Manmohan Singh's lost legacy

At his 3rd press meet, the architect of India's liberalization sounded like a man in denial

A TV panelist when asked to judge how Manmohan Singh fared in his 3rd press meet said it was bad, but he’d rate it average only because the PM announced that he was retiring.  The remark sums up in a nutshell how Manmohan Singh’s capital has eroded as he sets to pass the baton in about 5 months from now.

 

For anybody watching the press conference, it was all too clear that Singh squandered away the one last opportunity he had, to come clean, accept his government’s failures and be judged sympathetically before he hangs up his boots. But in contrast, judging by reactions on TV debates and social media, there is an overwhelming emotion of frustration that Singh dodged serious questions on the credentials of his leadership, gave no direction or specifics on what his government plans to do in the narrow window it has available and retorted to allegations of his being a puppet prime minister with platitudes on having done his best.

 

Singh said he’d rather have history judge him, than the unkind contemporary media and was confident that when that happened, he and his government would emerge unscathed as it was in fact vested interests in the opposition, bodies like the CAG and the media which had played into their hands that  overstated the dimensions of scams like 2G and Coalgate.

 

The prosaic defensiveness of the Prime Minister on issues like inflation, corruption and an economic crisis that’s halved growth also laid bare how hopelessly out of sync the ruling government continues to be with the overarching sentiment of discontent prevalent among the Aam Aadmi, India Inc and foreign investors, despite the drubbing it’s received in the state assembly elections.

 

Rather than accepting that growth had fallen off the cliff from 9% to 5%, Singh insisted that economic momentum had been maintained. He blamed global factors for playing a more important role in initiating the slowdown than a domestic policy paralysis characterized by red tape, retrospective taxation, poor governance and delayed action on removing infrastructure bottlenecks and expediting clearances. He said he was satisfied with the UPA’s legislative effort despite the unprecedented hold ups in parliament, yet again passing the buck.

 

On inflation too, while accepting that his government wasn’t successful in controlling spiraling prices, Singh gave a positive spin suggesting that those producing food had benefitted from the UPAs policies of higher MSPs and social welfare schemes like the food security program, and inflation was a consequence of that. On the need to improve supplies and marketing arrangements, rather than announce any proactive measures, the PM put the onus on the states under whose domain APMC markets function.

 

The point where he did accept blame – i.e. his government’s failure in creating more manufacturing related jobs, the PM gave no solutions only suggesting that MSMEs needed more support. On his best and worst moments at the helm of government, Singh predictably said he hadn’t had the time to reflect on this matter, but would consider the signing of the deal that ended India’s nuclear apartheid as his best moment.

 

Sadly as his tenure comes to an end, the stalemate on the N-Deal continues, leaving the future of Singh’s crowning achievement, his best moment so to say, in jeopardy if the BJP comes to power.  But it’s his incapability to articulate the worst of his tenure that will be remembered more than his singular achievement on propelling nuclear technology.  

 

Singh could have said a lot to reclaim his lost legacy – laid a concrete reforms roadmap for the next 5 months, articulated his vision for debottlenecking critical sectors of the economy to revive the investment climate, proposed solutions to bring down inflation, listed out a catalog of measures to curb corruption.

 

Sadly, his new found assertiveness was wasted on self-preservation and an attack on Narendra Modi, rather than accepting that the buck stopped at his doorstep. Had he, along with duly boasting about UPA’s social sector achievements also accepted culpability for a failure in governance, of undermining the needs of the middle classes and of industry, the contemporary media would have been less scathing and history would have definitely judged him as a PM in tune with reality.

 

In this press conference though, the architect of India’s liberalization sounded like a man in denial, a man out of rhythm with the new India.