|
|
|
|
|
| July 03, 2000 | ||
|
|
| Money
for Nothing Keep governors out of the game of competitive populism
Institutionalised profligacy aside, the prospect of giving semi-executive authority to governors is less than welcome. The tenant of Raj Bhavan occupies an ornamental post -- and is sometimes described as "His Honourable Irrelevancy". Apart from discretionary powers in, primarily, the North-east, he has no normal role to perform other than attest whatever decisions the state ministry takes. As the Centre's agent he can destabilise an unfriendly local government but even that role is circumscribed thanks to the death of one-party dominance and Supreme Court stipulations on the use of Article 356. Even so, governors are rarely paragons of virtue. Most are temporarily exiled politicians itching to get back to the power game. To allow them access to public money would be to do just that. Subsidising intrigue is not the taxpayer's national duty. Lip Service to Morality That Gujarat is rethinking its prohibition laws is welcome news
That prohibition creates more problems than it solves is hardly a recent discovery. Its imposition in the US in 1920 spawned the gangster culture -- and gave the underworld an illicit liquor tycoon called Al Capone. Four decades later, the nascent Mumbai mafia received a boost from the city's then operational dry laws. In the 1990s, Andhra Pradesh and Haryana tried to ban the bottle. All that resulted was a cocktail of smuggling, revenue losses and hooch tragedies. A good law is not merely one that is inspired by ideals, it is also easily put into effect. Prohibition fails this crucial test, just as Muhammad bin Tughlaq's introduction of token currency did seven centuries ago. Advocates of prohibition justify it on grounds of morality. Here too the illiberalism of deciding for an entire people what is good for them and what isn't is scarcely morally edifying. The nanny state cannot enlighten, it can only reprimand. That has been Gujarat's tragedy. |
|
||||
| Top |
 © Living Media India Ltd |
In
rejecting the proposal to allocate an annual development allowance to
state governors, the Union Government has acted judiciously. The proposal,
reportedly the brainchild of the governor of Uttar Pradesh, envisaged a
corpus of Rs 10 crore being made available to the resident of every Raj
Bhavan in the country. The governor would then be free to disburse the
money as he deemed fit, for projects and to organisations of his choice.
The model for this patently disingenuous idea was the MP Local Area
Development Scheme (MPLADS), which since it began in 1993 has given
parliamentarians a total of Rs 4,000 crore to spend on their
constituencies. That 35 per cent of this money has not been used and where
the MPLADS has come into effect it has inevitably led to suspicions of
cosy deals tells its own story. Such patronage devices are a throwback to
feudalism; they are completely out of place in a democracy where the State
should, in theory, be in the business of providing services rather than
distributing largesse.
In
the land of hypocrisy, the unenforceable law is king. For half a century,
Gujarat has, in theory, been alcohol-free. Now the state Government is
considering easing prohibition laws to make Gujarat a more attractive
workplace for, particularly, it professionals. Should this scheme find
favour in Gandhinagar, it will begin to undo one of the most
self-defeating measures in Indian legislative history. The idea of
enforced abstinence is enshrined in the Directive Principles of the
Constitution. In adopting it, Gujarat was to serve as a model. Instead,
the Mahatma's native land has lacerated his cherished if impracticable --
and, put bluntly, undemocratic -- aspiration. Today bootlegging is not
merely a Gujarati cottage industry but the base of a gigantic, tightly
organised crime syndicate. Its impact on and symbiotic relationship with
politics is an open secret.