popular movement. And the prime minister should see himself as a trustee of the people and must discharge his functions in that spirit.
How easy will it be for the prime minister to function while heading a team with state chief ministers? For the record, the country now has 28 full-fledged states plus the national capital territory of Delhi. All these entities have chief ministers. Therefore, Mr Modi's governance model would envisage the creation of a 30-member team, led by the prime minister and consisting of 29 chief ministers. It would no doubt be an unwieldy team. Whoever becomes prime minister would require all the skills that the world's best management gurus can think of!
Also Read
Three related questions are bound to arise. What will this mean for the Planning Commission? The Planning Commission was set up many decades ago to provide a forum where the Centre could discuss policies and financial allocation issues that affect the states. In the new governance model, proposed by Mr Modi, it would appear that the Planning Commission will become redundant. That in itself may not be a bad idea, given the way the states need to be increasingly empowered to spend the money allocated to them the way they think is desirable and necessary.
But what Mr Modi has proposed is to virtually supplant the Planning Commission with a similar body that would have state chief ministers as representatives. Past experience suggests anything that is once created in the government system rarely gets abolished. Are we, then, going to see the formation of yet another body to add to the Centre's financial liability and administrative complexity? Remember that there is already an inter-state council, which has been created under Article 263 of the Indian Constitution to review and discuss relations between the Centre and the states. So, are we talking about a third such body in the proposed governance model?
Secondly, there is the obvious question of what the proposed team of the prime minister and state chief ministers will imply for the prime minister's council of ministers. If the prime minister and 29 chief ministers can decide what moves must be initiated to bring about growth and development in the country, the role of the council of ministers needs to be reassessed. For all practical purposes, Mr Modi's governance model would have given rise to a new power centre. This may strengthen the states and the prime minister, but the role of the council of ministers at the Centre may be diluted. Remember that even the leanest council of ministers in recent times has seen about 70 ministers at the helm of different departments. It is, therefore, important that the proposed governance model should clearly delineate the powers that the council of ministers will enjoy. Without that, the new structure may mean an all-powerful prime minister, without either the provision for sharing powers or the checks and balances that the council of ministers can exercise over governance.
There is yet another area of concern. In the past several years, more than one political party has ruled the states in the country. This would mean that the team consisting of the prime minister and the chief ministers would be a diverse group with representatives from different political parties. Also, the relationship between the prime minister and the chief ministers will not be one of equals. Resolution of differences can often pose a bigger challenge than in other existing forums where such Centre-state issues could be taken up for discussion. State chief ministers may also live under the constant fear of being overruled by a more powerful prime minister or a group of like-minded chief ministers. The established norms of separation of powers between the Centre and the states may be violated in some cases and even set dangerous precedents.
These are valid concerns and cannot be swept under the carpet in the enthusiasm over creating a new governance model. Even if the prime minister may function like a trustee and development tasks are made into a popular movement, the basic structure of the proposed governance model suffers from serious flaws. Those who may argue that this is just one man's idea and may not finally be implemented could be mistaken. It was not just Mr Modi - even the BJP's senior leader Arun Jaitley floated a similar idea at the same forum. He suggested that Manmohan Singh's Cabinet Committee on Investment would have made a big difference if it had representation from state chief ministers. So the idea belongs not just to Mr Modi or Mr Jaitley, but to the BJP. That is also why the idea deserves serious scrutiny.