April 27, 1998

So the BJP too can't look beyond party members when it comes to choosing governors

It is with mixed feelings that the country will react to the first set of governors appointed by the BJP Government. The list is dominated by members of the ruling party. To put it bluntly, the BJP has done nothing to change the Congress' tradition of reducing the Raj Bhavan to a party pensioners' home. The framers of the Constitution did not envisage the post of governor as an extension of the ruling dispensation's patronage network. Governors were supposed to be people of eminence, truly senior citizens. Unfortunately, successive, largely Congress regimes have found only retired or exiled politicians -- and the occasional former civil servant -- fit enough for the job. Inevitably, this has led to rampant politicisation of the governor's office. Ironically, it is the BJP which has suffered much at the hands of motivated governors, most recently and notably courtesy Romesh Bhandari in Uttar Pradesh.

For years, the BJP has spoken of the need to delink gubernatorial choices from party loyalties. Yet, it faltered at the first chance it got to break this nexus. It is nobody's case that a war hero or one-time bureaucrat cannot be sent to the Raj Bhavan. Even so, what can justifiably be asked is: does even such an individual need to be a card-holding member of the ruling party to receive due recognition? Further, there is an India beyond the polity. Is there no place in Raj Bhavans for the country's cultural icons, its most erudite academics and thinkers? Have Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Lal Krishna Advani forgotten they were ministers in the Janata Party government which offered dancer Rukmini Devi Arundale the presidency of India? Admittedly, these are not new issues. They have been raised a hundred times as the governor's office has been repeatedly vitiated. What is frustrating is that yet another opportunity to discard a discredited system has been lost. The BJP may not be the original sinner -- but it has joined the rest of the guilty.

Passing On Policy

Needless bickering over the Exim Policy hides the real agenda

One thing is clear from all the fuss about the modified Exim Policy. It's time all progressive policy is saved from petty politics. It was unseemly for former finance minister P. Chidambaram to mouth off, saying the Government's swadeshi plank had "gone with the wind", as the policy was basically an extension of the United Front (UF) administration's policy. It was equally unseemly of Commerce Minister Ramakrishna Hegde to join issue by defending his Government's swadeshi approach. Both stands were totally needless. Every new government inherits a legacy. Chidambaram's government inherited an Exim legacy of the Congress regime -- one he was part of -- which signed away positions at the WTO without adequate debate. The UF regime also inherited many positive aspects, such as genuine policy efforts to boost exports, a largely deregulated industry, paperwork in the advanced stage for infrastructure projects. What they did, or tried to do, was take it ahead. Chidambaram criticised Manmohan Singh. He didn't reverse his policies.

Hegde's policy is simply better tuned. If over 300 consumer items have been put on the OGL, removing them from Quantitative Restrictions was because of an agreement arrived at during the UF regime at the WTO. A deal was a deal. India's name was on the dotted line. Equally, Indian exports in numerous key areas -- services, software, garments, gems and jewellery -- have received further boost. Chidambaram would do well to remember the trade deficit has only grown in the past two years. Surely, that trend needs to be arrested, swadeshi be damned? Parties and people, both in government and opposition, should not get so caught up with their own rhetoric that they lose sight of India's well-being. There will be legacies. Negative ones need fixing. Positive ones need strengthening. It's the only agenda that matters.

Issue Contents | Write to us | Subscriptions

© Living Media India Ltd