Striking a balance - by Sudipto Dey

Both economics and politics are important for a nation -- economics for pulling people out of poverty, and politics for good governance

Sudipto Dey:

Sunil Kant Munjal, joint managing director, HeroMoto Corp, and chairman, Hero Corporate Service, set the tone at the eighth edition of the MindMine Summit in his inaugural address. The summit is a two-day, no-holds-barred interactive session among a group of 50-odd thought leaders, opinion makers, top bureaucrats, diplomats, chief ministers, corporate honchos, professionals from IT, media and medicine, academics, artists, civil society activists, sportsmen and sports administrators.  

Since its inception in 2006, the MindMine Summit has been the annual flagship event of the Hero Group-promoted MindMine Institute, an independent think-tank not connected to any media house or industry association, that generates intellectual discussions and builds thought leadership on contemporary issues concerning the country, economy, industry and global relations.

Explaining the significance of this year’s theme -- ‘Today’s India: Economics or Politics?’ -- Sunil Kant Munjal said it should be seen in the backdrop of questions raised over the government’s inaction on the policy-making front. “Is it not the government’s role to convince allies and the opposition as to what it wants to do and where it wants to take the country?” Munjal asked. “It seems they took the foot off the pedal, as things were going well,” he mused, on why the reform momentum lost pace. He observed that in the last 15-20 years some of the toughest decisions on economic reforms were taken by coalition governments. So the poser going forward is how to strike a balance between economics and politics.

Taking a cue from Munjal’s forthrightness, Praful Patel, minister of heavy industries and public enterprises, conceded that the current government in the last few years scored a few “self-goals”. While coalition politics is here to stay, it is important for the two principal political parties -- Congress and BJP -- to bite the bullet on economic issues, he said. “Unless we have sound economics, we will not have sound politics,” Patel said. He acknowledged that the state of affairs in sectors like power and roads, and an issue like the size of the current account deficit could have been better managed.

Striking an optimistic note, he assured industry leaders that the “worst is over” when it comes to the logjam in decision-making within the government. However, he stressed that the government would need to strike a balance between the interests of various sections of society when arriving at key economic decisions.

Montek Singh Ahluwalia, deputy chairman, Planning Commission, acknowledged the reason for the slowdown in the reform momentum. “Government functionaries had become reluctant to take decisions,” he said. The business of implementing policies had become more complicated over the years, he added.

He emphasised the need for a culture change within government that would encourage participation of specialist professionals from the private sector in the running of the government.  “Private sector professionals should be ready to give up huge salaries to join the government,” he added. If the government is able to expedite its decision-making process, he expected the GDP growth rate to go up by another 1.5 per cent in the next one year.

Addressing a session on the Aadhaar project, Nandan Nilekani, chairman, Unique Identification Authority of India, allayed concerns that the project could fall prey to a change in the political scenario, with general elections looming in the near future. The Aadhaar team, he said, plans to roll out 600 million unique IDs by the end of 2014. With this number, the team believes, even a change in government at the Centre will not affect the implementation of the project. The project has gathered traction across states -- irrespective of their political affiliations -- with 350 million people enrolled and over 300 million unique IDs issued. Indeed, representatives from 15-odd countries have visited India to get a first-hand feel of the project.

In a session on India’s connect with the world, Salman Khurshid, minister for external affairs, refuted allegations that the Indian government has been soft when it comes to influencing its neighbours. Despite delays, Pakistan is committed to giving India MFN status, he said, adding that this is likely to gather steam after the formation of a new government in Islamabad. “There is a growing constituency for trade between the two countries,” he said. (Interestingly, former diplomat G Parthasarathy felt that India should not push for MFN status with Pakistan. “It is not a life and death situation for India,” he said.)

Speaking on China, the foreign minister said both countries have largely overcome suspicions about each other’s intentions. “This is the right time to ramp up people-to-people contacts,” Khurshid said. There is far greater scope for investments flowing from China to India, he said. The foreign minister is slated to visit China next month.

In a session on rising regionalism, when the moderator called for a show of hands, asking how many believed strong regions weakened the Centre, half of those present put up their hands. Interestingly, at the end of the session, when a show of hands was sought again, no hands were raised!

Perhaps what worked most to change the mind of the audience was a passionate plea by Omar Abdullah, chief minister, Jammu & Kashmir, to recognise that India is a conglomerate of states, and that it has historically never been a homogenous society. “We need to recognise this and embrace our diversity,” he said.

Even Rajiv Pratap Rudy, Member of Parliament, agreed that regional aspirations are good for the state. “But regional parties should not be allowed to set the national agenda,” he said. Meera Shankar, former Indian ambassador to the United States, was of the view that states should not play a role in deciding the foreign policy of the country.

The success of the 20-20 Indian Premier League cricket tournament generated a fair degree of heat among non-cricket sports federations and sportsmen. Randhir Singh, vice president, Association of National Olympic Committees, was of the view that most national federations have not been able to market themselves well. The reluctance of sportsmen to become part of national federations is affecting sports in India, he said.

Viren Rasquinha, former captain of the Indian hockey team, felt that IPL could teach sports federations a trick or two on how to market themselves well and focus on developing sustainable leagues.  However Neeraj Bhardwaj, managing director, The Carlyle Group, felt that IPL has set a bad precedent for sports in India. He felt long-term sports development should be the main criterion for sponsoring sports in India, rather than spending money on branding the sport.

The thought leaders were clearly divided in the middle when it came to the final debate on day two on whether the country needs strong leadership, not democratic leadership. Kanwal Sibal, former foreign secretary, CPI(M) leader Sitaram Yechury and Surjeet Bhalla, chairman, Oxus Investments, spoke in favour of the motion; Bibek Debroy, professor, Centre for Policy Research, Debang Nanavati, senior advocate, Supreme Court, and Smriti Irani, Rajya Sabha member, were against the motion.

According to Prof Debroy: “Democracy is like oxygen; as long as we have it we don’t appreciate it, but like in the case of the Emergency, when it’s taken away we realise its worth.” If there was no democracy there wouldn’t have been the option of a debate, he added. Yechury was of the view that strong leadership implies decisiveness, and decisiveness is not anti-democratic. “It involves a certain vision and thinking, which should be purely democratic,” he added.

For Surjeet Bhalla the operative words were the effectiveness of a leader. “When there is no effective leadership, democracy or no democracy, the country suffers,” he said.

The moot point, according to Munjal, is that both economics and politics are important for the nation’s journey -- economics for a large number of people living in poverty, and politics for good quality of governance. The issue here is: are we ready to strike a balance?