Two central ministries that may have been given a raw deal in the recent ministerial reshuffle are textiles and telecommunications. Civil servants in these two ministries may well be wondering whether the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government’s coalition compulsions will take a toll on their performance as well.
Both ministries had nominees headed by Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) politicians until the telecom spectrum controversies, also known as the 2G scandal, saw the exit of telecom minister A Raja in November 2010 and then of textiles minister Dayanidhi Maran a few days before the ministerial reshuffle took place on July 12. In the run-up to the reshuffle, UPA and DMK leaders made serious efforts to explore ways of retaining DMK representation in the council of ministers at pre-spectrum scandal levels. Those efforts do not appear to have made headway.
Details of the new understanding between the UPA and DMK, if any, are not public yet, but three things have become clear after the reshuffle. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stayed away from DMK as far as possible and, therefore, did not induct any new DMK member into the council of ministers to replace Raja or Maran. Two, Singh also announced that this was the last major reshuffle before the next elections. That statement may well be ominous for DMK. With the controversy over the 2G spectrum scandal unlikely to abate in the next few months, DMK’s chances of sending new nominations are remote and the future of the alliance appears shaky. Three, and this seems to be the most significant, Kapil Sibal will continue to hold dual charge of the ministries of human resource development (HRD) and telecom, while Anand Sharma will have the added responsibility of looking after the ministry of t extiles along with commerce and industry.
The cynical view emerging from academic institutions is that Sibal’s continuation in telecom is a blessing in disguise for the HRD ministry. In the first few months of taking charge of the latter, Sibal took several controversial initiatives that raised the hackles of academic institutions. Instead of moving ahead on education reforms in consultation with those who would have been responsible for executing them, Sibal has been accused of undue haste, resulting in half-hearted implementation of the few reforms he introduced.
In any case, Sibal had to pay greater attention to the telecom ministry from November 2010 and that meant a deceleration in whatever was happening in the HRD ministry. However, having the same minister for two important ministries could not have become a permanent solution. Indeed, if the current arrangement of Sibal holding dual charge continues, it will probably be the first time since independence that the same person has been in charge of two major ministries for such a long period. The telecom ministry may still manage with such divided attention of its senior minister, but the HRD ministry certainly cannot afford such neglect.
Admittedly, there will be less criticism of the manner in which the prime minister dumped the textiles ministry on Sharma in addition to his onerous responsibility of commerce and industry. It is true that the textiles ministry was part of the commerce ministry in the past and, often, the minister in charge of foreign trade would look after the ministry too. But that logic may no longer be valid.
India’s textiles industry has grown over the years to become the largest provider of jobs after agriculture. It provides direct employment to over 35 million people (more than ten times the staff employed by the Union government!). In addition, another 55 million people are employed in allied activities. It accounts for 11 per cent of the country’s total industrial production and its share in the manufacturing sector is a little higher at 14 per cent.
It is over this sector that the spectre of joblessness now looms large. Over 1,000 textile units in Tiruppur in Tamil Nadu are closed under court orders for polluting the environment. In addition, textile exports are suffering. Twenty years ago, textiles accounted for a fourth of India’s merchandise exports of about $18 billion. Today, they account for less than a tenth of $246 billion. The need for greater attention to reviving the textiles sector can hardly be emphasised. Sharma may address the problems afflicting the textiles sector now, but it would be wrong to assume that this arrangement can be a long-term solution for the industry’s woes.
