Recent events concerning the holding of the 2010 Commonwealth Games in Delhi once again raise the issue of the government’s competence in hosting such mega events. The government under the existing dispensation is just not equipped to do so. One may argue that the Asian Games were indeed successfully organised in 1982 and that the Commonwealth Military Games, as also the Youth Games, were recently held in Hyderabad and Pune respectively. Many others would argue, “We are like that only.” After all, everything falls into place miraculously by the last day and we pull it off. Is that something to be proud of in a commercially and technologically charged atmosphere?
China led the way in proving that countries in the East are also capable of hosting the Olympics — and that too, on a scale much grander than that seen anywhere before. Why and how did they succeed? Planning and execution are the simple answer. Generally, militaries are inherently capable of conducting events with precision. Hence the Republic Day parade at Delhi and the flawless execution of Beating the Retreat every year. The preparations and oversight for both events are largely left to the armed forces. The international fleet review conducted by the navy at Mumbai in 2000 was another feather in our cap.
The Indian Premier League (IPL) is the only event which can match the precision attributed to shows that have been successful. But then, the IPL was never managed by the government. Authority and accountability both rested with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and, what is more, funding was generated with in-house capabilities. That there were allegations of corruption is a matter of checks and balances. The event itself brought laurels to the country.
Why then is the government unable to replicate a model most suited to the efficient conduct of such events? Professional management needs real professionals with field experience to run the show — not politicians who are merely rubber stamps, some of them allegedly there only to generate funds for themselves.
Typically, government procedures are devised to ensure that public money is not frittered away; hence the tendering process and the choice of the lowest bidder. Over the years, these procedures have been violated not only to favour ‘friendly’ bidders but also to ensure that time over-runs do occur. With time over-runs there is inevitably a cost over-run. In cases where time is of prime importance there is a good opportunity to enhance the investments, which in turn provides better returns to interested parties.
Also, since the structure created by governments does not underline the need for accountability, it is difficult to penalise those in charge of any project. If quality of work is of international standards, when the event is done and dusted, posterity would gladly acknowledge the gift of the infrastructure created. Even that is not guaranteed in the tendering process, and hence it is likely that the infrastructure would be of little value for those who inherit it.
What about decision-making? On-time decisions lead to timely completion of tasks. The government structure is such that decisions delayed draw no ire from the system. Why do the Ambanis or Tatas complete projects on time? It is because it is their money and they are accountable to their monitoring system. So, why not outsource the whole project to achieve the best results? Who do you think is planning and managing the creation of infrastructure in such sporting events? Consultants from within and without, who also have limited accountability. Such a model does not always result in successful projects. How about public-private partnerships (PPP) with a clear-cut accountability and funding matrix?
Yes, that is possible if the model is based on a win-win formula. This would eliminate decision-making delays, bring in proven consultancies to ensure quality and penalise defaulters. Can the government ensure non-interference once all conditional clauses have been complied with? The new airport at Delhi is an example of a well-managed and high-class product which has been delivered on time. There are teething problems related to coordination and training, which are eminently solvable. Success in this case can be attributed to planning and execution by professionals who met international standards.
Why could we not create such a model for mega events and keep the politicians and bureaucrats out? As in the successful information technology industry, which thrives due to minimal intervention by the government, leave it to professionals after ensuring that checks and balances are in place. Until then, let us not even bid for international events, especially those that are of little value to sports lovers. The Commonwealth Games are neither the IPL nor the Olympics.
The author is a former naval officer
