Absurd governance

There comes a time in the life of governments when people start to view them with cynicism. That moment appears to have come for the UPA government.

Until two days ago, it was deserving of sympathy, inasmuch as it had been born in difficult circumstances and had, in the last one year, offered a ray of hope that the country would be run in a somewhat different fashion from under the previous dispensation.

But the decision taken after Sonia Gandhi's meeting with the Left""that the cabinet decision to sell off 10 per cent of the government stake (out of 67 per cent) will be put in indefinite "abeyance"""has exposed this government's true intentions.

If the BJP was reprehensible in its social policy, the UPA is equally so in economic policy. It will take some truly heroic sophistry to maintain that the Congress president has not cut a deal with the Left to the effect that it will do nothing that will make the Left unpopular with the unions until the elections in West Bengal and Kerala are over next February. In return, the Left has agreed not to oppose disinvestment.

Rarely has the country seen such hypocrisy. Even the basic distinction between disinvestment, which will benefit government coffers without entailing any loss of control, and privatisation, which the Left may have genuine misapprehensions about, has been lost sight of.

Equally hypocritical is the reported decision to amend the Electricity Act of 2003 with a view to retaining cross-subsidies on the grounds that these help the poor. It is, of course, mandatory for every self-serving measure to be presented as something that will benefit the poor.

The fact that India has had cross-subsidies for the last 50 years, and the poor are no better-off, suggests that it is only some of the rich who benefit from these subsidies. But, clearly, such an amendment will help the electoral cause of the Left and the Congress party has decided to put the interests of the Left before the interests of the country.

It seems to have forgotten that once before it had allowed itself to be held hostage by the Left, during 1969-1973. The consequences of what was done during those years are still with us.

This incident brings into very sharp focus the need for the Congress party to indulge in some introspection ""if it is still capable of that""with a view to ascertaining whether it can claim to provide effective governance when the head of the government is convinced of one thing and the head of the party is convinced of the opposite.

The truth is that this incident has once again underlined the fact that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's views count for very little. For example, the Left insisted that it would not be satisfied until it had been given some assurance by Sonia Gandhi. It also relented only after she had given these assurances. Clearly, the Left has no time for Dr Manmohan Singh.

Whether a country can be governed in this absurd fashion is something that we must all ponder. Sonia Gandhi may have refrained from becoming Prime Minister, but clearly she has not refrained from exercising the prerogatives of one.

India needs very firm governance at this stage of development and if the government is going to have to function with a gun permanently held to its head, it does not augur well for it. Ms Gandhi had a wonderful opportunity to call the Left's bluff. She has missed it.