We need a tall leader

A few days ago, a financial contemporary held a debate on an “Agenda for Renewal”, to which one turned for some guidance on the state of the economy and paths to recovery. What one learnt instead, from reports on the debate, was that there is utter confusion on the subject, with each constituent of the Indian economic development process talking about one's own problem and, fundamentally, missing out on the “big picture”.

In his address to the gathering, the Union Finance Minister appealed to his “political colleagues” to “keep aside politics from major economic decisions” which, unfortunately, can never be the case. Aiming his barb at the Opposition parties, which have been disrupting Parliament proceedings, Mr Pranab Mukherjee said: “Parliament is meant for passing laws, debate, taking decisions. Parliament is never meant for disruption… And once the institution starts functioning, I am confident that people will get back confidence, the corporate sector will get back confidence.” Despite interludes of protest, Parliament has functioned all right since Independence. But have we got anywhere considering the economy's potential?

GANDHI IN THE 21ST CENTURY

So is there something wrong with the institution of Parliament as such? Mr Salman Khurshid, the Union Law Minister, told the participants: “We have not applied our minds to our political system at all. It is extremely important that not only do we look at our electoral system, but we also look at our total governance system.” He added: “We are working with something we put together 50 years ago for conditions prevailing at that time. In the 21st century, we need to move forward with reform. We moved forward with economic reform but not political reform, and the consequences of that are troubling us today.” More pointedly, Mr Khurshid said: “We all are committed to Gandhian thought and to the Gandhian way of life. But we need intellectual inputs and outputs to tell us what Gandhi in the 21st century will and should be.”

Parliament is where the heart of Indian politics lies. So if there is something wanting with the parliamentary form of government (of the sort we have), can one expect the Indian politician of today to provide effective leadership in showing the way forward? Mr Jairam Ramesh, Union Minister for Rural Development, said that the political leadership “is driving the decisions and decisions are being taken.” In the same breath, however, he made the point that there was criticism that the political leadership was “taking a hands-on position and is not allowing the bureaucracy to function.” As Mr Sunil Mittal said in a different context, the bureaucracy was finding itself today in a position where it “cannot take a rational decision”.

PRIVATE SECTOR

The usually outspoken Mr Rahul Bajaj felt that the Government should meet senior Opposition leaders more often to get decision-making moving, a plea which was knocked out of the arena by Mr Kapil Sibal, the Union Minister for Telecom and HRD, on the specific count of prevarication. Incidentally, Mr Sibal also took a swipe at the private sector when he said that, “leadership is required even in the private sector, but we do not see that”. Referring to the Agenda for Renewal, Mr Ramesh too spoke of corporate governance and said that it did not talk about “the responsibility of business to follow the rules of the game”.

So did the discussion produce something other than confusion regarding the Agenda for Renewal, in the process missing completely the wood for the trees? Briefly, can it be said that the nation probably needs a tall leader now, who is missing?

COMMENT NOW