Sachin Pilot at Idea Exchange: ‘Raising funds for anybody except the ruling party is tough… the Govt knows exactly who’s getting what’

Manoj CG: Three of the top Congress leaders — party president Mallikarjun Kharge, Sonia Gandhi and Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury — decided to stay away from the consecration ceremony, the argument being that it’s a political event, a Narendra Modi event. Had it not been, in your terms, a political event, had Mr Modi not been there, had the RSS sarsanghchalak not been there, would the Congress have gone?

That’s a speculative question because that’s not how it was. It was a religious occasion, but yes there was an attempt to do all this just before elections. And why should someone be setting criteria about who can be invited and who can’t? About 5,000 people were invited. How do you select whether one qualifies to be invited or not? Opposition leaders have had different reasons to go or not go but from what I saw, even the BJP president was not there. So, the fact that an X party president was not there, is irrelevant. You go when you want to go, when you hear a calling.

Manoj CG: We saw Shashi Tharoor tweeting a photograph of Ram Lalla, with the caption ‘Siyavar Ramchandra ki Jai’. The Himachal Pradesh chief minister had his official bungalow lit up. Are you, as a believer, happy that a temple has come?

Yes, as a believer, one should be happy. But Ram is not limited to one temple, one location. Ram is everywhere. Ram is omnipresent. To try and limit him to a particular location or a particular day is confining, and you can’t have someone take ownership of somebody as universal as Ram.

It (One Nation, One Election) seems impractical. We have so many elections at multiple levels and to put them together is probably an attempt to centralise the election system. It may not be practical for a country as large as ours

Story continues below this ad

Liz Mathew: It is a fact that politics in this country has changed and the line between religion and state doesn’t exist now. How can the Congress counter this?

It’s wrong to assume that there is no line. In any nation-state, when the lines get blurred, that’s not a happy occasion. The country’s institutions and governments have to be above religious considerations.

Vandita Mishra: Does the Congress believe that what happened on January 22, the consecration ceremony conducted by the PM, with him being the chief person doing the rituals and the state mounting the whole show, dissolves the line between religion and state?

I’m not here to pass judgments on that particular event. This whole concept of selective invitations, and then reducing the event to certain people only, is not appropriate. You have personal beliefs, religious sentiments, which are very important. India is a country full of faith. You can practise and follow any religion, and yet the state remains above all of that.

(Right) Sachin Pilot, AICC general secretary in-charge of Chhattisgarh, with Manoj CG at The Indian Express office in Noida Praveen Khanna

Liz Mathew: How happy are you with your new role in the Congress? Do you have any clarity on your future in the Congress?

In politics, you don’t have much clarity on who will fight elections or who will win. But I’m very satisfied with the last 23-odd years that I’ve been in public life. Now I’ve been made general secretary of the party. It’s an important position to discharge your role and Chhattisgarh is an important state for us. I do believe that no hard work goes to waste and the coming together of the INDIA alliance is a positive development.

Ram is not limited to one temple, one location. Ram is everywhere. To try and limit him to a particular location or a particular day is confining, and you can’t have someone take ownership of somebody as universal as Ram

Manoj CG: During the UPA, you and some of your friends — Jyotiraditya Scindia, Milind Deora — were always considered a part of team Rahul, who had great access to him. Now, they have left the party. Why are such leaders leaving the party?

You should be asking them this question. I don’t think accessibility is a problem, but each one is free to choose what ideology they’re comfortable with, and how they want to proceed in their political career. Time will tell whether their decisions were right or wrong.

Ritika Chopra: What went against the Congress in Rajasthan? Do you think the stand that you had taken against the government ended up hurting the party’s prospects?

I took a public stand on what I thought was important for the people and for the party in government. If I felt that young people were not feeling that they’re getting justice, that they were disenchanted with the system, I raised those points so we could do course-correction at the right time. Don’t forget, in Rajasthan every five years there is a government change. Just in terms of numbers, we got almost 70 seats this time. I did take a stand. Was that good or bad? I’ll let the data speak for itself. The election before that, there were 21 seats. I wasn’t taking any stand at that time. And then, before that, we got 50-52 seats. So, this time we were hopeful that we’ll break that trend — BJP for three decades and then Congress for the same length. We worked hard and I’m saddened that we were not able to repeat ourselves.

We lost Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. The latter, especially, was a bit of a shocker. But the vote share of our party in Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh is unchanged. So, it’s not that we lost support from the people. Looking back now, out of the ministers in Rajasthan, three didn’t contest elections, 25 did, and 18 of them lost. In my opinion, because the success rate of incumbents is always low, had we changed some of the sitting legislators, perhaps we could have done a lot better.

Rahul Sabharwal: What is the assessment of the Chhattisgarh loss?

We had a very good majority in Chhattisgarh and our policies were quite well-received but we lost. We didn’t do well in the tribal and urban areas. For Lok Sabha, we’ve already formed committees, we’re getting feedback from the ground, block/district level up. So we are well-prepared and the cadre is enthused.

Ritika Chopra: The BJP has increased its vote share and seems to be eating into others’ vote share. What is it that the BJP is doing right?

My analysis is that the new voters, some of the other “votes” that the BJP was able to get, didn’t come that much to us. The vote share difference between the BJP and Congress in Rajasthan is about one-and-a-half percent, so it’s not a lot. I think in Lok Sabha we can mount a formidable challenge in all these north Indian states.

It’s wrong to assume that there is no line. In any nation-state, when the lines get blurred, that’s not a happy occasion. The country’s institutions and governments have to be above religious considerations

Story continues below this ad

Hamza Khan: Why is the Congress averse to tying up with smaller parties? In the Lok Sabha, do you plan to tie up with them?

It’s very easy to say that in hindsight. Did the smaller parties eat only into the Congress votes or did they also damage the BJP equally? It’s difficult to say in a triangular contest. You can do the math, but it’s not math, it’s chemistry. In Lok Sabha, we already have the INDIA alliance. And where there’s bipolar politics, Congress vs BJP in the Lok Sabha elections, the ultimate decision will be taken by the INDIA alliance.

Ritu Sarin: Some of your colleagues have joined the ruling party. Have you been approached with any feelers from the ruling party? Secondly, do you apprehend that before the elections some more leaders from the Congress or fence-sitters may join them?

I can’t say because there are a lot of pressures in today’s politics. To answer your first question, no. I guess they know who to approach or not to approach… commitment to ideology is important.

Now to have agencies go after you… 95 per cent of all enforcement directorate notices, raids and action is done to leaders of the Opposition. It’s open now, what’s happening. For example, in Assam the chief minister is openly threatening. Who is the CM to say, launch an FIR (against Rahul Gandhi)? He’s saying I’ll arrest you in three months. When you have an open threat to a senior leader of the party, they’re basically telling the smaller ones that you better toe the line. There is fear-mongering, pressure, misuse of agencies and all sorts of tactics adopted to corner leaders of the Opposition.

Mohammad Qasim: The BJP fielded some of its Lok Sabha MPs to Rajasthan for the Assembly elections last year. Will you fight Lok Sabha elections?

They took MPs to the ground, they went kicking and screaming. No one went because they wanted to. In BJP, they boss around. In our party, we discuss, debate and decide. I was asked to fight in Vidhan Sabha, I did that. I was entrusted with Chhattisgarh, I’m working there… New people must get an opportunity. In Vidhan Sabha, of the new people given a chance, most have won. When a youngster of 25-30 years of age gets a chance, it enlivens (things). In the Lok Sabha, I hope people will bring forward good, new, educated, motivated youngsters.

Rahul Sabharwal: You had some unhappy news on the INDIA alliance from Mamata Banerjee.

Ms Banerjee is a very senior leader but I believe that the INDIA alliance partnership will prevail. In every state, every party wants to have its own political space, which is understandable. There has to be a give and take. I think Mr Kharge and Mrs Gandhi will work out a solution to the seat-sharing.

Rahul Sabharwal: Ms Banerjee and Nitish Kumar pointed out that they were not kept in the loop about the Yatra coming through their states. Is this about Brand Rahul versus INDIA alliance? Is there a contradiction?

There’s no versus. The first Bharat Jodo Yatra, almost every state, our then-UPA alliance partners and our allies were there for almost the entire duration of the Yatra. This Yatra is not about just one party. There are stakeholders, young people, NGOs and civil society. It’s for coming together with people who have been disenfranchised.

Liz Mathew: Do you think before embarking on this Yatra, Rahul Gandhi should have had meetings with leaders such as Nitish Kumar, Sharad Pawar, Mamata Banerjee or Arvind Kejriwal?

These meetings have happened at successive intervals. It’s not that when Mr Gandhi is doing this Yatra, nothing else is happening. There is a committee that is talking about seat-sharing in every state. For INDIA alliance meetings, Mr Gandhi is there, Mrs Gandhi is there, and Mr Kharge is there. It’s all of us working together.

Manoj CG: Congress is planning to have alliances in five-six states, including West Bengal, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra. Instead of forming a committee and asking parties to negotiate with it, why couldn’t Mrs Gandhi speak directly to the leaders?

There is a due process. Every leader has appointed leaders of the party to talk to. Every nitty-gritty cannot be discussed by Mr Kharge and Ms Banerjee. She has deputed individuals of her party to talk to our leaders. I’m sure the finality of it will come when the top names you suggested sit together and sign off on it. But there’s preparatory groundwork, give and take, there is data. Every partner of INDIA alliance, irrespective of size of state or number of MPs, has an important role to play. When the Opposition vote is undivided, it’s far stronger than the BJP-NDA vote.

Amitabh Sinha: Do you think it would have been better if the INDIA alliance had the opportunity to get itself tested in the Assembly elections, before the Lok Sabha elections? On the Election Commission and EVMs, do you think the EC hasn’t done enough?

If all questions were satisfactorily addressed, then there should be no more doubt in anyone’s mind. Anybody who’s asking a question is within his own right to ask questions, and the EC should clarify. What I’m not in favour of is how you choose election commissioners. There’s been an amendment to that. That, again, causes doubts as to the transparency and the sanctity of the position that the EC occupies. The perception today is that for seven decades all institutions that were nurtured by various governments of different colours and shades have been systematically eroded.

These three states that we had elections, it was a bipolar contest… In some states we had that arrangement, but here it was one- to-one between BJP and Congress. So, there was no scope of ‘testing’ the INDIA alliance.

Sukalp Sharma: Do you see One Nation, One Election as an attempt to make the electoral exercise more efficient or as an attempt to centralise the process and move towards a more quasi-presidential system, brushing away regional politics and issues?

I tend to agree with the latter. They have a committee that’s been formed and are discussing it. But it seems impractical because we have so many elections at multiple levels — from panchayat, corporation, Vidhan Sabha and Lok Sabha — and to put all of them together is probably an attempt to centralise the election system. It may not be practical for a country as large as ours. We have 40 different political parties and different time cycles.

Ritu Sarin: With elections around the corner, do you think funding and donations are areas of concern for the Congress? Does the ruling party have an edge in infrastructure and funding?

It’s an open secret that raising funds for anybody except the ruling party is a very tough task because of various pressures and by overtly undermining the resource collection for the other political parties. With regard to electoral bonds, there’s a lot of fear in the corporate sector that if you help anybody except the people that the ruling dispensation wants, you will get into trouble. The Government of India knows exactly who’s getting what and where. It’s not a level playing field. That’s why the Congress is doing crowdsourcing and public funding. Raising funds for the Congress has become a challenge. I’ve seen many elections and people are not willing to come forward because they fear a backlash.