If the next general elections are held on schedule, there are still seven months left in the life of the Manmohan Singh government. But the current political mood in the country seems to suggest that both the government and its principal challenger, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), are already in pre-election mode, busy taking decisions that would help them in the forthcoming polls. There is nothing wrong per se in such elaborate pre-election preparations, except that they have an adverse impact on whatever governance that is still possible in the remaining seven months of an elected government's five-year tenure.
Lopping off a little over ten per cent of the time voters give an elected government to perform, and that too in the name of pre-election preparations, is always questionable. Worse, there can be no justification at all for wasting, as a consequence, two full sessions of Parliament that can still be held before the country can go in for the general elections. The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government may still try to bring in a few more pieces of legislation to seek Parliament's approval in its forthcoming winter and Budget sessions. But it is extremely doubtful if the BJP would agree to play ball and discuss these Bills or other legislative issues.
The country, therefore, is destined to suffer a long and dreary winter of little legislative action before heading into elections in May 2014. This was one of the reasons why advancing the general elections or combining them with the forthcoming state Assembly elections was an idea that should have been given a serious thought by both the ruling coalition and the Opposition parties. But it seems neither of them is willing to advance the general elections in the opportunistic hope of gaining some more time for better preparations for the next electoral battle. But at what cost this will be achieved is a question that should be of some concern to all those who worry about governance in this country.
The question has acquired significance also because the election bugle has been sounded this time rather early - almost eight months before the scheduled date of the general elections. This began with the anointment of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi as the BJP's prime ministerial candidate. There is no doubt that the first few public meetings that Mr Modi has held have emboldened the BJP rank and file to believe that the party would be able to form the next government in New Delhi. It believes that there are early signs of a Modi wave that would no doubt be aided and abetted by the anti-incumbency factor made more powerful since the UPA government has failed to completely free itself from charges of corruption, policy paralysis and inaction.
There are also questions about the durability of the Modi wave. As the few meetings of Mr Modi showed, the BJP leadership must be internally debating about the challenges of sustaining the image of the Gujarat chief minister for such a long period of time before the elections without his campaign degenerating into cheap theatrics - a sign of which was already evident in the last few public meetings of Mr Modi. The likelihood of making populist promises will increase. Already, the BJP has outlined its ambiguous stance on foreign direct investment in some sectors. Would they dilute the Modi wave? Finally, can a wave last as long as seven months? And how real are the chances of the Modi wave peaking a bit too early before it could capitalise on the much-needed votes?
On its part, the UPA government too cannot be spared for having unleashed a series of policy actions that are aimed at securing the people's mandate. The hurry the government showed in getting the ill-thought-out food security Bill passed in Parliament was a clear sign of wooing the voters. Then there was the announcement of the constitution of the seventh central pay commission, which would review the pay packages for over five million government employees and three million pensioners. That is a large vote bank that no doubt would be pleased with the prospects of a pay rise, even though it would take effect from January 2016. Even the announcement of a new index to categorise states for their entitlement to central funds has come in for some criticism for the manner in which the components of the index were chosen. Critics are likely to point out that this has been done with an eye on the election, in an attempt to woo political parties to join the Congress-led coalition.
The total cost of all these measures would be fairly substantial. The immediate impact of the food security law on government finances for the current year may be limited. But its burden in the years to come would keep rising since no political party would have the courage to even cap the entitlement, let alone remove it. The additional financial burden of a new pay commission on both the Centre and state governments would be at least about one per cent of gross domestic product, spread over a period of three to four years. Populism apart, these measures would impose new costs on a government that would take oath in New Delhi in May 2014. It is clear that the political executive at the Centre has refused to learn the right lessons from the deteriorating fiscal deficit, which in April-August 2013 already ballooned to 75 per cent of the annual limit.
Whatever may be the ruling coalition that takes office in New Delhi in May 2014, it is certain to start its innings with the handicap of paying a heavy price for the populist excesses committed by the political class during the eight-month-long pre-election preparations.
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
